On October 15, Jaxon Schor was detained by Israeli soldiers outside of Nablus in the West Bank, and then transferred to a nearby Israeli police station for interrogation. A US citizen of Jewish descent, Schor had been in the West Bank with Faz3a (pronounced “faz’a”), which facilitates foreign volunteers’ participation in Palestinian demonstrations opposing the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, all of which are internationally recognized as belonging to a future Palestinian state.

Spurred by the US government’s ongoing support for the Israeli genocide in Gaza, volunteers from the United States, like Schor, have been traveling to the West Bank as part of the movement for Palestinian liberation.

Such foreign volunteers participate in demonstrations, accompany Palestinian farmers, shepherds, and children traveling to and from their farms, fields, and schools, respectively, and document crimes against them, as they are often at risk of attack by Israeli soldiers and settlers hoping to drive them from the area.

The annual olive harvest is a vital aspect of Palestinian culture, identity, and economic independence, as generations of family members care for the same groves—and sometimes even the same trees. For that same reason, Israeli soldiers and settlers often attempt to keep Palestinian farmers from their groves, especially during the harvesting season, effectively depriving them of both economic and moral support.

In response to Israeli violence against Palestinian farmers, Faz3a has been working to “defy colonial rule” by facilitating the participation of international volunteers in the annual olive harvests for the last four years. As Abdul Hakim Wadi, a supervisor with Faz3a, explained to Shareable, the impact of the volunteers is both sentimental and practical.

“This has a positive impact on the psyche, to know that there are free people in the world, and they believe in [Palestinians’] right to live in peace,” Wadi said. He also notes that the presence of volunteers encourages more Palestinians to participate in harvests, demonstrations, and other activities opposing Israel’s genocide and occupation, as Israeli soldiers and settlers are less likely to attack foreigners.

When Schor was detained, he was accompanying Palestinian farmers harvesting olives. Among the Palestinians and other foreign volunteers, Schor says he was seemingly arbitrarily singled out by Israeli soldiers, who confiscated his US passport and then detained him, as there was allegedly “a personal order against me being in the area.”

Schor received no further explanation until the Israeli police arrived more than three hours later to handcuff him and announce—for the first time—that he was being arrested for trespassing in a “closed military zone.” When Schor asked to see the written order closing the area, he was flashed a piece of paper too far away to read and then thrown into a police car. At the station, the charges against Schor escalated further, with an interrogator accusing him of participating in “anti-Israel Hamas demonstrations” and “fighting Jews.” When Schor denied the accusations repeatedly, he was shown the “evidence” against him.

“He flipped a folder around that was on the table and showed me pictures of me that dated back to one of my first days outside, pretty much after I got here,” Schor told Shareable, referring to the interrogator. “They had basically an investigative folder on me.”

Although the photographs only depicted Schor participating in peaceful events like the olive harvest, the alleged evidence sufficed to have him deported and banned from Israel, as well as the occupied Palestinian territories, “indefinitely.” Such deportations are only the latest tactic being used by Israeli forces in their attempt to staunch international solidarity with Palestinians in the West Bank.

Schor’s deportation is only the latest tactic that Israeli authorities have used to try to staunch international solidarity with Palestinians. According to a press release issued by Faz3a, the deportation followed multiple detentions, arrests, and even informal expulsions, in which Israeli police drove volunteers to the Israeli-Jordanian border and ordered them to cross. Faz3a describes all of these efforts as “part of the assault on Palestinian ability to resist Israeli colonialism.”

“Their end goal was to deport us”

The West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip were all invaded by the Israeli military during the Arab-Israeli War of 1967 and continue to be occupied by Israel.

Palestinians have always opposed the Israeli occupation, but opposition both locally and internationally has intensified since the attack by Palestinian militants from Gaza on Israel last October, which Israel responded to by killing more than 44,000 Palestinians, including at least 16,000 children, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, as cited by Al Jazeera. The actual toll of the genocide, obscured by the continued Israeli attacks and blockade, may top 330,000 deaths by the end of the year, according to estimates published in The Guardian.

Events in Gaza have also provided cover for Israel’s annexation of the West Bank, which was announced by the Israeli government on November 11, as reported by Middle East Eye and others.

Despite the nonviolent nature of their work, foreign volunteers with Faz3a and the International Solidarity Movement, a similar group, are being targeted by Israeli soldiers, settlers, and even a newly formed police unit, according to Faz3a. For the volunteers, the consequences are often violent and sometimes even deadly.

In July, Faz3a volunteers were accompanying Palestinian farmers in Qusra when they were attacked by masked settlers armed with clubs, severely injuring several farmers and volunteers, including at least four US citizens.

In August, a Faz3a volunteer from the United States was shot in the leg by an Israeli sniper while leaving a demonstration in Beita. Later that month, hundreds of masked settlers stormed Qusra, attempting to raze the village to the ground and injuring two Faz3a volunteers, including at least one US citizen.

Violence against volunteers reached its most extreme on September 6, when an Israeli sniper shot and killed Aysenur Eygi, a US volunteer with ISM, who was leaving a demonstration in Beita.

Following international condemnation of Eygi’s killing, Israel appears to have changed tactics from direct violence to deportation of foreign volunteers.

While detaining Schor on October 15, the same Israeli soldiers also detained another Faz’3a volunteer from the United States, Hinou Chung, seemingly by coincidence. Chung was also accompanying the Palestinian farmers outside of Nablus when Israeli soldiers singled out Schor, and Chung decided to stay with Schor to monitor the situation. Although Chung was at first told he was free to leave, the soldiers then decided to detain him, too. Chung had no “personal order” against him, but he was also arrested for allegedly trespassing in a “closed military zone,” accused of being a “terrorist,” and deported on the strength of the alleged evidence against him: one photo with Schor.

“They arrested me at an olive harvest before telling us that we were not allowed to be there, but their end goal was to deport us,” Chung told Shareable. “Their end goal was to find some reason to get us out of the country because they knew we were helping Palestinians.”

“That’s why we go”

While both Chung and Schor are US citizens who were detained, deported, and, in Schor’s case, barred indefinitely from returning to Israel, a close international ally of the United States, neither Chung nor Schor have yet to hear anything regarding their cases from the US government. That silence, however, is far from unexpected as the US government has yet to take action in other, even more extreme cases, such as Eygi’s murder.

In fact, at least four US citizens have been killed by Israeli forces since last October, and the involvement of the US government has started, and thus far ended, with requests for the Israeli government to investigate its own soldiers and settlers. For its part, the Israeli government has yet to hold anyone accountable in any of the cases.

