"WELL THAT WILL FAIL"
1. I am only aware of one other previous bike co-op (this is anecdotal mind you) in Sutton's Bay, Michigan. It failed after high expectations fell prey to human avarice, laziness, selfishness, and apathy. People just didn't return the bikes. They kept 'em, for the aforementioned reasons.
2. So called "Co-ops" that functionally operate within the framework of our capitalist society all share a similar structure: a non-profit corporation owned collectively by a community which purchases shares in order to participate (in the community I no longer live in the ICC and the PFC are stalwart examples of this model). The radical concept of the commune, communal living or sharing material possessions never really gained ground outside of the 60's and 70's without being coupled to the dense materialistic system they were essentially trying to liberate themselves from. Co-operative organizations are governed by a Board of Directors much like any corporation.
2b. Well why is this necessary? Which actually begs the greater question why did communism fail (as a system for redistribution of wealth, of greater equality, or social harmony)? The answer is complicated, so please bear with me {because my mother and girlfriend think my writing is pedantic and overbearing}.
b1. Altruistic systems are weak. They are vulnerable to greed. Most are founded on tenets that espouse the greater nature of humanity and regard man's lower nature as a corrosive byproduct of the overall system in place around him. Which is simultaneously naive and condescending
b2. It is nearly impossible to transition to an altruistic system of commerce or existence with people whose origins come from foreign selfish systems. This has constantly been attempted and always failed, which brings us back to the greater why?
b3. The answer recalls the transition of the Kingdom Judah from Judges to Kings (which we all remember from our Torah studies). Greed operates innately within the framework we have created for our society [footnote1], seemingly in an implicit manner maybe because there is a sheer thrill in knowing you got away with sneaking a cookie out of the cookie jar while mommy's back was turned. This metaphor is not as abstract as it seems. Greed operates as a mechanism resisting an externalized norm - that paticular norm of doing the best for all and not oneself. The fact that this norm is externalized at all is the very crux of the matter, rules are set in place by authority figures and as such are always outside of ourselves. Because we don't internalize simple concepts like the golden rule, we are simply in stasis waiting for a vacuum of leadership to revert into savagery. This is, of course, not true for all of us. We all know a goodie two shoes who internalized all the rules, and everyone hated him for it. But the point is that most people are not likely to be a goodie two shoes all the time, and if they feel no one else is watching, they are likely to let their greed run rampant. Whether that's eating your roommate's sandwich or embezzling from everyone's pension fund to support your gambling addiction is irrelevant, most of us wait til the cameras are off and the backs are turned and the watchful eye is dormant - to take full advantage for self [editorial aside: Mind you, this is not meant to simplify greed to a reductionist pleasure, it is far more subtle than that, far more inculcated and nefarious. At best one could claim that it sublimates through even the most sublime system, and the greatest fallacy that Marx employs is that this product fades, that greed relinquishes into some form of higher principle once the capitalist hierarchy is removed. Greed is so complicated essentially because the motivations for greed vary infinitely from narcisism to absent mindedness. No one would say that Jean Valjean is equatable Gordon Gecko]. Our sense of propriety, of what is wrong and right, is very much based on others and on authority figures that range from teachers, adults, beureacrats, civil servants, politicians, parents, professionals, police and priests who are all too often just as fallible, just as corrupt, just as human as anyone else. Our sense of propriety is dictated by a hierachy outside of ourselves, a both a ficticious and tangible force designed to maintain social order but not to establish internalized scrupples. This is the problem. A vast problem that may not be portaged (timshel). Consider when non-western civilizations (that co-habitated with their enviroment and within themselves in a more common-sensical and logical way) came into contact with the first Europeans focused on conquest. From Captain Cook to Cortez to the butcher Christopher Columbus the system of greater self interest ripped apart the system of basic incorporated altruism. These handfuls of foriegn interlopers were greeted as gods (Lono, Quetzalcoatal, Pacha Camac ect.) a favor they returned with slavery, rape and murder. This is precisely what I mean when I say altruism is weak (see b1)- the physical consequences, (not the meta-physical) can be catastrophic when encountering a more ruthless force. Its analagous to "The Invention of Lying", the lowest common denominator always seems to overrun nicities, as if being good implies being pliant.
b4. It is important to realize that greed is not the most universal characteristic of humanity, it is simply the lowest common denominator. I don't think that it should be philospohically extrapolated to a modernist conception of original sin, or that all humans are greedy selfish animals in desperate need of the Leviathan to save them from themselves. That is the dead opposite of what I am attempting to convey here. In truth by following the principles of Hobbes' work we create a self-fufilling prophecy by making ourselves increasingly morally bankrupt and thus increasingly reliant on a strong external authority to regulate behavior. The goal should not be some Japanese utopia of obedience and efficiency based on fear, the goal for humanity should be harmony. A harmonious co-existence with each other based off of shared benefit - not self interest.
b5. The problematic nature of the modern connundrum is two-fold: 1) we depend on authority figures for understanding the rules of social behavior yet (ironically) media has replaced authority because it is more ubiquitous, more visual and much sexier. But this media is a fast paced simulacrum of reality constantly trying to out-do itself [editorial aside: consider dwindling sexual mores within the porn industry: the increasing violence of male domination and misogyny accelerating to sociopathic levels in the last two decades as porn increasingly has to out-do itself in order to capture the attention of those with dwindling attention spans. Somebody should really make a graph to illustrate what I am saying.] and as such it always pushing boundaries in society which in turn mimic the mimicry. This would undoubtedly make Baudrillard happy, or answer the timeless Republican question/accusation of the liberal/libertine media but it is daunting when confronted with the sheer scale of the problem. 2) to implement a real change or a new society free of this problem we need to start fresh. But to start fresh with individuals raised in such an enviroment is impossible (see b2), it has been tried before, the USSR being the largest example of how it systematically fails - the politburo is eating caviar and speaking of the merits of sacrifice for collective good - and more importantly how could we start fresh at all without carrying all of our pre-existing biases with us? How presumptuous of our greatest philosphers to endeavor that this is indeed possible! Even assuming we could wipe the slate clean, start tabula rasa, we will then encouter the boy who cried wolf scenario, where some random child discovers that he can lie to manipulate the actions of others until the code he violates becomes meaningless and everyone is devoured. Again this essentially is the plot to "The Invention of Lying", and not to toot Rick Gervais' horn too much, but this psychological concept is much more vexing because even if we were able to eliminate all of our biases and begin again it wouldn't take long for greed to be spontaneously invented and undermine the fabric of the new system of social harmony which is exactly why the Bike Co-op will never work, and even if there is initial enthusiasm, and its recieved well, and everyone comes to Cafe Ambrosia to herald the genius of such a simple and practical concept, and AnnArbor.com runs a huge spread on sharing bicycles, well that will fail.
Post Script: This demonstration of a few seconds of thought that takes laborious hours to articulate on paper (proverbial of course) is a greater illustration of my pedantic and neurotic nature, which is precisely why my girlfriend and my mother roll their eyes everytime I write anything.
- DJV
Footnote1: The economic structure which permeates all greater and surrounding structures in our society is based off this greed. The father of this system, Adam Smith, designed it as an economic model using this LCD as the primary engine of motivation, creation, achievement and ingenuity. Smith also intended this to exist within a vaccum of power, where no unions, cartels, or conglomerates existed. This is not the case, as he underestimated the nefarious power of the LCD in terms of it working its tendrils into everything around itself as a means of self preservance and perpetuation. Ah father Frankenstein.
0 comments:
Post a Comment