Hierarchies Are Anti-Abundance
marc fawzi
Here is the argument I'm working with for "All Work Is Created Equal"
"Hierarchies go against the idea that all people are created equal and
deserve to be paid equally for their energy.
Sustainable abundance is predicated on equal access for all to all
resources.
Hierarchies are designed to ration resources.
Therefore, if we do not flatten the value of work itself, we will
never have sustainable abundance."
~~
More on how to flatten the value of work:
http://p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Energy_Economy#All_Work_Is_Created_Equal
What potential trouble do you see in this kind of thinking (if any)?
Marc
Andrew Hessel
I have lots of work to do each day. I don't consider writing an article for publication equal to cleaning the bathroom. Hierarchies are important in collating data, prioritizing, and ensuring workflows run smoothly. I don't think it's an accident that these structures emerge in almost any community. And I've never seen equal access to resources, even when those resources are free. The further away one lives from a river, the further they have to carry the water.
Andrew
Bryan Bishop
> I have lots of work to do each day. I don't consider writing an article for
> publication equal to cleaning the bathroom. Hierarchies are important in
> collating data, prioritizing, and ensuring workflows run smoothly. I don't
> think it's an accident that these structures emerge in almost any
> community. And I've never seen equal access to resources, even when those
> resources are free. The further away one lives from a river, the further
> they have to carry the water.
"""
As is suggested here, I personally feel life and society need a
balance of meshwork and hierarchy:
http://netbase.org/delanda/meshwork.htm
Indeed, one must resist the temptation to make hierarchies into
villains and meshworks into heroes, not only because, as I said, they
are constantly turning into one another, but because in real life we
find only mixtures and hybrids, and the properties of these cannot be
established through theory alone but demand concrete experimentation.
"""
Nathan, why did you make this mailing list even when Joseph
specifically asked you not to? Also, we've been going over this on the
open manufacturing list, so Marc, I'm surprised that you've forgotten.
marc fawzi
Andrew,
Hierarchies ration power and control in order to function.
This means that where we have hierarchies we do not have equally empowered peers.
Where we do not have equally empowered peers we do not have sustainable abundance (because it breaks the condition that any peer should be able to produce anything which means that they should be equally empowered)
So that's where I have a problem ....
Further thoughts, anyone?
Marc
Chriswaterguy
On Feb 3, 7:59 pm, marc fawzi <marc.fa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Hierarchies ration power and control in order to function.
>
> This means that where we have hierarchies we do not have equally empowered
> peers.
>
> Where we do not have equally empowered peers we do not have sustainable
> abundance (because it breaks the condition that any peer should be able to
> produce anything which means that they should be equally empowered)
one I find convincing.
Chris
>
> So that's where I have a problem ....
>
> Further thoughts, anyone?
>
> Marc
>
> > Marc,
>
> > I have lots of work to do each day. I don't consider writing an article
> > for publication equal to cleaning the bathroom. Hierarchies are important
> > in collating data, prioritizing, and ensuring workflows run smoothly. I
> > don't think it's an accident that these structures emerge in almost any
> > community. And I've never seen equal access to resources, even when those
> > resources are free. The further away one lives from a river, the further
> > they have to carry the water.
>
> > Andrew
>
marc fawzi
The conditions I've identified (some obvious ones) are:
- 1. Non-Wasteful, On-demand Production (which permits predictive inventory management so producers don't have to over produce, which causes waste and inefficiency and is therefore unsustainable, or under produce which causes shortages and high prices, which is also unsustainable)
- 2. Decentralized Production (which assures there's no dependence on a few suppliers)
- 3. Renewable Production (which assures there's no dependence on scarce resources)
- 4. Scalable Production (which assures that volume is not limited by the production process)
- 5. Open Source Production (which assures that the good or service can be produced by anyone, while enforcing social and moral rights of the originator, not their right to a monopoly.)
- 6. Non-Scarce Qualities (which assures the absence of any scarce qualities that would justify paying more than the cost of work energy it takes to produce and deliver the given good or service)
- 7. Non-Scarce Dependencies (which assures that there are no dependencies in the cost-of-work-energy calculation on any goods or services that do not meet the above conditions.)
There are other factors that go into the definition of the conditions for 'sustainable abundance.'
The fact that organizational hierarchies ration power and control in order to function (with most power and control at the top and least at the bottom) is contradictory to having equal empowerment and where you don't have equal empowerment you won't have equal access to power and control.
Patrick Anderson
>> Where we do not have equally empowered peers we do not have sustainable
>> abundance (because it breaks the condition that any peer should be able to
>> produce anything which means that they should be equally empowered)
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Chriswaterguy <sing...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is this an agreed-upon definition of sustainable abundance? It's not
> one I find convincing.
Marc,
Could you tell us what you mean by the phrase "any peer should be able
to produce anything"?
I assume you are not saying we are all identically skilled.
I personally interpret your statement as meaning "each peer should
have 'at cost' access to the Material Means of Production needed to
produce anything they would personally want, even if they might need
to compensate some other peer to actually do the skilled work".
This is the beginning of talking about property rights, and would also
need to include some sort of 'rent' to cover the extra
damage/wear/exclusive-use that peer requires to get that work done.
Sorry if I'm way off of either of your viewpoints, just trying to find
my bearings here.
Patrick
marc fawzi
each peer should
have 'at cost' access to the Material Means of Production needed to
produce anything they would personally want, even if they might need
to compensate some other peer to actually do the skilled work
>>
- 8. Equal Pay for Equal Work Energy (which assures that hierarchies, which exist through the rationing power and control, do not emerge, as they would create a basic inequality in the access to money by peers, which is antithetical to sustainable abundance.)
It's trading at cost in the value of work as opposed to pricing work subjectively.
marc fawzi
So I guess my problem is not with the idea of hierarchy but what it is associated with, i.e. rationing of power and control.