Re: [ox-en] Re: Model of humans
- From: Robin Upton <lists2009 altruists.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:45:58 +0900
On 19/07/10 17:12, Stefan Merten wrote:
I look forward to an economic system in which I can priority to
relationships, rather than
be concerned about fiat tokens of empire.
Well, I think how the relationships in the economy are shaped is a
good question. Lately I learned from StefanMz that they *are* shaped
differently. But I still think you should not confuse personal
relationships with economic relationships. But you probably don't do
Perhaps I do. Is there a value in drawing a distinction between the two?
It seems on first reflection to be the flip-side of alienated work.
i.e. economic relationship (buying) comes from someone who only
helps due to magic beans. Personal relationship means love, not money.
Right now, I do have distinct sets of relationships, but I have yet to be
convinced that this is an ideal state of affairs.
Bearing the above in mind, I can see a future taboo against some cases of
conditional exchange. e.g. I will not treat your life threatening
you give me some magic beans. In another context, it makes perfect sense.
e.g. I will perform an operation on you unless someone gives me use of a
sterile operating theatre for 3 hours and some trained staff.
[oops], ^will perform^won't perform ...but you got the vibe
I intended this as a clear example. I can see that it may not always be
But the latter is a factual precondition for the treatment - right?
You don't need to put this as a form of exchange when it's simply a
That is perfectly the difference between alienation - some magic beans
not belonging to the process - and a concrete need - the facilities to
actually perform the treatment.
e.g. I need a coffee and biscuits to help me concentrate on the operation.
My angle on this is designing a gift economy in which people specify (in
their requests and offers, and the software to match them up.
Contact: projekt oekonux.de