But as both Chung and Schor are quick to point out, Israeli violence against Palestinians is far more extreme than against foreign volunteers such as themselves. While the casualties of the ongoing Israeli genocide are concentrated in Gaza, Israeli soldiers and settlers killed more than 700 Palestinians, including 160 children, in the West Bank since last October, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, as cited by Al Jazeera. In Beita alone, ISM reports at least three Palestinians have been killed by Israeli soldiers or settlers since the start of the genocide.

“It’s terrible for anybody to experience this stuff,” said Schor, contrasting his deportation with the routine violence endured by Palestinians. “But we are still international citizens. We still have a privilege that is undeniable, and that’s why we go, to try to take advantage of that.”

Chung, too, described his deportation as trifling compared to the experiences of the Palestinians he had met in places like Qusra.

“A lot of the children that you talk to in the village, they have bullet wounds, they have knife wounds,” he said. “It’s so matter of fact that, after some time, you get used to it—even though it is very messed up, to think about these children, who are as young as 10 years old, having a bullet wound and just shrugging it off, laughing about it. … One can only imagine how much they have to live through.”

It’s in light of such harrowing experiences, rather than despite them, that Wadi believes volunteers like Chung and Schor will continue coming to the West Bank.

“The presence of solidarity is increasing,” he said, in reference to the volunteers. “The presence of more foreign supporters, and the continuous presence of local and international media, helps in documenting the crimes of the settlers and the occupation army against the Palestinians and foreign supporters, exposing them in the countries of the world.”

Additional coverage of Palestine

• Life-Saving lending library: Union supplies Palestinian journalists with safety gear amid ongoing Israeli genocide

• Covering Palestine: The impact on journalists on the frontlines and abroad with Arvind Dilawar (The Response Podcast)

• There is another way: Round table on Palestine-Israel (The Response Podcast)

• Direct action for Palestine with Mohamed Shehk (The Response Podcast)

Arvind Dilawar is an independent journalist. His articles, essays and interviews have appeared in The New York Times, Time Magazine, The Daily Beast and elsewhere. Find him online at: adilawar.com

The post U.S. volunteers remain dedicated to solidarity in Palestine, despite Israeli violence and deportations appeared first on Shareable.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this guide should be misconstrued as legal advice. For guidance on your particular circumstances, please consult a lawyer.

Taxpayers in the United States paid an average federal income tax rate of 14.9 percent—nearly $2.2 trillion altogether—in 2021, the latest year for which information is available from the Internal Revenue Service, according to the Tax Foundation. That tax levy arrived amid real wages stagnating since the 1970s, per the World Economic Forum, and military spending reaching record heights—more than $916 billion, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. 

It should therefore come as no surprise that some taxpayers, spurred by economics, politics or both, choose to avoid paying taxes altogether. Here’s how they attempt it—both legally and illegally.

Legally: By lowering your taxable income

The only technically legal way to avoid taxes is to intentionally lower your income below the taxable threshold, which varies by age and filing status—that is, whether you are single, married or the head of the household, meaning you have dependents such as children or relatives other than your spouse whom you support financially.

If you are unmarried, younger than 65 years of age and have no dependents, the threshold at which you must file an annual tax return is $12,950, according to the IRS. In other words, if you earn less than $12,950 a year, you don’t have to file a return and therefore pay further income tax. That threshold increases to $14,700 if you’re older than 65, or $19,400 if you’re the head of the household, or $25,900 if you’re married and filing your return jointly with your spouse.

You can also increase the threshold for income taxes by contributing to tax-exempt accounts for specific benefits, like retirement and health care. According to the IRS, up to $6,500—$7,500 if you’re over the age of 50—can be contributed to an Individual Retirement Arrangement (IRA) without incurring federal income taxes. Similarly, up to $3,850—$7,750 for families—can be contributed to Health Savings Accounts (HSA), per the agency. If you’re unmarried, under the age of 50, have no dependents and make the maximum contributions to IRA and HSA accounts, that means your income tax threshold is $23,300.

But annual tax returns are only one method of taxation. If you’re a full- or part-time employee, rather than a business owner or freelancer, federal and state governments also deduct taxes from each of your paychecks. Per the IRS, you can minimize these “payroll taxes” by updating your filing status, increasing the number of dependents and/or making other adjustments to your Form W-4, which helps your employer calculate the amount of tax dollars that should be withheld from your paychecks.

Illegally: By refusing to pay—or lying

Avoiding taxes due to political considerations is often described as “tax resistance” and framed as a form of civil disobedience. Typically, tax resistance involves the open and deliberate withholding of all or a portion of your taxes due. For example: You may complete your annual tax return and submit it to the IRS with a letter explaining your refusal to pay. In such cases, tax resisters may also donate the withheld taxes to causes more in line with their beliefs, such as the Church Peace Tax Fund from the Mennonite Church USA, or reserve the money to pay potential fines for non-payment of taxes from the IRS. Such fines, including penalties and interest, may accrue on overdue tax debt for up to 10 years, when the statute of limitations expires. The National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee maintains a War Tax Resisters Penalty Fund to help tax resisters meet such burdens. According to the NWTRCC, it is extremely rare for tax resisters to be imprisoned.

The other illegal method of tax avoidance is simply lying. This can be as sophisticated as reporting complex losses of income on your annual tax return or as straightforward as adding nonexistent dependents to your W-4. Either way, be aware that knowingly attempting to mislead the IRS may be considered fraud and result in jail time.

Life After Taxes

In 2003, David M. Gross decided to legally avoid paying taxes by intentionally lowering his income. As a form of tax resistance in response to the US invasion of Iraq, he requested a 75 percent pay cut and, nine years later, reported having a richer life for it.

After becoming self-employed, Gross had to get creative to meet his new budget. Maximizing his contributions to tax-exempt benefits, his income tax threshold was about $36,000 a year, but $14,000 needed to be invested in retirement and health care accounts. The prospect of surviving on the remaining $20,000 in the notoriously expensive San Francisco Bay Area initially seemed daunting, yet Gross found that wasn’t the case at all. Aside from fixed expenses like rent, he minimized his variable expenses like food and transportation through a do-it-yourself ethic with cooking and biking. By taking advantage of other free or low-cost resources like libraries, public transit and Craigslists’ “free stuff” section, he even managed to save enough for backpacking trips in Mexico.

That said, Gross admitted that his choices would not serve everyone as well. He had professional skills that translated well to a self-employed, work-from-home job, which helped to minimize his expenses, and had no children, who typically cost more than the deductions they afford. Still, Gross’ fundamental concern applies to every taxpayer: Wouldn’t you rather be living more, even if it meant earning less?

