A wood bank is exactly what it sounds like. People in rural and Indigenous areas still heavily rely on wood heat as the primary fuel source for their homes. Volunteers cut and split firewood, stack it somewhere public, and give it away for free to those who can’t afford it. No paperwork. No means tests. No government forms. Just a pile of hardwood that shows up because someone else’s house would be cold without it.
Most articles about wood banks wrap them in the same tired language. Community spirit. Rural generosity. Neighbors helping neighbors. It’s the kind of coverage you get when journalists focus on the people stacking the wood instead of the conditions that made it necessary. They never mention the underlying reality. Wood banks exist because without them, people would freeze. It’s the same everywhere: Local news crews film volunteers splitting logs while pretending it’s heartwarming, reporting on senior citizens splitting 150 cords a year for neighbors in need as if the story is about kindness instead of the failure that created the need in the first place.
…The volunteers running wood banks aren’t performing resilience. They’re plugging holes in a sinking ship and doing the work the state stopped doing. They are the thin line between a cold snap and another obituary…
I didn’t know about these. Two things can exist at once: The system is failing these people, and people who donate time/effort/wood/money to help others are very generous.
I don’t like that the article minimizes the altruism. Prepping firewood is hard work, and it’s a hell of a nice thing to do for others.
Considering the articles point on how pretty much everyone only focuses on the altruism; it’s a really nice contrast.
I didn’t know about these.
…and with that I learn about wood banks from a writer that scolds other writers for writing nice things about the generous aspects. There’s nothing to contrast.
Dude I don’t work the soup line simply because I enjoy it and have nothing better to do. Don’t mistake altruism for a lack of need. I do volunteer work because I know that without my effort, more people are going to suffer needlessly. Part of it IS fueled by a smoldering rage that the state is so devoted to helping nobody but the wealthy. Believe me when I say that of I saw no need for my effort I would certainly save myself the trouble.
All of the chatter about the system failing seems to presuppose that that is a bad thing. More independent, decentralized, robust local economies and communities is a good thing. If that happens to stem from racism and neglect, it doesn’t invalidate a good idea. Would it be better to have a better system that was more inclusive and supported all people? Probably. But realistically our industrial system isn’t something to mourn. Replacing it would be great.
To each according to their need, from each according to their ability. Heartwarming.
We can praise the good things while acknowledging the bad things. It’s not either-or.
This does remind me of that FB group with the name that is something like “Failures of capitalism disguised as heartwarming stories” or the like…
NewRepublic simping for the State, fails to see how anything other than the State could be considered inspiring or resilient.
Apparently, acts of solidarity aren’t inspiring and people taking their material wellbeing into their own hands aren’t being resilient because it means the State is non-functional…just…what?
Such a weird article.
The author seems to be viewing the state as the first line of defense and neighbors helping each other as a last resort to be used only when the state has failed. An alternate view is that neighbors helping each other is the first line of defense, and the need to rely on the state is a sign there isn’t a functioning community.
Consolidating resources to be used for mutual benefit is what government is for. Clannism is not a community.
Kinda hits different when your tax dollars get sent to a shithole red state. Thats not my community, thats not who im trying to support.
Its not clannism





