I also failed to mention that

I also failed to mention that considering the group would be aiming to develop above and beyond localism and according to the requirements of such a target, anyone that applied their effort to the production would be able to take from the free store. This “effort” would obviously start with the actual growing of food but the types of effort needed would develop along with the volume of production. Later, a situation may arise where there is a need for complex logistics to allow for the production/distribution of stores, bringing new people into the group, development of production etc and so there would be more methods of applying people’s effort from doing physical work, to couriering, to nightwatch, to administration, to training/teaching and so on. So, as long as the people taking “out” put some degree of effort “in” they would be free to take from the store.  In reply to the above comment:I am fully aware that socialism cannot exist in one country, nor can it be in an allotment. Which, is why I state that the target would be to, over time and is practicable, to include the greatest amount of people as possible over the greatest area as possible. This way, people that do not necessarily wish/are able to do the physical “growing” there are other areas that area associated with supporting the production that allow for people to take from the store by applying their effort in a slightly different way but still towards the overall successful outcome of the production.How this is different to an “allotment” is that it would not be an allotment. It could be either hundreds of backgardens, or agricultural land on a greater scale-depending on how people decide. Initially, there would not necessarily be any great “controversy” or any massive impact upon capitalism-much as is similar to current attempts at removing capitalism. However, the idea would be designed specifically to act as a catalyst for development that would undercut one of the most significant tentricles of capitalism: that of selling food for people to live.If you eventually show people through practice that you can remove the “need” to buy all your food from people, then you show that you do not have to “buy” your energy off companies either, nor do you have to buy your clothes and so on.While people already know this and a great many of us already within the SPGB and similar organisations recognise that we are forced to engage in capitalism in order to survive, most people are not necessarily aware that we “need” to but we do not “have to”. Unfortunately, they lack a practical alternative that lies in front of their noses, especially when they have so many other distractions in their lives.What I propose is not some kind of wishy-washy grow-your-own attempt at providing a few vegetables for your salad a few months of the year but an attempt to show that people can easily work together, without profit as a goal, in a sustainable way to remove the need to have to buy food. At the moment, allotments are there for a small scale, either for the supplement of an invidual or a very small group’s consumption. What I propose is people doing away with growing in this way, but putting in effort to a production system that allows for the taking of free food.  An idea that needs developement but through adoption and adaptation not by pooh-poohing and outright dismissal.