Gift economy

=== RESPONSES === //How do you monitor who's contributing?// Excellent question. There's various ways that could be done. A gift-economy doesn't have to take place in an Anarchy but that is the kind I advocate. In an Anarchy they would organize a way to do it themselves, so I couldn't really say. One way this could be done is by everyone being accounted for and listed along side their profession(s) so that each time you used a service or tried to take from a shop you would have to be validated. That may be a good solution for some but, personally, I see that as unnecessary. I would suggest it operate simply upon communication. Staying a secret person and only socializing with people as far as using services and taking from shops would be unbearable for most. So it's inevitable that word will spread when some tries to abuse the system, especially in a society where spreading such information is encouraged. This would become continually easier to achieve in this modern era. Places that are less technological would usually make up for it in how small their local populations are. Also, in a Anarchist society where things are directly managed by the people, public facilities would tend to be organized in more convenient locations for everyone. When everyone relies more heavily upon locality it would become even harder to avoid detection of abuse. If the gift-economy were to become large scale or even global then the implementation of an ID system may become more necessary. Finally, this gift-economy would most likely have to come about after a moral-transformation of society. If this is the case then less wide-spread abuse than today would be a given. //If some guy is making some weird collect able item (such as a wooden bird) then does he get as much free junk as he wants? Who determines whats contributing or not.// If it's service to someone then it's contributing. Even being a stay at home parent could be considered as such. Making wooden birds for people who happen to desire that would certainly count, although if that's all they're doing it probably wouldn't be considered enough unless that's about all they're capable of doing due to some physical disadvantage. The maxim is: From each according their ability to each according to their need. //A garbage man is obviously a job, but someone like a TV advertiser salesman, would they get access to this system?// Lol, I don't see why many advertisements would exist in a money-less society. If there was truly need for one then absolutely. //I would like freedo to clearly provide pros to a system like this and how it would work. Please explain how this system will be implemented, controlled, maintained, etc.// IMPLEMENTATION: Here's the tricky part of explaining myself because I clearly come off as insane. Karl Marx argued that it could only be achieved through the temporary institution of a dictatorship which would eventually dissolve. I STRONGLY disagree. It is my position that such a system can only properly be introduced after a moral transformation of society through grass-roots movements. This will prove to be particularly difficult but I have a plan, however crazy it may seem. "Be the change you want to see in the world" ~ Mahatma Gandhi I think this is extremely good advice for this scenario. If I want there to be a gift-economy then I'm going to live as if there is one. If everyone around me were to do the same it would become true, since economic systems exist upon consensus. What does this mean? It means I must deny the use of money. An incredible task, yes, but I think the shock value incorporated with it will play a large part in popularizing the idea. I shall travel all about and do much service and ask for no money in return. I shall rely on the good-will of others, just like the kind I am giving, for my basic needs. If it's true that my proposed system is completely unfeasible then that will be proven by people letting me starve to death. Call it a hunch, but I don't think that will be the case. It may also be important to point out that I intend to include Pacifism and civil rights as a large part of my message. CONTROL/MAINTENANCE: Depends on what you mean by control. Having any centralized authority directing it is exactly what the movement does not need. As for how it's going to run without it; just like any other social movement, like the anti-war movement or the animal-rights movement or the environmental movement or any meme in society, it would operate from the bottom up, starting with every individual. In an Anarchy every individual would be directly involved in the decision making process in everything involving things that effect the way they live and function with society.