Read more about Gross’ rationale for, and experience with, intentionally lowering his taxable income below.

Note that this account was first published by Shareable on April 17, 2012, and is reproduced below without update.

How to Not Pay Taxes

by David M. Gross

Nine years ago, I started living a more bountiful life by working less, earning less, and spending less.

I started by going to my employer’s human resources department to ask if I might take a significant pay cut. “How significant?” they asked. I said, “I’m not sure yet; maybe 75 percent?”

As you can imagine, this was not the sort of request they were used to, but they gave it their best shot. How did I come to make such a strange request? A little over nine years ago, the war on Iraq began. Along with many other people, I was horrified at the magnitude of the suffering the U.S. would inflict with its “shock and awe” campaign, and also at the increasingly blind, ignorant, and bloodthirsty war fever that dominated our country. But I also knew that as a taxpayer I was a small but vital part of the monster we were unleashing, and that no matter how much I protested, as long as I continued to pay taxes, I was — in a practical, bottom-line sense — a war supporter. I had a hard time getting to sleep at night and looking myself in the mirror in the morning. I knew I had to stop supporting the war, if only for my own peace of mind.

But how? My major financial contribution to the war was from the federal income tax which was automatically withheld from each paycheck before I even saw it. If I were to stop this withholding by filing a new W-4 form with more allowances, this would just delay the inevitable. Come April, the IRS would realize they’d been underfed and would come after me or my employer to seize the rest. I decided instead to get “under the tax line,” reasoning that the best way not to pay income tax is not to owe any to begin with. So that’s why I visited my H.R. department. But they said they couldn’t help me — such a radical pay cut might look suspicious to auditors and cause problems of some sort for the company.

So I quit my job where I’d been earning roughly $100k, and now I’m self-employed doing contract work and writing books. When I started, I didn’t know where the “tax line” was. I assumed it was somewhere in the vicinity of the “poverty line” (which didn’t sound encouraging). I found some stories about war tax resisters who use the “under the tax line” method (one among many methods of war tax resistance) and these seemed to suggest that the “tax line” was somewhere around $3,000 to $8,000 a year.

So I started thinking “hmmm… I could buy bulk rice and pick dandelions for vitamins” . . . “you can do a lot with top ramen!” . . . “maybe I could work as a fire-spotter to avoid paying rent” . . . that sort of thing. I started to resign myself to a path of deprivation, sacrifice, and renunciation in the service of my values.

There are things to be said for sacrifice in the service of values, but my path took another turn entirely.

I researched tax regulations to find out more precisely where the “tax line” is and just how much of a budget I had to work with. What I found was a great relief. Today in the United States, about 40 percent of households that file tax returns are already under the federal income tax line — that is to say, two in five of these American households pay no federal income tax. So I didn’t have to live in a cave and eat grubs and berries, all I had to do was join the income-tax-free 40 percent.

There really is no single “tax line.” The threshold is different for everyone. It’s based on things like your family structure, your age, how you make your income, and what you do with your money. For me, the tax line is about $36,000 this year. By using deductions for tax-deferred retirement accounts, and for health savings accounts and health insurance — entirely legally and by-the-book — I’m able to owe no federal income tax.

To do this, I have to put about $14,000 into these retirement and health savings accounts (almost 40 percent of my income). Subtracting Social Security taxes, that leaves me about $20,000 to live on during the year. That seems like very little to many people, especially in the expensive San Francisco Bay Area where I live, but it’s more than enough for me.

For one thing, it’s a real $20,000, not a $20k salary that then gets whittled down by income tax. My yearly expenses — rent, food, transportation, health insurance, and the like — come to less than $18,000. What’s left over is a rainy-day, emergency, or vacation fund. I often use it for a south-of-the-border backpack-and-hostels style adventure. And note that I’m also saving a healthy $14,000 a year for retirement and for health expenses.

Here are some of the techniques I’ve adopted to lower my expenses:

• I cook my meals from scratch rather than eating out or eating expensive packaged food.
• I brew my own beer, because I like the good stuff (and because I want to avoid the federal excise tax on alcoholic beverages).
• I’ve traded English tutoring for Spanish tutoring, and web programming for training in DIY skills like meat curing and urban foraging, rather than paying for classes.
• I use the public library for research and recreational reading rather than buying books.
• I don’t own a car, but instead use public transit, bicycling, Greyhound, Amtrak, and such.
• I try to find used stuff on freecycle or craigslist rather than buying new — for instance: a pot rack, a Foreman grill, a vacuum cleaner, a back door that I could cut a cat door in without risking our security deposit, a bread machine, speakers, a living room couch, some lectures on video, a food processor and blender, and a carboy I use for brewing.
• I gravitate toward social events that highlight generosity and participation rather than commerce and spectatorship.

How has my life changed now that I’ve gone from a $100k urban playboy lifestyle to living on $20k?

When Money Magazine profiled me a few years ago for an article they put out on how to avoid taxes, they wrote that their readers wouldn’t enjoy the “ascetic lifestyle” that comes along with my technique. Well, if this is “asceticism,”asceticism is very underrated. The life I’m leading now is fuller and more enjoyable than ever. I have less anxiety and feel more integrity, and I’m genuinely living a bountiful life. By being willing to take in less income, I can work fewer hours. Those now-free hours are much more valuable to me than the money I’d been trading them for.

It seems that many things people give up to pursue their careers are more valuable than the money they gain in the trade. And many are not for sale at any price: health, youth, and the time we need to pursue our dreams, learn new skills, volunteer for good causes, strengthen relationships with our family and friends and communities, or just to read those books we’ve been meaning to get around to.

Money is at best a means to various ends. It is these ends, and not the money itself, that define abundance. While money is a useful means to some ends, it is hopeless for others and inefficient for many.

For example: I love good food. When I was making the big bucks I used to go out to eat all the time since there are so many great restaurants in the Bay Area. But for the cost of one restaurant meal I could eat fantastic food all week — if only I had the time to look up the recipes, shop for the ingredients, prepare the food, and clean up the kitchen afterwards. Now I have that time, and so I eat great food just about every day for a fraction of what I used to spend. And along the way I’ve learned a thing or two about the art of cooking, which helps me share good food with others.

One measure of abundance is this: What percentage of your time and energy can you devote to your passions, and what percentage are you forced to spend on priorities that contradict and oppose them? By “your passions” I don’t just mean “your selfish whims” but your values, the things you think are worthwhile and important.

If a percentage of your paycheck is being sucked up by Uncle Sam, you’re spending that percent of every working day — spending your energy and time, your life — to promote the Pentagon’s priorities and political pork projects, war and empire, bank bailouts and mass imprisonment. You can serve your values and your community much better by redirecting that time and energy in more positive directions.

