Posted by Lillia Frantin on June 11, 2009 at 08:32:54:
In Reply to: Re: Money as the root of all evil? posted by david searles on June 02, 2009 at 22:56:27:
David,
Thanks for comments. Here's some thoughts:
To the notion of transformation, it of course is unknown what shape or form the "class struggle' will take. Or how long it will take. But one thing seems true: the 'class struggle' goes on daily and in ways we hardly identify as a 'struggle'. I look to the transformation from Feudalism to Capitalism as a precedent; it must have been invisable at times. But it happened because human beings wanted (needed) more freedom & saw a way to get it, even if by degrees. As I see it, Necessity and invention, transformation and revolution, two sides of a coin. Definitions of Survival,Necessity and Desire are affecteded by the potentials offered in a given time. Now, whether the political vote- eg, assuming 'working class' people do struggle to create our own Party- is the viable means to change the Constitution & legal framework to outlaw Capitalism itself, or thru some other means or mix of means...I agree the 'struggle' will have to happen before a class-conscious transformation to a total cooperative democracy(economic & civic)can be created.
I am open to how it will 'look' but do believe its possible it will be 'quick' (like Feudalism to Capitalism - or chattel slavery to emancipation- seems quick in retrospect). I wonder that what we are seeing now- the reemergence of talk about Socialism- will have some part to play in that struggle. Whatever 'form/s' it takes, however, the conscious movement toward cooperative democratic decision-making ---call it Socialism or whatever--will come from a historic opportunity based on our social condition, our tools, our sense of 'what we must do'.
As for remuneration, to me this is more of a detail than a basic argument for or against real, cooperative
democracy. But lets say the best way for the 'working class' to remunerate and exchange, at the time this
'transformation' takes hold, is to incorporate
'paper/abstract/money' ( value we individually ascribe to the things we produce- art, antique cars, books & theatre) as a parallel track to 'time-labor credit cards' based on how many hours each of us contributes to the social good or common wealth. Maybe that would be fine with everyone. Thats ok by me.
But we might also just say (leaving aside the 'paper currency' itself-is that an important thing in & of itself?) anything we do, create, produce, value, desire...that occurs outside the typical 'workweek' of social production...is just bartered, agreed value for another agreed value or just 'given' to someone who prizes what we have done. I know as an artist, I would love to give my paintings to an 'admirer'- much as I might give flowers from my garden- but under the constraints of 'professionalism/market constraints', I
cannot without jeopardizing my ability to 'make a living'.
So, I guess I agree with the possibilities of parallel 'value systems', as long as they are agreed to by the people. But first we have to build a movement of people who agree that society needs to be changed, that it needs to become a REAL DEMOCRACY, it must move towards establishing a new means of organizing relationships & create new, unencumbered DEMOCRATIC decision-making. It must do this by breaking
with the past, destructive, authoritarian capitalist hegemony.
And that 'STRUGGLE'--which we are now engaged in!- WILL ABSOLUTELY BE NECESSARY TO TRANSFORM SOCIETY...(isn't what we are now trying to do (organize, educate, unite & dialogue) PART OF THAT STRUGGLE? It sure ain't easy and sure FEELS like a struggle!)
So, again, we are 'on the same page'. Like debating
'free access' or Michael Albert's technocratic approach to 'planning' in Parecon, to me it is a
side issue that will be decided by future people's desires, opportunities, needs. The main issue I think we agree on is the NEED FOR REAL DEMOCRACY where we work and where we live. And getting there? THAT'S THE STRUGGLE.
Member, Editorial Committee