Elitism and peer production (was: [ox-en] Project / Book)
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 11:07:24 +0200
Hi Mathieu and all!
16 months (488 days) ago Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
Then there's the question of elitism. Something I mention from time to time in relation to expertise.
I think the last one is an important sentence because it emphasizes
expertise. In fact I think any society we can wish for needs lots and
lots of expertise - simply because it's so complex and has so many
fields of knowledge which are both wide and deep.
To me this is an undeniable fact which we can not simply "wish away".
Still we need to deal with it.
How to reconcile the fact of being a "big man" in a community because of technical competency with a democratic structure? There is no equality when some people have access to tools and controls which others don't understand.
At this point I'd like to stress that (abstract) equality is from the
capitalist value set. When I think of a peer production based society
I think values like this will / need to be transcended in a positive
way. Admittedly I have no clear vision of how this might look like but
still I think existing peer production projects give some ideas here.
The bigger the technical system, the more technocratic power grows.
True.
When I think about this a bit I think there are these key reasons why
this is usually not a problem in peer production projects.
* Trust
The first key reason can be described by trust. If I can trust a
powerful person then I can rely on that person doing "good things".
In contrast the term elitism to me transports distrust.
Since peer production does not rely on classical personal
relationships trust can not build up on a personal basis - at least
not by the average user of a peer production project and the
developers.
I think there are structural reasons why people can trust powerful
persons in peer production projects.
* Non-alienation
The most important one is of course that if at all alienation
plays a minor role in peer production projects. Thus those
powerful persons follow the same goals as I and therefore I have
good reasons to believe that I can trust them.
* Transparency
An important tool for this is transparency in all relevant
procedures. By transparency I have the chance to check my
assumption that powerful persons follow the goals of the project -
at least potentially. In fact peer production projects usually
maintain a high level or transparency.
* Availability of source
Another point why powerful persons are a minor problem in peer
production projects is the availability of the sources. When the
sources are available for a potential fork then if those powerful
persons leave the right track I can use the sources to do my own
thing.
In this sense the sources are means of production. If the means of
production can not be shared so simply - such as big machinery -
then this is a source for problems. Still the other points are still
valid.
* Balance of power by volunteers
On this side of a fork there is still the fact that those powerful
persons need the community as much as the community needs them.
Since the community consists of volunteers people may simply leave
if they are not happy with the way things work.
Also power has two faces. On the one hand there is the face that it
can be abused like you probably worry when talking about elitism. But
on the other hand power can be *used* to move things. In fact I'd say
this is one of the duties of such persons.
Grüße
Stefan