What worked for me won’t work for everyone: Some people, for good reasons, have higher expenses than I do (for instance children, though they are good tax deductions, can be an expensive hobby – I don’t have kids). Not everyone has job skills that translate well to a part-time, freelance, work-from-home style job. Many people have to work full-time jobs, year-round to earn as much as I earn. Many still earn less. I don’t have a one-size-fits-all strategy, but there are some lessons I learned along the way that many of us can use to make our lives more bountiful, whatever our situation.

Take stock of your own vision of a rewarding, generous life, and look closely at which components of it are best served by earning money and which components are best served in more direct ways. Look also for ways in which your career may interfere with such a life. And look at how the government, by means of the tax system, is forcing you to expend your time and energy on priorities that contradict your values. Consider the possibility that the most bountiful and generous life you could be living may be one in which you are earning and spending less but living and sharing more.

If you like this article, read Comprehensive Disobedience: Occupying the Sharing Economy in Spain, also by David Gross.

The post How to not pay taxes appeared first on Shareable.

One hundred thirty-five journalists and media workers killed; more than 100 arrested, including 40 still being held without charges; nearly 900 violations altogether, including travel bans, destruction of equipment, and beatings—this is the daily reality of journalists in Palestine since October 7th, according to Rania Khayyat, communications officer of the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS), a labor union for Palestinian media workers. 

The worst violence is concentrated in the Gaza Strip, where journalists are subjected to Israeli bombardments, shootings, and a siege, which has killed more than 34,535 Palestinians, including 14,500 children, according to Al Jazeera at the time of this writing. But Palestinian journalists in the other Occupied Territories, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, nor Israel are spared from a litany of abuse from Israeli soldiers and settlers. Since October 7, settlers have launched at least 603 attacks in the West Bank, all with the aim of expanding illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, which is a blatant disregard of international law, according to the United Nations. 

Amid the ongoing Israeli genocide in the Gaza Strip and occupation of Palestine more broadly, PJS recently created a potentially life-saving lending library of sorts, loaning safety gear to reporters on assignment.

“We depend on two levels of safety,” explains Khayyat. “The first is awareness and education. We always try to provide safety awareness campaigns to teach journalists and increase their awareness of how to deal with violence and how to protect themselves in the field. The second level that we try to support them with is safety gear.”

Due to the likelihood of violence from the Israeli military and settlers, PJS recommends that Palestinian journalists working anywhere from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea wear both ballistic helmets and bulletproof vests clearly marked for press. Unfortunately, such equipment can cost more than $3,000 in the West Bank—the equivalent of nearly three months of average local wages, according to estimates by the US Department of State. 

While PJS pushes all media outlets to provide such equipment to their reporters, Khayyat acknowledges that the costs are out of reach for all but the largest ones. “Only very big media outlets can afford it—the international or regional ones, such as Al Jazeera, for example,” she says.

For reporters at smaller outlets, as well as freelancers, PJS recently established a program to loan safety equipment. Reporters can borrow helmets and vests for the duration of their assignments, and then return them for colleagues to use, thereby increasing access to equipment that would otherwise be prohibitively expensive. That said, the demand still outstrips the supply.

“To be honest, we don’t have enough for freelancers,” says Khayyat. “We are always receiving requests, from freelancers especially, for support with gear.”

With much of PJS’s funding diverted to providing basics to journalists in the Gaza Strip—at first, medical kits, power banks, and Internet connectivity; then as the Israeli siege worsened, food, clothing, and shelter—it has been able to obtain less than a dozen sets of helmets and vests. The goal, according to Khayyat, is to have up to 60 sets at PJS quarters throughout the West Bank to improve access for reporters. 

While Khayyat hopes to continue fundraising for safety equipment, basic humanitarian aid remains the focus for now. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), of which PJS is a member, continues to collect funds to provide journalists in the Gaza Strip with basic humanitarian aid.

“The vast majority of journalists in Gaza—like the population—are currently in survival mode,” says Monir Zaarour, IFJ’s director of policy and programs for the Middle East and Arab world. “When they are not under direct threat of being killed or injured or displaced, they are overwhelmed by the task of securing the basic needs of their families and children: food, clean water and medication.”

There is also little hope of getting safety equipment through the Israeli siege of the Gaza Strip, which has limited the entry of anything Israel deems “dual-use,” or potentially beneficial to Palestinian militants, since 2007. Furthermore, Khayyat notes that more than 80 press centers in Gaza have been targeted and destroyed by the Israeli military since October 7th, meaning there are few places to house equipment. PJS itself was forced to abandon its headquarters in East Jerusalem and a branch in Gaza, for the relative safety of Ramallah in the West Bank due to the ongoing Israeli genocide. Today, the PJS office in Gaza shelters displaced Palestinian families.

The forced relocation of PJS underscores how an end to the Israeli occupation, rather than any amount of equipment, is ultimately necessary to provide meaningful safety for journalists in Palestine.

“End the occupation,” says Khayyat. “This is the main demand that we have, because most of our problems, most of the violations, most of the journalists that we are losing, it’s because of the occupation.”

“We need pressure,” she continues. “We need to lobby against Israel to abide by international laws, to stop the targeting of Palestinian journalists. … We need to hold the killers of Palestinian journalists accountable—not only the killer, any person who violates the rights of journalists, the right to work, the right to life.”

If you would like to support journalists in Gaza so that they can continue their work, please make a contribution to the IFJ’s International Safety Fund with the comment “For the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate.”

The post Life-Saving lending library: Union supplies Palestinian journalists with safety gear amid ongoing Israeli genocide appeared first on Shareable.

Last March, the Internet Archive was forced to curtail its lending of e-books following a judgment against the digital library in a lawsuit coordinated by the Association of American Publishers (AAP). In a celebratory press release, AAP president Maria A. Pallante attempted to draw a contrast between the Internet Archive and “the thousands of public libraries across the country that serve their communities every day,” whom Pallante thanked. But, in December, more than 100,000 of those libraries, as represented by the American Library Association (ALA) and Association of Research Libraries (ARL), expressed support for the Internet Archive’s appeal against the case.

“This is a fight to keep library books available for those seeking truth in the digital age,” says Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive. And other libraries appear to agree.

A court brief filed by the ALA and ARL urges the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the lower court’s judgment in light of the impact that it will have, not just on the Internet Archive, but libraries across the United States. The appeal comes amid a wave of threats that libraries nationwide are trying to stem.

Hachette v. Internet Archive

“This lawsuit is an attack on a well-established practice used by hundreds of libraries—even traditional ones—to provide public access to their collections,” says Kahle.

