As we move through the coming global political and economic upheavals, re-localizing our lives is the best way to re-establish our sovereignty and begin to live sustainably. This is not going to be a tweak of what is now, or even a variation of how we live, (e.g., greener and more aware of our human ecological impact), but a complete and absolute remake of all aspects of society. The mindset and materialist lifestyles we have been living for the last 500 years are going to drop away. So many ecological thresholds have been crossed, that the world we once knew cannot continue. This is not an eco-catastrophe prediction, woe, woe and thrice woe kind of thing, just a realistic look at the state of the world’s ecosystems, and the lack of humanities willingness to wakeup and see what is happening under the guise of maintaining a destructive standard of living with petty bickering (often violent) at all levels about our differences.
The notion that economic benefit is best managed by expanding vertical and horizontal integration is fast becoming recognized as a falsehood that benefits only the corporate mindset. Once you figure in all the non-market variables, the many economic externalities, and the ecological destruction of market ‘streamlining’ to maximize profits then the obvious is seen. There is a place for global product production with complex products, like computers, but for many products, localized production makes sense. What I give as streamlining is the use of harmful technologies (e.g., pesticides, chemical fertilizers, large scale mining, lax toxic chemical disposal, etc.) that harm the environment we live within, thereby harming us.
In the last post I ended with the idea of the ‘Economic Library’ as a new kind of economic model. It is a total antithesis to the market economy so don’t expect any support from the current hierarchical models. It relies on implementation at a localized level. In our current economic model, it is said that, “Anyone can be successful, but not everyone can be successful.” Think about that for a second. That sentence is predicated on the Darwinian idea of competition and a deliberate weeding out of any less profitable competition (recall 90% of new startups fail – covered 2 posts ago). In our current market model, the top goal of a competitive business is a monopoly! And a monopoly, like a biological monoculture (either crops or invasive weeds), is not good for the ecological complexity necessary for a healthy system – economic or biological (see my earlier ‘economic’ posts for more background). A market drive system is about control, dominance, and individualistic self-serving disregard for any community. The Library Model is about sharing, cooperation and helping the community thrive.
How do we get to that kind of library model while living within the current system? In many places around the world in smaller enclaves, it is happening where mindful individuals come together and make it happen. That all sounds very noble, but for most people I think a royal kick up the butt may be the triggering agent – probably an economic collapse that drives it out of necessity. Whether by choice or necessity, I envision a huge warehouse managed like a current book library. It will be driven by a non-market economy that is non-transactional.
Our market economy is driven by transactional relationships where there is an immediate exchange of something valuable between two people – usually money for product, although bartering skill for service could be used non-transactionally. Transactional relationships have little depth. There is little trust and probably no concern for the inherent value of the other person on the other side of the transaction. It’s merely acquisition of stuff – think about how shopping online now works.
“Non-transactional relationships are ones where one person does something or gives something to the other without any immediate reward. A parent child relationship is ideally a non-transactional relationship. Long-lasting friendships and long-term romantic relationships are also non-transactional. In non-transactional relationships, the relationship itself is the reward for both parties and they try to maintain it” Ehsan Eafkhami.
The challenge of course is getting past the self-serving mindset of, ‘what’s in it for me’ that comes from being just transactional in a market-driven economy. Being non-transactional demands trust in a system. In a library economy, the ‘librarian’ is a crucial figure that manages the system.
As a personal example, many years ago when I was a biochemical research technician, I was responsible for the daily running of a sizable research department. We had a bank of department centrifuges but only a few communal centrifuge rotors (The active rotor-module that sits on the spindle of the centrifuge). I had to set up a log-in/log-out system for the rotor heads and related equipment for communal use, where I also managed the care and maintenance of the rotors After a few weeks, many academic researchers recognized how I (as the librarian) ran an effective logging and maintenance system. Then they let me place their personal rotors into the communal program so other researchers had the option to use more rotors for different purposes. Even before I knew what a library economy was, I had created one, and it worked great. But it took my continued overseeing to keep it working. Don’t ever underestimate the incredible job done quietly by librarians at your local library.
Now, scale that idea up to multiple items you use only occasionally in your home. The first step is to accept that you can ‘donate’ occasionally items to the communal library system, and release that confining sense of ownership. The item will go into the equipment ‘library’ where the librarians/technicians/mechanics will maintain, repair and replace whenever is needed for that item. You are off the hook for maintaining the item and yet whenever you need to use it, or another like it, you can just book it out. A very minor personal inconvenience but with a huge communal benefit – a building of non-transactional and developing loving relationships. It will “require good faith to start. A cycle of giving must take place by both people without expecting to receive. Over time more and more trust will develop and the relationship itself becomes the valuable thing to have” Ehsan Eafkhami.
Now expand the items to include almost everything we use occasionally. There could be a small membership fee to cover costs and hiring of the ‘librarians’ but the system will have self-generating benefits. The membership cost could be part of a ‘Local Exchange trading System (LETS)’. This could also encompass a local Cooperative Movement. I grew up in a town that in 1844 pioneered such a movement (Rochdale, England). The goal is to become locally self-sufficient and self-reliant on each other and not the state in a sharing cooperative society in which individual sovereignty is primary, yet the community is a nurturing location that helps everyone thrive.
As I said in my Espe story (Espe 16), it will be like, “The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas and how the musketeers had a rallying call of ‘One for all and all for One.’ When we finally put aside our differences and start working together; it [will be] a lot like that for whole communities everywhere. [I don’t] expect people to have set roles. Indeed, [when we become] generalists rather than specialists… [we will still need] technological specialization [but expect] everyone to be able to ‘pitch-in’ and help whatever the tasks in front of us. Our economy will simply be a tool we use to support what we are doing as we live an abundant life, and not a means to accumulate money that keeps us separate and individuated with a fear of scarcity. What we define as prosperity will be the complete opposite of what it is now. And we will all be prosperous, because all our ‘need’s will be met simply by the way we live, and not through the never-ending quest to acquire money and stuff.
The next big item 3 is about using new metrics to redefine what prosperity and success mean in a true sustainable world.
0 Comments