The first is that building intentional communities can succeed in replacing the current system. They cannot, because the project of capitalism is directed specifically at destroying and undermining attempts at self-sufficiency in all its forms. You can succeed in such ventures only until they show up on the economic radar as a problem to be dealt with. That's what building codes are about, when they make things difficult for self-sufficient homesteaders. Richard, while I must agree with you to a certain extent here, I do believe that critical issues such as soil loss and increasing desertification, global warming and accompanying climate change, etc.
Natural disasters are nondiscriminatory in nature.
But there is an edge here for us 'poor' as 'appropriate technology' is largely held in the hands of those who have already made the decision to drop out of mainstream society, e.g., the straw bale networkers, along with the homeschoolers, barter groups, and the rest of those who still live 'close to the land' and in a 'common sense' manner. The elite just don't have a clue as to how to 'survive' and restore the land. It is not going to be those who live in the large cities that will survive. It is the common sense practices of those who live close to the earth that will allow them to survive the 'environmental holocaust' that is about to rain down upon us. Sorry, if I repeat myself here, but I don't feel that the 'common sense' approach can be emphasized too much.