The lawsuit coordinated by AAP against the Internet Archive involved some of the largest publishing companies in the world: Hachette, the lead plaintiff, as well as Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, and Wiley. Filed in 2020, the suit alleged that the Internet Archive committed copyright infringement by scanning and distributing copies of the publishers’ books online via its National Emergency Library.

In response to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Internet Archive launched the National Emergency Library at a time when many libraries were closed and readers home under mandatory lockdowns. The Internet Archive facilitated the National Emergency Library by scanning purchased or donated books, encrypting the files produced to prevent them from being copied, and loaning them to one reader at a time for a limited amount of time using digital rights management tools. The Internet Archive argued that this was protected by “fair use,” which permits the use of copyrighted material without permission in cases that are non-commercial, limited and/or negligible to the market for the copyrighted material.

Judge John G. Koeltl disagreed. In Koeltl’s judgment, the Internet Archive—a nonprofit organization that charges readers no subscription—stood to profit from the National Emergency Library via donations; its lending was not limited; and it threatened the e-book market. Consequently, in August of 2023, the Internet Archive was forced to take down their digitized versions of the titles that publishers sold as e-books.

Internet Archive v. Hachette

The Internet Archive is now appealing Koeltl’s judgment. In its first court brief in the ongoing case (still known as Hachette v. Internet Archive), the Internet Archive argues that Koeltl fundamentally misunderstood the facts of the case, especially regarding fair use. The Internet Archive argues that, just as fair use protects the non-commercial, limited, and market-negligible lending of traditional libraries, it protects such lending by digital libraries too. More worrisome, the inverse may become true: If fair use can be denied to digital libraries, then it may be denied to traditional ones too.

This is where the American Library Association and Association of Research Libraries come in. 

“This legal case … is part of a long-standing disagreement between libraries and publishers about how copyright principles should apply to libraries in the digital age,” says Jonathan Band, attorney for both the ALA and ARL.

In their aforementioned brief in support of the appeal, the libraries clarify that they are not filing in support of either the publishers or the Internet Archive, but in defense of fair use. Their concerns center on Koeltl’s judgment that donations entail profit and that digitization is not protected by fair use. If maintained, this judgment would render all libraries commercial enterprises and prevent them from continuing important work, such as digital archiving.

“ALA and ARL’s brief asks the court to preserve the fair use rights of libraries by correcting the District Court’s error in characterizing the Internet Archive’s use as commercial under the first factor of fair use,” says Katherine Klosek, director of information policy at the ARL. “If the publishers prevail on the ultimate question of fairness, we ask that the court craft its opinion in a way that is narrowly tailored to the facts in the case in order to preserve library fair use in other library contexts.”

Whether the Internet Archive and supporters of its appeal will prevail is yet to be determined. Publishers will be filing their opposing briefs later this month, and the court will be setting hearing dates thereafter.

“There is simply no legal support for the notion that Internet Archive or a library may convert millions of eBooks from print books for public distribution without the consent of, or compensation to, the authors and publishers,” says Terrence Hart, general counsel for Association of American Publishers. “The plaintiff publishers will vigorously litigate the appeal of this case, which stands for foundational copyright principles.”

Book Bans, et. al v. Libraries

As previously mentioned, Hachette v. Internet Archive arrives amid a wave of threats to libraries. Last March, three days after the AAP issued its celebratory press release regarding Koeltl’s judgment, the ALA issued its own  statement condemning “the violence, threats of violence and other acts of intimidation that are increasingly taking place in America’s libraries.”

By its count, the Internet Archive estimates before Koeltl’s judgment, it was lending more than 500 banned books, which it has since been forced to take out of circulation. If successful, the ongoing appeal can help stem the tide and save libraries big and small, traditional and online.

“Libraries are under attack like never before,” says Kahle. “The core values and library functions of preservation and access, equal opportunity, and universal education are being threatened by book bans, budget cuts, onerous licensing schemes, and now by this harmful lawsuit. We are counting on the appellate judges to support libraries and our longstanding and widespread library practices in the digital age. Now is the time to stand up for libraries.”

The post Libraries urge court to reconsider judgment against Internet Archive appeared first on Shareable.

But unlike traditional investment clubs, VSIC’s 27 members have made all of their investments in co-ops. 

To date, VSIC’s 27 members have invested more than $60,000 in nine different businesses and funds, making it a sort of co-op for co-ops.

“Our distinction is our focus specifically on investing in cooperatives,” says Matthew Cropp, chair of VSIC.

VSIC was founded in 2016 and is incorporated as a limited liability company, rather than a cooperative corporation. 

That said, in the co-op tradition, the club governs itself on a one-member, one-vote basis when it comes to decision-making. Each member owns a portion of the LLC, which they contribute $20 to $200 on a monthly basis. Investment decisions are made at quarterly in-person meetings or between meetings using the online voting platform Loomio.

The largest of VSIC’s current investments is in the Cooperative Fund of New England, which loans money to co-ops, democratic worker-owned businesses, and community organizations, and — like VSIC — is not incorporated as a co-op per se, but operates on consensus decision-making. 

VSIC also invests in other cooperative funds and financial institutions, like the Kachuwa Impact Fund and the Vermont State Employees Credit Union, but its portfolio includes retail and wholesale businesses too, such as City Market and the worker-owned cooperative Real Pickles.

According to Real Pickles co-founder Addie Rose Holland, the company makes use of traditional lines of credit for regular expenses like purchasing vegetables — but community investors like VSIC allow the co-op to take on larger projects, like improvements to their production facility. 

VSIC was part of a round of community fundraising in 2019, which allowed Real Pickles to install a solar hot water system and second solar array, making its operations 100 percent solar powered. 

For Holland, using community financing to invest in renewable energy reflects a two-way street of support and responsibility. 

“It’s important because we’re sharing the risk with our community and it allows us to have a little bit more flexibility with how we use the money,” she says. “We’re also, through these relationships, wanting to make sure that we’re doing responsible things with that financing as well.”

While supporting the growth of existing co-ops such as Real Pickles is part of VSIC’s mission, the club also focuses on developing entirely new cooperative ventures.

“In the short term, our goal is to support the creation and growth of co-ops in our community and more broadly,” says Cropp, the VSIC chair. “We also seek to create and maintain a community of practice for folks locally interested in solidarity economy organizing that can spin off into new co-op projects.”

One such spin-off is the Vermont Real Estate Cooperative. Launched by VSIC members in 2019, VREC purchased its first property, a commercial space which is leased to a tenant, last year. Today, VREC has more than 40 members with over $100,000 in assets and is considering further investments in commercial and real estate property.

