[ox-en] Re: Alternative exchange systems furthering GPL society?
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:46:28 +0100
Hi Michel and all!
Last week (13 days ago) Michael Bouwens wrote:
I think that I agree with your general point. LETS are about
re-instauring personal relationships in exchange, this makes them a
limited, complementary option, but still valuable.
I think we can agree on that - though I still think there should be
better options.
I think we need
social change theories which integrate various partial schemes in a
larger totality, which is what I'm trying to do in P2P theory.
Which I welcome. However, I think we are on the edge of a new part of
history and I think one needs to carefully understand the differences
to the previous part of history - aka capitalism. You can help forming
the new era only if you understand the fundamental motors. To further
this understanding is one of the most important goals of this project.
At the end of the feudal phase religious sects of all kinds spread
like wildfire. Basically they tried to save the old system by applying
some reforms to it. However, as we know the new era swept them all
away so much that today it is even hard to know about them. Trying to
save the exchange system somehow to me looks very similar to those
sects.
Also a new era does not solve the problems of the previous one
directly but by transforming and overcoming them on a new level /
synthesis. This new level / synthesis is probably the hardest thing to
recognize.
For instance if you think of the problem of religious freedom. The
type and branch of religion in a certain area *is* a major aspect if
the whole society is based on religion. Thus something like the
30-year war (30jähriger Krieg) or the crusades are completely
possible. Capitalism solved this problem by making religion a minor
aspect. Only when capitalism is on the decline this old religious
stuff comes up again just because people seek orientation when worlds
are falling apart. In this case they seek orientation in concepts
which on a societal level are simply outdated.
Please note that I'm *not* underestimating spiritual aspects of
humans. I only say that on a societal level there time is over.
I
surmise that in peer production, the importance is on the contrary
'impersonal abstract relations, but without alienation', re our
previous discussion.
Yep.
So I agree with your first half comments about
the limitations of LETS. On a personal note, I once tried to join,
but it was so much hassle, and I didn't go through, indeed, money is
so much easier to handle.
Yes.
To respond to your second part. No, I do not think that alternative
exchange systems make peer production more realisable by itself. It
is a question of creating a differentiated and integrated social
structure: a commons-based civilisation within a reformed market and
reformed state, as I would provissionally put it.
Ok. If it not furthering peer production we should look for
improvements here - right? What is the basic question again? How could
those people which are somehow excluded from the main monetary system
can be reintegrated?
So, pure peer production is aided by basic income, and distributing
fixed capital to a maximum extent; the market is rendered more moral
through a series of reforms (natural capitalism, fair trade, etc..),
finally, reciprocity-based, personal relations spheres are
re-inforced for those whose access to the monetary system is
difficult, and also because it is less alienating and reinforces
community. All those things go together, it is one struggle for a
more fair society.
So, we reinforce both 'totally non-alienated peer production' and
'less alienating reciprocity and exchange schemes' AT THE SAME TIME,
because they are both better than fully alienating systems.
*If* they are, I agree.
I would also question your reliance on total automation. In fact,
work itself is not alienating per se. Many farmers, given the
choice, would remain farmers, and want to work with organic schemes,
living in their communities and families. Are you saying that
totally automated farming is preferable?
What's the problem with totally automated organic farming? Is an
organic plant somehow better when a human eye looked at it before it
ended up in the cooking pot? Well, at least not to me.
*This* - the totally automated organic farming - is indeed something
which I think we should strive for when we think of agriculture in the
GPL society.
I think that total
automation will only work in the sphere of massively standardised
things, or indeed perhaps there will be a form of mass
personalisation.
The latter is what distinguishes classical industrial production
(Fordism) from state of the art production (Toytotism). Indeed I
remember figures that there are no two cars leaving a production plant
during a very long phase which are completely identical.
But still, masses of people, myself included will
prefer the work of artisans and organic agriculture, because that
works embodies human creativity, and many creators will want this as
well. Automation is only a small part of the process towards less
alienation, the other part is non-alienating creative work.
Well, if I say Selbstentfaltung then these options are of course
included. But as you told us one needs to do alienated work to earn
money to eat, buy cars, housing, etc. which is basically frozen work
of other people.
If all this stuff would simply be available because they are results
of automated production then no one *needs* to work to produce the
things necessary for a decent and modern life style. Automation makes
room for creative work which does not has more automation as its goal.
As for your very last paragraph, I think it is based on a limited
view of the historical record. That there is a particular exchange
system is not because it is generally more efficient, but because it
is 'more efficient for a particular elite'. It's a class thing.
There have been other historical periods with different monetary
schemes, I'm just adding one example here.
Michel
BRAKTEATEN MONEY IN MEDIEVAL EUROPE (dr. Kennedy)
[...]
This is one of the myths the alternative money scene loves so much.
The main error is that the example can not simply be transferred to a
developed capitalism and the conditions you find there. Also the facts
were not really as they are told in this myth and most of all the
phenomenons described were not as single-reasoned as they are told.
Mit Freien Grüßen
Stefan
--
Please note this message is written on an offline laptop
and send out in the evening of the day it is written. It
does not take any information into account which may have
reached my mailbox since yesterday evening.
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de