Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Did your community celebrate last night?

[Tim Mensch (tim-coho-l]

Ann Zabaldo wrote:
> Is there room for conservatives in cohousing?  Or are we islands of  
> liberal/progressive thought?  (Not saying this is "bad" or "wrong." --  
> just curious ...)
>   
I think that the "conservative/liberal" label makes the question too 
simplistic. People are complicated, and as much as we like to assign 
simple categories, it's not that easy. See http://politicalcompass.org/ 
for one interpretation of political philosophy as two axes instead of 
the traditional one conservative/liberal axis. I've talked with some 
friends about their beliefs that indicate that even two axes may not be 
enough.

I do believe that people in cohousing (at least cohousing that works in 
the ways I've imagined and experienced it) need to prefer what George 
Lakoff calls the "Nurturing Parent" frame of thinking. Anyone who wants 
to understand why Democrats were failing for so long, or rather why the 
Republicans were succeeding, should read his book, "Don't Think of an 
Elephant." It's seriously eye-opening.

In brief, Lakoff believes that the two "frames" that people can see the 
world from are the "Strict Father" frame, where a moral leader that you 
follow without questioning is important, and people who don't should be 
punished (think Arnold Schwarzenegger), versus the "Nurturing Parent" 
frame, where the parents (or the government) tries to guide and help 
their children (or the citizens) and protect them from harm.

In broad strokes, Lakoff claims that folks who fall in the conservative 
camp tend to think of politics in the Strict Father frame, where people 
in the liberal camp tend to think of politics in the Nurturing Parent 
frame. This is also probably too simplistic, but Lakoff argues 
convincingly that these two frames can explain at least to a first 
approximation the sometimes contradictory differences between liberals 
and conservatives--things like why "pro-life" and "pro-death-penalty" 
can be rationally supported by the same person. It's possible to apply 
different frames to different aspects of your life (politics, family, 
job, etc.), so it's likely also possible that even in one person the two 
frames can be applied differently to different issues, which may explain 
the other variations.

Clearly (at least it seems to me) one needs to be at least comfortable 
with expressing the Nurturing Parent frame to do well in cohousing. I 
mean, who is the moral leader of a cohousing community? (Unless it's 
affiliated, officially or not, with a religion and has an implicit moral 
leader?) In the Strict Father frame, people are more comfortable either 
leading or being told what to do, and in no cohousing community have I 
experienced many people who like to be told what to do. :)

Maybe I'm wrong, or making too much of a leap here, but it at least 
feels intuitively correct. And this may be the underlying reason that 
cohousing has attracted more people who describe themselves as "liberal" 
than "conservative." Not that cohousing dictates politics, or even that 
the current groups are liberal and therefore don't mix well with 
conservatives, but that the frame you need to be comfortable seeing the 
world from, which tends to dictate your politics, also colors your 
decision to join cohousing.

Thoughts? Or is everyone sick of talking about the politics of 
cohousing? :) I'm hoping this is enough of a new angle that people find 
it relevant, anyway. :)

--
Tim Mensch

No longer living in cohousing, and instead trying out Superbia.

Disclaimer: I strongly supported Obama, and though I didn't explcitly 
celebrate, I was very relieved to see him elected, and would have probably 
celebrated if I were still in cohousing.