Bigthink - Idea Comments Feed

Comment on: Another way to subvert corporate globalization

Bigthink — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:28:47 +0100

I agree with so much of what is being said here. I am also for a more cooperative and participatory economy. However, we DO need corporations! We need them to become social institutions, driving change, instead of profit-seeking, ethically void, machines.

Comment on: Another way to subvert corporate globalization

Bigthink — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:48:57 +0100

I've heard of FairTrade, but only seen fair trade coffee locally. I was hoping to find out about more such organizations, and will continue my investigation.

I do not advocate Parecon (for many of the reasons you pointed out), I brought it up in passing because it promotes reliance on local producers. I appreciate your interest in alternative systems and experimentation. The political explorations I've been playing with are based on the idea of 'allowing' for different ways of living (economic systems, political systems, judicial systems, %u2026). This means allowing them to run their course (within some very liberal but reasonable constraints), to succeed or fail on their own merits, and letting this form of open exploration and experimentation in social systems inform us of 'better' ways to live rather than designing social systems based on what we think we know. Under such an open system people could try out popular ideas like neo-liberal economic models as well as more obscure ideas like anarcho-communism or parecon. Think of it like being to civilizations what freedom of speech was to ideas. This will not come about on its' own, it took a group of enlightened individuals to champion the idea of free speech and it will most likely take a group of enlightened countries to champion the idea of freedom of civilization. It may sound a little out there, and the ideas still has many wholes, but I'm not convinced it's untenable, and am beginning to think it may be the best path forward, especially since the protections needed to allow for such diversity would also hinder the concentration of power that is currently threatening our world. I've been calling the idea "laisse etre", yes, it's a shameless play on "laisse faire".

Comment on: Another way to subvert corporate globalization

Bigthink — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:08:40 +0100

I think you're emphasis on the need to pay attention to consumption (what we buy, how it's produced, who is affected) is well founded Gnos.

There are currently a number of organizations that certify 'responsibly produced goods'. FairTrade is a certification process that operates through Transfair in North America, which pays attention to economic, social and environmentally sustainable production. However, they only certify a small number of agricultural goods (primarily), especially coffee. There are a lot of other organizations that do this same certification process, which vary in size and in their notion of what it means to have 'responsibly produced goods'.

I read that wiki article about Parecon and it sounds interesting. My only problem with it is that it deals with ideal theory... i.e. 'what would the ideal economic system look like'. I spent a lot of time working with ideal theory and I've become disillusioned with the whole paradigm.

For me, this automatically begs the question: how do we get there from here? Implementing parecon seems to require dismantling capitalism--at least locally/regionally--for parecon to exist. Most people aren't interested in this, so where does that leave people who are?

I like the idea of creating alternatives that function alongside capitalism. Not because I want capitalism to stay around, but because it allows us to experiment with alternatives here and now, rather than limiting discussion to a vague 'future'. This experimentation allows us to figure out what works for us and what doesn't, and it also creates an EXISTING alternative to capitalist production/consumption.

One really simple (and limited) form of these alternatives is Ithaca Hours (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_hours). Another more radical example of departing from a capitalist framework is squatting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squatting).

What's interesting about these alternatives is that there's no naive notion of being 'totally separate' from capitalism. Instead, they represent adaptation and transformation in the society we have right now. This mindset is anathema to ideal theory, which forgets to tell us how to 'the ideal' from where we are now.

Comment on: Another way to subvert corporate globalization

Bigthink — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:16:50 +0100

This is a good idea. I've looked into this a bit before when exploring parecon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_economics) and found it difficult to find local organic products or alternative means of meeting my needs. Second hand goods are nice, and help, but all such items were new once and still have a harmful footprint. I'd rather find outlets for responsibly produced goods. This has led me to wonder:

Are there any web sites that host free (or very, very cheap) advertisements for organic and low impact products?

What are the criteria for 'responsibly produced goods'? I think they would at least have to include:
- Little to no pollution created while producing the product. If pollution was created then relevant countermeasures should be made to offset the pollution. Every byproduct of the manufacturing process should be accounted for.
- A plan for how to dispose or recycle the product should be determined before the product was made and some system should be in place so that the cost of recycling is made part of the purchase price of the product (when you buy a product you also pay to have it recycled). The lower the recycling or cleanup cost of the product the cheaper the product.
- Production should use 'responsibly produced' materials whenever available.
- All labor must be protected by some minimal set of labor protections (TBD).

Yes, such criteria would greatly affect the cost of products but I do think there are enough people that would accept the hit to their standard of living; if not, well then I guess we've chosen the now over the then.

I've not yet given up on governments, but we have two votes, one in our political system, the other (dollar vote) in our economic one. It's about time we start using both of them.