For Cropp, the ability of VSIC to not just financially support existing cooperatives, but to help form new ones like VREC, is essential.

“Our hope is that the club will serve as a key building block in the local co-op development ecosystem,” he says.

Check out these related stories and resources:

The post ‘Solidarity investing’ club helps plant a new crop of co-ops in Vermont appeared first on Shareable.

For farmers, the consequence of Farmigo’s failure, and other services like it, was the loss of “a market for, literally, fields of products,” says Lindsey Lusher Shute, co-owner of Hearty Roots Farm in Clermont, New York, and CEO of Farm Generations, a cooperative of farmers. The failures of businesses like Farmigo helped inspire Farm Generations to develop GrownBy, an app that aims to support small farms by using technology to better connect them to new and existing customers. 

Launched in early 2021, GrownBy allows users to find farms in their area, order products, and sign up for Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) plans. Like Farmigo, users select their desired products and distribution points, where they meet with farmers for pick-up. But unlike Farmigo, GrownBy is backed by a cooperative — not venture capital — which means it serves farmers, rather than investors.

Shareable recently spoke with Shute about GrownBy, the co-op behind the app, and its aim of sustainably supporting small farmers. The conversation has been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.

How does GrownBy work?

GrownBy is a phone and web app that connects farmers and shoppers. With a single login, you can shop from any participating farm — and if a farm hasn’t joined yet, you can invite them. For farmers, we make selling subscriptions and pre-orders easy with farmer-designed sales tools. Any farmer who sells on GrownBy is invited to join our cooperative. 

What does it take for a farmer to join the cooperative? What benefits do they receive from the co-op?

Any farmer who makes a sale on GrownBy is invited to buy an equity share and join the cooperative. Members can vote on major co-op decisions, run for a board seat, and are eligible for profit sharing based on their sales.

Can you elaborate on the cooperative behind GrownBy? Are the co-op members all farmers, or do they include technologists, consumers and others too?

GrownBy is owned by the Farm Generations Cooperative. Membership is open to our farmer-members, and we’re looking to offer equity to our technical team in the near future. 

Why did Farm Generations feel a service like GrownBy was necessary?

Farmers — and particularly small farmers — are critical to the health of our region and our nation. COVID demonstrated the significant risks of a highly consolidated food supply and why local food is more important than ever. GrownBy is built to support our small farms and help them keep up with consumer trends into the future. Our goal is to make buying local food convenient and accessible to everyone. 

GrownBy is owned and built by farmers, which is also part of our mission to help small farms thrive. We have already seen a number of attempts to digitize local food sales and many of these efforts have come at the expense of producers, in one way or another. As a cooperative, we can guarantee that we are on the side of farmers.

You mention that other attempts at digitizing local food sales have come at the expense of producers. What does that expense look like? How does GrownBy avoid such issues?

Companies have lost the trust of farmers by making major decisions without their input. We’ve seen the price of services doubled, companies building aggregation lines of business that compete with direct producers, and local food delivery groups break promises, leaving farmers without a market for, literally, fields of products.

GrownBy will undoubtedly evolve, but as a cooperative we will always engage and be fully transparent with our farmer-members. We’re a tech company, but one that is deeply invested in the success of each of our producers. At the end of the day, our progress is measured by their financial well-being. We’re here to create a strong foundation for small farms now and in the future. 

The other major advantage we have is how we’ve raised capital. Because we’ve built the company with community and public support, we are not under pressure to scale the business in a rapid and unsustainable way. We are looking to grow, but not in a way that sacrifices the quality of our product or the trust we’re building with the farm community.

What’s been the response to GrownBy from farmers and customers?

Everyone has been really happy because we provide the experience that both the farmer and the consumer are looking for. On the consumer side, we have an easy-to-use app that makes buying local quick and easy, and on the farmer side, we have a sophisticated tool for selling direct and saving time. We were lucky to have a great group of beta testers last season who helped us make a product that serves the whole community well.

The post For farmers, by farmers: an interview with GrownBy’s Lindsey Lusher Shute appeared first on Shareable.

In response, the cooperative of musicians behind the Ampled online music platform has committed to giving 100 percent of every payment made through the platform to the respective artist, through at least the end of the year.

Founded in New York City in 2018, Ampled was preparing for its public launch when COVID-19 reached the U.S. The team behind the platform said that prior to the pandemic, they had already decided to build something with artists, rather than for them. They drew on their own experiences in the music industry, as well as collaborating with professional musicians on the platform’s functionality and the company’s governance. This collaboration not only allowed Ampled to build something aesthetically appealing to musicians, but inspired the fledgling company to become a co-op.

“Based on some surveying we’ve done, musicians are far more familiar with cooperative models than the general public,” says Austin Robey, Ampled’s co-founder. “They also have a much more critical view of capitalism. The idea of collective ownership is something that artists find very attractive. We’ve also heard a very loud desire for access and transparency for both finances and decision-making.”

With that understanding, Ampled structured itself in a way that was designed to empower and reward musicians. Unlike other startups, which tend to be controlled by their founders and investors, Ampled’s operations are directed by the musicians, their fans, and its workers, with each group having three reserved seats on the co-op’s board of directors. Initially, 75 percent of profits were earmarked for musicians — until the fallout from COVID-19 moved the team to dedicate everything to artists for the rest of 2020. After that, the co-op will reassess the revenue share, with musicians, fans, and workers all having an equal say.

Following a months-long beta test, the platform had its public launch in late April. It’s currently inaugurating its first cohort of musicians and board of directors, with elections set for December. The co-op has also received some impressive backing, from NEW INC, an incubator led by the New Museum, and Start.coop, an accelerator for co-operatives.

Ampled at The New Museum, NYC, 1/28/20

“Our selection committee felt that Ampled is a very innovative model that gives ownership and control to musicians, in an industry that is largely the opposite,” says Jessica Mason, co-director of Start.coop. “Most of the music industry is structured to extract value from musicians. The profits go primarily to streaming services and the music labels, while the actual artists get paid very little. Ampled has the potential to disrupt the inequity in this system and enable musicians to increase their share by connecting the musicians directly to the fans who love them.”

Start.coop also believes that, despite the challenges currently presented by COVID-19, Ampled and other co-ops are actually better positioned than their traditional competitors to weather the storm. In Ampled’s case, the most obvious competitors, Spotify and Patreon, have long drawn criticism for exploiting artists and have responded to the pandemic by soliciting donations, rather than offer any meaningful operational restructuring.

“Across every industry — those most hard-hit by COVID-19 and those that are thriving — we have seen that co-operative ownership creates more resilient businesses and also lowers failure rates,” says Mason. “From childcare centers to the next Uber or Facebook, there is a massive opportunity for new founders who care about inequality to choose shared ownership and for existing businesses to convert to shared ownership.”

