Re: Equality and Free Software (was: Re: [ox-en] Germ of a new form of society or germ of a new form of business?)
- From: Graham Seaman <graham seul.org>
- Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 19:39:08 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, Art McGee wrote:
"From each according to their ability,
To each according to their needs."
That about sums it up. What else is there to discuss?
Lots. How about replacing 'ability' and 'need' with 'desire',
for a start?
Because you can't run an economy that way.
I've got no ambitions to 'run' anything, and life would be better without
an 'economy' ;-) If the best we can hope for is something where people's
output is rigorously measured to see if it matches their abilities - that
is, both 'output' and 'ability' have to stay quantitative - then the best
we can do is replace the market with bureaucracy. Been there, done that,
didn't work.
I just read a nice definition of selbstentfaltung (cross-referencing
another of Stefan's mails from just now):
'Imagine a jazz band in which each person seeks fulfilment as a musician.
Though basically interested in self fulfilment, and not in that of the
band as a whole, or of her fellow musicians taken severally, she
nevertheless is maximally fulfilled only to the extent that each of the
others is, and the same holds for each of them. There are additionally
some less talented people around who obtain their satisfaction not from
playing but from listening, and their presence further enhances the
fulfilment of the band's members.' [G.A. Cohen, Self-ownership, communism
and equality]
Listeners are good to have too, even if what they do is not measurable
in any way.
The whole point
is not to define or regulate every aspect of society, but
from the perspective of getting everyone's basic need for
food, clothing, shelter, education, etc., met, that's the
right approach.
OK, I think that's one of the core problems here: how does satisfaction of
basic needs relate to free software. Or, how does classic socialism relate
to oekonux. The answers aren't going to come from taking one side of the
question without the other.
Even after a socialistic revolution, people
are still going to be unhappy in various way, but the idea
is to remove the majority of the obstacles that prevent them
from fulfilling their desires.
Surely.
As it stands now, we're
forced to do that which we hate in order to survive. If we
can remove the fear of death/starvation/homelessness/etc.
from people's thinking, they can then be free to pursue
happiness.
And the strategy for that is what?
'First a, then b' kind of puts off happiness a long way...
Graham
Art
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/