Difference between revisions of "User:Spiritdude"

Revision as of 02:35, 29 January 2013

My name is Rene K. Mueller, and I have been studying RBE for a while as part of my involvement at the Occupy movement in 2011/2012, and currently run

• OccupyConcepts.org and also a wiki, in particular the
• Resource-based Economy entry, where I listed also the history origin of RBE (it was proposed before TVP and TZM), and I also address some of the short comings of RBE in its current state (2013/01).

By participating here at RBEM.org I hope RBE extends beyond a sole technocratic take on nowadays problems, and some actual transitional or hybrid RBE projects are implemented in order to test and then refine the RBE further, so it no longer remains just wishful thinking.

Considerations for RBE Communities

I have been observing various emerging RBE projects:

• RBE 10K (2013/01), hosted and started on this Wiki
• Build a RBE Hybrid Community (group at FB), aims to raise money via multi-marketing strategy, details of the project not yet clear
• Global Unity Project (2013/01), eco pod (container) based habitat, aims to be a transitional RBE project

so I addressed some of the issues of those projects:

Monetary System vs Money/Currency Itself

Some what is talked about RBE doesn't make sense to me, and I like to describe it in more details. Many people don't like money, and like to operate without a currency - what they actually don't like is that the monetary system and the currency thereby

1. create distance between them and the things they need and desire
2. aids not the equal distribution of resources and wealth but more inequality of such.

Because this mix up of cause and effect, as I see it, many RBE advocates blame money or currency in general for the problems. There are some issues with the issuing of money which creates an inherent unequal distribution of wealth as abstracted through money (money issued as debt by the national/federal banks, and the fractional reserve bank, which empowers banks to issue money themselves, and due human flaw, aids to the abuse of that position of power), it is a problem of the current implementation of the monetary system, but money/currency itself isn't the core problem here, let me explain:

Any value assignment, any comparison between two separate things and their individual assessment, creates a currency, an abstract currency - it allows to compare and weight overhead. Any system which aims to be efficient, requires to calculate overhead and choose the more efficient one, internally determined by comparison, which as just mentioned, is a currency (a number). So, any system which aims to be sufficient, calculates within with a virtual currency (e.g. Wh). What I am saying, currency has a function, and not all currencies are coins and bills, but numbers multiplied with an assessment factor in a computer program or system, especially the rather technocratic RBE approach by TVP.

RBE Flavors

What RBE promotes (there are several flavors underway, not just TVP or TZM but also other groups, and RBE has been around before J. Fresco, see Resource-based Economy I mostly wrote) is a common good approach, yet, it never really goes to the very details what it really means, but it becomes very important when a transitional project of RBE.

If you focus on starting a RBE based community, village or even larger project, concentrate on the principle how RBE actually works, because I think there you really state your vision, as right now RBE is a too airy concept to implement.

Common Goods

All is owned by all, it also means there is no private ownership of anything anymore. What exists is private possession (possessing is not owning), usership over ownership. Regardless how big a RBE space is, a small house, a village or the entire planet: in that perimeter there is no ownership but only using- or usership; you can take care of things, use it. Inventory of the tools, or the resources is essential, this also means, there is no secrecy of anything, everything related to resources and goods is published within the perimeter - you know what is where and how available, this is the practical side transitioning owning to using and taking care of something. Listing the individuals and their expertise is a good start, but it needs to be an actual system, e.g. a small group has a spreadsheet to 'hire' (mark to have his/her working force) a specialized individual for a certain time, then others know he or she is occupied.

Prevent (Self-)Enslavement

Many communities have been tried (last 50-60 years) and some suffered the enslavement of the individual. People joined an utopian project, and gave everything, no pay, 60-80 hr work per week, and after a couple of years they were exhausted, they enslaved themselves.

Make no mistake, e.g. to start a permaculture garden takes up to 10 years, so long it takes you to study the environment and its co-dependencies. The first 2-3 years your harvest might be minimal, some things you wish might not grow at all.

Seed of Abundance

Whatever transition project you aim, ensure there is one technology or thing you have abundant, a "Seed of Abundance", which aids direct to the community, e.g. a specialized core which enables you to create something you need essentially in abundance, and what exceeds your needs, you can sell outside the perimeter and cover resources you aren't able to produce yourself yet, e.g. some projects working close to RBE, like Damanhur, Auroville etc, they have that "Seed of Abundance", mainly being attractive by their own existance, and have income from visitors - which isn't really sustainable for the entire planet.

