With one slight modification, I agree completely with glen's five principles. The exception: *"there is nothing supernatural, so all solutions have to be built on science."* The closest thing to a "cultural universal" (a practice, norm, technology, custom, etc. that is shared by all cultures) is a belief in a *supernatural*. I see no problem in basing a "solution" — a non-money-based social structure — on such a belief.
The most prominent examples of societies/cultures that do not use money internally, would be the Mennonites and the Amish. Both do use money externally, i.e. for interactions with outsiders. An example that I am more familiar with is the **United Order** established by Brigham Young. Orderville is a small town about 20 miles south of where I live and was the last community to practice the United Order. Just before its demise, the community numbered in several thousands and engaged in enterprises that included mining, ranching, lumber mill, textile and garment manufacturing, cotton growing, mercantile and trade, etc. The geographic range of the community covered all of Arizona north of the Grand Canyon, as far as present day Las Vegas, and the southern third of Utah. It was a Mormon community and all shared a common belief in a 'supernatural' and that belief played an integral role in the organization of the community. For example, the Bishop's Storehouse — both literal and metaphorical — was the repository of all goods and produce from the community and the Bishop, a religious leader, was charged with protection and distribution of contents among the populace according to need. But a Bishop is not a full-time religious figure — the church, even today, has less than 100 people who are 'paid clergy' — and not an authoritarian figure. Although there was a division of labor (men seldom worked in the communal kitchen and women seldom engaged in ranching or mining) it was primarily an egalitarian society. Women also tended to exert civil and social authority over the community while men exercised religious authority. Everyone, including children from age 8 and older (age of baptism), had direct access to the supernatural (to God) and was expected to use that access to determine correct actions and make decisions with regard every aspect of life. All of this functioned (internally) without any form of money (or similar abstraction). Orderville was disbanded when the US Government took control of Utah, took away women's right to vote, confiscated property of anyone with any connection to polygyny, and imposed a Washington-based civil authority. Because the "economy" of these cultures is based on a mixture of balanced and general reciprocity, there is no need for money within the society. There is no reason that these cultures could not scale to at least 'national' scales except, perhaps, those like the Amish that eschew technology and the "modern." for what it is worth, davew On Sun, May 9, 2021, at 5:27 AM, ⛧ glen wrote: > It's not clear to me why my attempt to answer hasn't impacted the way > you repeated the question. So I've copied it below. What I outline is a > hand wave at a future structure not entirely without money, but with an > augmented money. > > I think these 5 principles also model the non-moneyed organizations > Dave references. > > I understand that these answers aren't *complete*. But your repeating > your same question without incorporating the attempts to answer it is > worriesome. > > > On May 5, 2021 5:17:00 PM PDT, "uǝlƃ ↙↙↙" <[email protected] > <mailto:gepropella%40gmail.com>> wrote: > >Well, there are smarter people than me, who know more about Marxism > >than I do, on this list. But it seems there are ~5 principles to guide > >it: > > > >• civilization is already a cooperative enterprise, it's just a matter > >of cooperation's extent/ubiquity > >• there's nothing supernatural, so all solutions have to be built on > >science > >• innovation, technology, culture, etc. are limited only by nature; so > >in principle the things we build (including governments) can be as big > >and complex as the natural world > >• class is a cultural construct; we create it; hence we can eliminate > >it > >• the spectral signature of organization sizes is present in nature and > >should be mirrored in society (e.g. power laws for org sizes, small > >world networks, etc) > > > >None of this implies the elimination of money. Reduction to a single > >dimension is just fine *when* it works. But when it doesn't work, it > >has to be "fleshed out" with other structure. Contracts are such a > >structure. We use contracts all the time to flesh out our money-based > >transactions. And contracts need not be simply pairwise (as Pieter > >seemed to imply with his conception of a free market). Contracts can be > >between any number of groups or individuals ... they nest. > > > >The trick is with the legal system and spatiotemporal extension. When > >the lawyers draw up a contract and the courts judge an alleged breach, > >there's spatial extent that we can't codify (unintended consequences, > >externalities). And do contracts have higher order effects (extend to > >descendants, siblings, business partners, etc.)? Designing a legal > >system to align with the 5 basic principles above would, I think, > >produce something very unlike capitalism ... but maybe not whatever it > >is the Marxists imagine would emerge. > > > >I'm sure the above is too vague. But it's the best I can do. As I tried > >to make clear *I* have no idea what could replace capitalism. I don't > >even understand socialism. Smarter people than me would have to work it > >out. > > > > On May 7, 2021 10:43:35 PM PDT, Russ Abbott <[email protected] > <mailto:russ.abbott%40gmail.com>> wrote: > >Further illustration of my ignorance in these areas. > > > >This discussion originated with the idea that we are oppressed by > >capitalism and money. My question still is, what is the (or at least > >*our*) > >alternative? Can you imagine converting our society into one without > >money? > >What could it possibly look like? Simply saying, *replace our culture > >with > >that of the Incas* doesn't help me to see any real alternative to where > >we > >are -- or a viable path from here to a non-monetary world. > > > >-- Russ Abbott > >Professor, Computer Science > >California State University, Los Angeles > > > > > > -- > glen ⛧ > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