Though Ampled acknowledges the devastation wrought by the pandemic, it also sees an opportunity. Artists who watched Spotify offer podcaster Joe Rogan a deal rumored to be worth $100 million and Patreon dedicate just $10,000 to the company’s COVID-19 relief fund are perhaps unsurprisingly looking for alternatives.

“This crisis is fueling a desire for new ideas on the table,” says Robey. “What may have seemed unrealistic a few weeks ago is now possible. A platform collectively owned by artists? If there’s any time this can work, it’s now.”

##

This article is part of our reporting on The People’s COVID-19 Response. Here are a few articles from the series:

• Coronavirus catalyzes growing wave of grassroots action despite social distancing
• The coronavirus pandemic calls us to share more than ever
• The People’s COVID-19 Response needs you
• 10 ways to share during the COVID-19 pandemic
• The pandemic isn’t a portal, yet
• The Response: Resisting COVID-19 with mutual aid in Chico, CA
• 20 ways Shareable readers are helping during the pandemic

Download our free ebook- The Response: Building Collective Resilience in the Wake of Disasters (2019)

The post New co-op helps fans support musicians during pandemic appeared first on Shareable.

“Since we are around 40 individuals from five countries, much diversity is experienced and long discussions on everything are necessary,” says Kudryashova. But, she also admits, “We are definitely happier and feel more rich now than before moving to Porto 15.”

Backed by the city of Bologna, Porto 15 is the first municipal housing cooperative in Italy. Its success has inspired other similar projects throughout the country, but the model has yet to arrive in the United States.

The building which houses Porto 15 was originally constructed in 1914 and sits in Bologna’s “Creative Cluster,” amid art museums and galleries. Its development into a municipal housing cooperative was organized by local and national agencies, which began accepting applications for “cohousers,” as Kudryashova and her neighbors are called, and conducting renovations in 2015. Promoted by the Italian Ministry of Youth, Porto 15 is dedicated to housing low-income people under the age of 35, who are given a six-year lease with an option to renew for two more years. They must then move out to make room for a new cohort.

Kudryashova, now 39 years old, was among Porto 15’s first residents. Working for the nearby University of Bologna, she finds the cooperative’s location — five minutes from the train, 15 minutes from the main square — one of its greatest benefits, but was most drawn to its model of “cohousing,” as it’s referred to in Italy.

“I was eager to experiment with more sustainable ways of living in a city and to promote these ways amongst neighbors,” she says.

Besides paying below market-rate rent, Kudryashova and her cohousers are responsible for managing Porto 15’s operations. Generally, this is done through a steering committee and biweekly decision-making meetings. There are also a number of working groups dedicated to specific functions, such as funding, communications, events and facilities, which include a laundry, wood shop, bicycle repair, storage, communal pantry and tool library.

While that may sound like a lot of work, Porto 15’s success is evident, as the model inspires other municipal housing cooperatives in Italy.

“So far we are the first and the only public cohousing in Italy,” says Kudryashova. But she adds, “There are other public cohousing projects with other target audiences which are being projected or realized now.”

Unfortunately, the model of municipal housing cooperatives has not yet made its way to the United States. The National Association of Housing Cooperatives (NAHC) is the only country-wide organization representing cooperative residents. It estimates that cooperatives house more than one million families in the United States, but the exact figure is difficult to pin down.  

“We only know of the housing cooperatives that are members of our organization,” explains Paul Doggett, NAHC’s membership manager. “There are thousands of cooperatives that are not members of our organization, so it’s tough to pinpoint how many cooperatives and the number of people they serve in the United States.”

Linda Brockway, a NAHC board member, estimates that there are around 2.5 million people housed by cooperatives in the United States. These housing cooperatives are made up of anywhere from four to 2,000 members, and most are incorporated as nonprofit, “social welfare” organizations. (Brockway mentions that, for a short time in the 1950s, housing cooperatives were awarded charity status.) But none of the housing cooperatives in the United States are municipal projects, like Porto 15.

“Most of the cooperatives were developed by a developer, without city or county involvement,” says Brockway.

Back in Bologna, Kudryashova describes how Porto 15 continues promoting municipal housing cooperatives. Porto 15 is a member of La Rete Nazionale Cohousing (The Italian Network of Cohousing) and has organized open house events to celebrate the European Day of Cohousing in 2018 and 2019. They had hoped to do the same this year, but all of Italy went into lockdown in March due to COVID-19, with restrictions on gatherings only now being lifted. So instead of the open house, Porto 15 is considering a smaller get-together, just for themselves.

“We might be gathering all together in our courtyard, with physical distancing,” says Kudryashova, “to celebrate the end of the lockdown.”

The post Bologna pioneers a model of municipal housing cooperative appeared first on Shareable.

On this particular day, things escalated quickly. Shortly after FNB set up for service, the property manager arrived and called local police. Although the volunteers were prepared with relevant sections of a tenant’s lease spelling out that guests were indeed allowed, and a tenant was explicitly stating that they were her guests, the three responding officers ordered FNB to leave the premises. One of the volunteers, Cam Morgan, questioned the police.

“I focused on drawing attention to the state oppression occurring by continuously asking the police what exactly they would do to people if we didn’t stop handing out free food to residents, who have explicitly said they appreciate and need it,” says Morgan. “After less than a minute of verbally challenging the three people who chose to become cops, and choose to continue to enforce and protect an oppressive system, I was arrested and charged with criminal trespassing and obstruction.”

Unfortunately, Morgan’s arrest is just another instance in a growing trend of criminalizing mutual aid. Despite the need for groups such as FNB increasing over the last few years, more and more municipal authorities across the United States are restricting their work.

The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (NLCH) has been tracking laws criminalizing homelessness, including restrictions on free food sharing in public, since 2006. In their latest annual report, Housing Not Handcuffs, NLCHP notes that, while the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that homelessness has been rising since 2016, the number of cities now restricting food sharing — which homeless people often rely on — has increased 42 percent over the same period. NLCHP estimates that nearly one-in-ten of the 187 cities it surveys now has laws restricting food sharing.

“Many cities have chosen to restrict homeless people’s access to food under the flawed premise that providing homeless people with free food encourages them to remain homeless,” write the report’s authors. “But this theory is not founded on evidence or on common sense. Restricting access to free, safe food will do nothing to end homelessness, which is rooted in a lack of access to affordable housing; instead restrictions on sharing drive hungry people to search for food in unsanitary places or causes them to spend their meager income on food rather than saving it for housing.”

