In your society then you do not use the organisational or leadership qualities that some people possess and others do not. How does a football team operate if each player is free to decide tactics? In a company some people have to make decisions on what to buy, make sell etc. To suggest everybody could be equally skilled is just not true. In a local community do you only do what a continual referendum of the people dictate? What happens t those in the minority who do not agree with the decision?
So if I start a company making furniture and I have the vision and know-how to make it then I can only become as large as my personal work will achieve? Why would I work with somebody else when it is me who has the skill? The result is that less furniture will be made. What about my neighbour who could not work out how to design or build anything - how does he feed himself unless he has skills he does not possess? Is he not better to be my employee and do as I instruct?
So we have personal items - but from the thrust of this those would be relatively insignificant. I would not be able to own a car or house? No enterprises would exist that the Commune as a whole did not endorse. So as a person I am told what to do by a majority - and if they disagree with me then I cannot do as I would like. I strongly doubt that any modern high tech industries would be formed.
So how do I get fruit if I grow vegetables. Barter is money by another name.
On what basis do you suggest there is a basic surplus? I would be more convinced if part of your policy was to eradicate 90% of the world's population. With 8 billion and the logistics of moving things around - made worse by lack of anything larger than communal enterprises - there would always be shortages and starvation.
Why does cooperation or competition have to be the greater force? In nature both coexist. I agree we are all dependent on the output of others but for each of the goods and services you mention I have supplied something that has been exchanged to create a common means of trade. I do not equate individualism with dependence - individualism to me is the freedom to express ourselves differently from others.
I have concentrated here Col on questions about your ideas rather than to suggest my alternatives but promise I will come to that.
A nice set of questions to grapple with Arthur. I must admit that dislike of hierarchies is a bit of a foible of mine - it comes from having had a soldier for a father ! You will notice that the Capitalist class has disappeared from my utopia - but I said nothing about the managerial class. Even Worker's Cooperatives have a management - but these are normally on a rotating elective principle. I do not see any problem with electing our bosses in industry in the same way we do with politicians. That way the whole society becomes democratic, and not just the political sphere. I have no problem with limited short term hierarchies which are based only on the project in hand as long as they do not carry over into everyday life. With rotating roles in society eg. my boss in the factory becomes my inferior on the field - I can live with this. Unfortunately hierarchies involving whole classes do not develop in one generation only - and here I would ban all inheritance to prevent the development of classes. You will tell me, no doubt, that there are people who can do nothing other than unskilled work and who need a leader - I don't believe this. Every person has a talent, and the job of this utopia is to find it. In many big Western countries we tolerate the idea of human wastage, yet in smaller ones they don't - countries like Finland and Switzerland need to harness the talents of their populations much more successfully than we do, and they normally succeed in this.
With regard to personal possessions, you can keep your car (if you must) - you can also own your house, your piece of ground, and anything else which you need to live. I have no wish to thieve the coat off anyone's back. But the possession of a second house would not be possible, as long as there are homeless people around. Also ownership of land would take the form of stewardship - ie. you should leave the land in the same environmental condition in which you found it, so that the next generations can also enjoy it. The principle is - take from the World what you need, but a penny more is theft !
With regard to your vegetables it is easy. You give your excess vegetables to the common store, and you take the fruit that you need from it. There is no barter involved. The whole thing is orientated around need not comparative value. I admit I am doubtfull about the idea of abolishing money - maybe at some stage but not initially. Kropotkin was in favour of this, but I am prepared to postpone it.
When you get onto the World picture you lose my little World. I have said that my frame of reference is different. As you would expect I do not begin with the focus of the nation state, or with the need to solve the whole World's problems - but rather from my back door. The question of what such a hypothetical state would do with dissenters doesn't arise because it is likely to be so small that they can easily leave it. I have indicated that a certain amount of private enterprise would be allowed in industries which are not classified as key industries which are absolutely essential for the community.
Ref. competition vs. cooperation - both have a role in nature but those species which have cooperated best with each other have been far better at surviving, and rearing offspring than those where the principle 'dog eats dog' rules.
You ask if this is a utopia which I have described - of course ! It is possible on a small scale, and is perhaps more likely in some other countries than in Britain. But there are experiments Worldwide in forming the type of community which I have described. As to what influence it has on my political activities - probably not so much. Like many people I dream idealistically but act pragmatically. I support de centralization of powers to the base of society, and strengthened regionalism, because I believe people's laws should be made as close to them as possible. I would also support community ownership schemes and also the Worker's cooperative movement. I would also engage in all local activities which help to free my community from a dependence on global financial, or energy systems which can collapse at any time. Anything which leads to more self sufficiency for my region is ok. for me - this leaves lots of scope for political activity.
I don't want to damage Corbyn's campaign. 