Once you have defined the using/taking-care of resources within a RBE system (regardless of size), and developed this initial "seed of abundance" you can start.

Apply RBE at the Beginning

If you aim for a perimeter like a village, you don't necessarily need money, you need someone who is willing to join the project with the resource: the land (you apply RBE in the bootstrap process itself). Of course you can also raise money to buy the resource (land for example) if one or two individuals cannot join with the resource required.

My recommendation: focus on the details how RBE actual functions, how actual work (we aren't there were automation does all, but we might getting there eventually) is distributed, how the actual common goods approach is applied and lived.

General Thoughts on Self-Determination

You see, pretend you live right now in RBE, you just do things you might not really like to do, but this isn't about money, it's about you deciding to do something to earn money to make a living. In RBE there is still work to do, perhaps 70-90% of all the work done today, and it needs to be organized, and people still need resources to live, to produce the things we need and desire. Of course it feels great once you decide what you want to work, but the next thought is, is that what I like to work also that what the RBE community needs? So you start to make a list what the actual needs of the RBE community is: a public available list, and those who can contribute do so. You might account the time you use, as you unlikely can be at two place at the same time physically (the spreadsheet I mentioned above). At first you, as community, like to provide the physical necessities, like shelter and food, and then the other human needs; once the actual needs are covered, aim for the vision (e.g. some may aim for further automation, to reduce time to work, others may aim for some other goals). The vision creates the cohesion for the social aspect of the community.

So, why I say this all? RBE as conceptual framework has to become clear, concrete, explain exactly what is valued (the prime values), what is accounted, what is optimized to gain efficiency - this is the tidieous groundwork indeed.

Once this groundwork is really done, a transition / hybrid RBE will have no trouble to take off and gain huge traction, because people wish for a more self-determined way of living, and to see more close what you work for makes sense for the whole (of the community) and isn't just to make a disconnected living.

Applied RBEM in Real World

Here the bootstrap an implemented RBEM, e.g. for RBE 10K:

Accounting of Resources

How are you going to account for resources, and services without money?

Since in RBEM all is owned by all or nobody individually thereby, a currency abstraction (money) does not equate ownership and exclusivity and thereby create an elevated position of control and power thereby. In an actual RBE society resources and services are accounted for, according their availability and demand of such. Technically seen, resources will be likely normalized in Wh or closely related (Energy x Time) and then used within the decision process to acquire, share and recycle resources, e.g. you can say then "to build a house or bridge or settlement on Mars 'costs' so many resources, and this option is more efficient as the other"; abstractly considered this a sort of technical currency, but one which cannot be obtained by individuals to take control of certain resources, it is simply a way to compare overheads or assess resources. The main aim is to satisfy all true demands or needs (see also next question in FAQ) by thorough survey to determine the inventory, and the equal rights of all to have access to such.

The actual details how different resources are assessed and then accounted for is part of the RBE 10K project; how resources are made comperable with a technical currency such as Wh or something closely related.

Determination of Demands & Needs

How do you determine actual demands or needs?

This indeed goes beyond the current layout of RBEM: determining actual needs has to do with finding the root of a need, and not remain on the surface or appearance of a need.

For example, in the current system one might say: I want a car.

Q: Do you need a car? What for?

A: For status, for being free, for being able to commute to work.

Now, you can say, those needs may look like silly, but this is how the person might honestly answer. In RBEM it is assumed, people do no longer have needs to obtain things to derive from them a personal status, as ownership or possessing is solely seen functional; this indeed neglects the current psychological programming of how things build up the self-image of people.

Nonviolent Communication (NVC) has developed an approach to determine actual needs, e.g. the need for a car to satisfy the need to show status might have its root in the underlying need to be seen, recognized, or loved; and this is a social need and has only on the surface to do with actual physical need for a car, as of this example. RBE suggests that we don't need to own things, we solely need them e.g. to commute from point A to B, after the use of the vehicle someone else can use it; things are shared, not owned; at most they are possessed if required.

This FAQ cannot debate this part sufficiently at this point, it is clear that the RBE 10K project will explore this shift of awareness and consciousness of the participating individuals.

Actual Sharing of Resources

How do you connect the resources, services and the needs or demands together?