Food Not Bombs Atlanta has experienced the growing criminalization of mutual aid firsthand. In November of 2017, another volunteer was charged with a crime during service at Hurt Park in downtown Atlanta after police claimed it was illegal to share food without an appropriate permit. FNB responded by returning to the park with hundreds of supporters, which apparently unnerved both law enforcement and the local prosecutor.

“When the FNB member showed up to court to face the charge, they found that city representatives did not even show up to court and the charge was dropped,” says Morgan.

Morgan’s own case remains open. After being arrested, she was held in jail for over 24 hours, eventually being released on her own recognizance. Her court date has yet to be set, but already FNB is continuing its work. For the time being, volunteers are setting up outside of Park 35 Apartments, but they feel the location — on the sidewalk next to a high-traffic road — is ill-suited to the needs of the residents, some of whom have mobility issues. Local code compliance officers have also begun trying to push FNB from even the sidewalk, once again claiming that they require a permit to distribute food and threatening them with additional calls to law enforcement.

The entire episode has motivated FNB to do research into the ownership of Park 35 Apartments. They were able to discover that the complex is owned by Related Management, a New York City based real estate corporation founded by billionaire Stephen Ross, who recently hosted a $250,000-per-plate fundraiser for Donald Trump’s re-election campaign.

“The contradictions are not lost on us,” says Morgan. “While Stephen Ross makes millions every year, tenants of Park 35 are harassed for attending a food distro. While Stephen Ross nets in a worth of over $7 billion, Park 35 tenants endure hostile property management.”

The revelation appears to have made Morgan even more committed to FNB’s work.

“We will continue to share food with residents of Park 35 Apartments,” she promises, “and will continue to fight to return to our original location to share free food, clothing and tenants’ rights literature.”

The post Volunteer’s arrest highlights growing criminalization of mutual aid nationwide appeared first on Shareable.

In 2017, Bonnie Linden read a Shareable article about a couple building a community cupboard in front of their home in Winnipeg, Canada. The concept was simple: set up a pantry box in a public space, which visitors can use to pick up or drop off donated food. Linden decided to give it a try, setting one up outside of her home in Capitola, California, east of Santa Cruz. Two years later, she and six other volunteers operate three community cupboards in the Santa Cruz area, which distribute 6,000 pounds of food each month.

“We stock the shelves daily — sometimes twice daily,” Linden said. “It disappears rapidly!”

Linden is just one of a growing number of people around the world who are using community cupboards and community fridges to alleviate food insecurity with groceries that would otherwise be destined for landfills.

The community cupboards set up by Linden are easy to construct and maintain. The cupboards are made from used bookcases, to which she adds plexiglass doors and dashboard protectors for insulation. The cupboards are then mounted on four-by-four posts and installed in publicly accessible locations with adequate shade to reduce food spoilage. Lastly, the cupboards are stocked with groceries donated from neighbors and local businesses and fixed with signs encouraging visitors to take what they need and leave what they can.

But Linden’s community cupboard faced legal hurdles. When she first set up her cupboard in Capitola in 2017, neighbors complained that it was attracting houseless visitors, who they accused of breaking into vehicles in the area. The Capitola City Council did not buy that argument, but her neighbors found another line of attack.

“[Neighbors] found an ordinance in the zoning code that prohibits food distribution from residences,” she said. “They threatened to fine me $500 a day if I continued to host the cupboard.”

After eight months of successful operation, Linden was forced to relocate her first community cupboard just across the Capitola city line, to the neighboring town of Soquel. The subsequent two cupboards she installed are both in Santa Cruz, where they remain unopposed by local ordinances. 

Contrary to the generalizations made by her neighbors, Linden has found that visitors to her community cupboards come from all walks of life. Yes, some are houseless people living along the Soquel Creek or out of their cars, she acknowledges, but others are parents who are in the area picking up their children from the nearby school. She’s also watched as “well-to-do folks use the cupboards as a place to get a free treat — drive up in a new Mercedes and take a bunch of stuff,” as she put it.

“I’d like to be able to have a conversation about privilege, how the cupboards are for the needy,” she said. Then the spirit of sharing seems to take hold again and she reflects, “but I suppose emotional neediness plays into the equation as well.”

Community fridges partner with supermarkets to reduce food waste

Community cupboards like Linden’s can be found around the world — as cataloged by Little Free Pantry — but similar efforts in the United Kingdom have reached new heights with community refrigerators.

In 2016, London-based environmental charity Hubbub teamed up with Sainsbury’s, the second-largest chain of supermarkets in the United Kingdom, on a campaign to reduce food waste. Hubbub launched a community fridge in the small English town of Swadlincote. Like a community cupboard, visitors to the fridge could pick up or drop off food, and businesses could make their own donations.

“At the time, the concept was new to the UK, but not to other countries like Germany and Spain, where ‘honesty fridges’ or ‘solidarity fridges’ were common,” said Kanahaya Alam, the campaign’s manager at Hubbub. “The Swadlincote Community Fridge was so successful that within weeks of launching it we received hundreds of expressions of interest.”

To formalize their support, Hubbub created the Community Fridge Network, which provides guidance and even appliances for those looking to set up community fridges in their own neighborhoods. Today, the Community Fridge Network spans England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland with 85 current fridges, and 40 more being planned.

“On average, each project redistributes up to a tonne of food and attracts 200 visitors a month,” Alam said. Those located in urban areas could distribute four tonnes (2,200 pounds) each month, she adds.

Although community fridges have the obvious benefit of preserving perishable foods, which cupboards can’t as safely do, they do have drawbacks. The reliance on electricity means fridges should be housed indoors, which reduces access and creates safety issues as visitors pass from public to private spaces. For those reasons, the Community Fridge Network mandates that members register as “food businesses” with the UK government.

##

This post is part of our Winter 2019 editorial series on waste reduction. Get our free ebook on this series: “Beyond Waste: Community Solutions to Managing Our Resources.” Shareable is a partner of this project with Greenpeace. 

Take a look at the other articles in the series:

• Celebrate the radical power of DIY during MAKE SMTHNG Week
• Communities worldwide prepare to host MAKE SMTHNG Week events
• Fashion Detox Challenge invites people to pause, reflect and change
• How the MyMizu app is creating community and fostering sustainability in Japan
• Bring sustainability to the party with reusable party packs
• Right to Repair movement invites us to review the way we produce and consume electronics
• From Oakland to Utrecht, sustainability-focused maker villages unite artisans for creative exchange
• Using ancient values to solve modern problems at the Eunpyeong Sharing Center

The post Community cupboards feed neighborhoods despite legal hurdles appeared first on Shareable.