In market/capitalistic based economy, supply and demand determine a price and so investments to increase availability for short supplies are gained, or if something is sufficiently available becomes cheap as of price - so far the ideal market mechanism. But as we know, human short-comings began to twist and abuse this system, and the otherwise understandable gain of profits, which essentially is the capability of might and opportunities in such a system, lead in the recent decades to absurdities which created a caricature of its formal ideal: resources are owned by a small minority, and sold, lent, or otherwise made available under circumstances which support further inequality of access to the resources. RBEM emphasises the importance of the actual access to resource over any kind of ownership, and defines all resources as common goods.

In other words, supply and availability of resources and the demand and needs are balanced to each other without any consideration of individual control, ownership or other monetary considerations like profit or artificial scarcity.

It is still a complex undertake to connect supply and demands in RBEM, although RBEM assumes to be functional where abundance of the essential needs are already covered - the actual bootstrap and transition is multi-faceted:

1. Resources are finite, often limited, some are available in large quantity, some even in plain abundance, some for one time use, other recycle naturally; RBEM suggest to have a very detailed inventory, which for some resources it is easy to obtain, whereas natural grown resources (like fruits or vegetables), or resources having a complex supply chain (like a computer) have fluctuations in their supply vs time and availability and pose complex interdependencies; several strategies will be experimented with and documented to provide long-term availability of those resources; needless to say this requires immense expertise on the involved areas of making resources available, process and recycle again.
2. To move away from owning things, but use and take care of things in a sharing manner, frees many resources which are tied up in personal ownership and possessing - the RBE 10K will document this increase of availability of resources closely.

Additionally, unlike in market based economy, in RBEM all solutions finding processes are open and publically available and reviewable; there is no place for secrecy regarding negotiations or price finding - this means also, the collective (every individual or groups) can contribute to refine and optimize processes how to allocate resources to actual needs and demands. Very likely RBE 10K will become an experiment where several such strategies for different resources are tested.

Social and Ethical Decisions

How are you going to make decisions which are not scientific determinable?

RBEM according TVP strongly suggests that most decisions can be made based on scientific understanding. Yet, it indeed leaves out general direction where a society is heading for, e.g. to abandon hunger world-wide has something to do with the ideal that all people are entitled to have access to sufficient nutrients to sustain their physical bodily needs - this aim isn't scientific, but an ethical decision.

How is or was this decision determined? There are base values which are partially described in RBEM, but indeed the overall focus is on making decisions based on facts and not beliefs, yet, ethics aren't neither facts nor beliefs, but a sense of conscience, which leads to a social agreement or contract among people, like the declaration of Human Rights of the UN.

It is also one of the main criticism of RBE being solely focused on technology and science (essentially being technocratic), but life is more than that. This is also why RBE 10K has to expand beyond the basic layout of RBEM, you are welcome to provide your input and expand it.

General Decision Making

How exactly do you come up with decisions?

There are several ways one can make a decision:

1. single ruler: a president (elected), a king/queen (non-elected, comes due heritage), benevolent/malevolent dictator (non-elected)
2. group / representatives: democratic elected representatives (politicians) democratically decide
3. entire population:
   1. democratically: majority over minority
   2. consensus: finding common grounds and finally determine decision by
      1. compromise: letting go of certain demands to find common goals (not always possible)
      2. avoiding what's objectable so the final decision has no grave objection from any side (not always possible)

It is obvious due the egalitarian setup of RBEM that consensus and democratic decision making is favoured where entire population is considered.

Each approach as more or less benefits and more or less drawbacks; as well hybrid form as of and how fallbacks are determined: how long can a consensus seeking process last, until democratic (majority over minority) is used, or a hybrid is defined (e.g. 98% achieved consensus be valid base for a decision).

To have large amount of people find consensus Working Groups (WG) have been proven to be efficient to work, once a WG determined they work out solutions, review issues which are too time consuming to discuss in a General Assembly (see below for more).

Crowd-Sourced Consensus

The most prominent attempts of implementations of such functionality are

• BetterMeans.org or
• Liquid Feedback.org (aka Liquid Democracy as used by the Pirate Party)

in which all interested people voluntarly participate in order to find decisions.

General Assemblies

General Assemblies (GA), as practices by the 15M movement in Spain, and then the Occupy movement 2011-2012, have shown true application of Nonviolent Communication (NVC) for large groups, and provided the entire new decision making process for communities and movements.

Links

• User:Ziggy where he describes his motivation to start this wiki and the RBE10K project.

Contact

• Google+
• Email: spiritdude AT gmail DOT com