artº gorz, lets, etc - j shorthose

191

This article explores the potential of various experiments in alternativesocial and economic organisation which occur at grass-roots levels.It is informed by the critical theories of Andre Gorz, HerbertMarcuse and Ivan lllich, and the radical design theory of VictorPapanek. Contemporary capitalism continues, and often results inmany people feeing the prospect of long term economic insecurity.In contrast the article discusses micro-experiments such as LocalExchange Trading Schemes, Credit Unions, Income-PoolingSchemes, Self-building, and other related projects. It suggests thatthey hold the potential for a more convivial and sustainable futureas well as empowering individuals ta maintain a greater sense ofeconamic security and an expanded sphere of autonomy away framthe vagaries of the market.

Micro-Experiments in Alternatives

Jim Shorthose

In Ecology as Politics, Gorz wrote.

What is essential is not to define a new coherent politicalscheme, but to suggest a new imaginative attitude, one thatwill be radical and subversive, by which alone we will be able tochange the logic of our development (Gorz, 1983: 62).

Modern societies, rich or poor, can move in either of twodirections: they can produce a new bill of goods—albeitsofter, less wasteful, more easily shared—and thereby furtherintensify their dependence on consumer staples. Or they cantake a totally new approach to the inter-relation betweenneeds and their satisfaction. In other words, societies caneither retain their market-intensive economies, changing onlythe design of the output, or they can reduce their dependenceon commodities: the latter entails the adventure of imaginingand constructing new frameworks in which individuals andcommunities can develop a new kind of modern toolkit(lllich, 1978: 34)

192 Capital & Class #72

Introduction

The events in Seattle in 1999 provide an example of the oppositionto the economic rationality of global capitalism and State co-ordination of the social conditions for that commerce. This impliesthat many people are seeking an alternative economic rationality.The main thesis of this article is to suggest that there are certainexperiments occurring in society today which can be seen asarticulating this alternative, albeit in an embryonic way. I willdiscuss some examples of these alternatives, against the backdropof some neo-Marxist theory. Part of this alternative economicrationality exhibits an imaginative attitude to social and economicinteraction; to ways in which individuals and groups can providematerial security for themselves and each other in a way not reliantupon external economic institutions which stand over them; toways in which alternative values can be expressed, which articulatemore simple, sustainable and convivial ways of living. Micro-experiments which come from this imaginative attitude try toexpand the real democratic control that people have over theireconomic and social lives, and allow them to expand their creativityand self-determination. I will argue that the micro-experimentsdiscussed below combine practical, green and socially convivialalternatives to the rationality of capitalism. These are howeverbig issues. Many of the experiments I want to discuss are still verysmall and embryonic. My aim here is to discuss the future potentialof some of these micro-experiments against the backdrop of neo-Marxist theory. It is clear that neo-Marxist theory has much to offerin both understanding the nature of some of these developmentsand in contributing to debates about their future. This is not to saythat such micro-experiments are in some way Marxist. They are not,and the people who take part in them hold a variety of views. Themicro-experiments develop according to their own internal logic.It does seem however, that neo-Marxist theory can contribute tothe understanding of their potential significance.

This discussion stems from some basic assumptions. Firstly,most people in Western societies rely for their material securityon paid work. It is clear that this is an increasingly insecureposition for the vast majority (Gorz, 1999). We have seen inrecent years technological unemployment which threatens tomake many jobs and professions obsolete in the future. We haveseen an increasing divorce of the levels of employment from thelevels of profit that corporations make. We have witnessed

Micro-Experiments in Alternatives 193

simultaneous rises in investment, profit and redundancies. Wehave seen an increase in the contractual insecurities of manyworkers and professional in a wide variety of jobs. With wideningsocial divisions we see the advent of classes of people who do nothave necessary marketable skills and so are likely to face long-termunemployment. For these reasons, reliance upon waged work formaterial security is becoming an increasingly futile and unrealisticprospect for many people.

Alternatively, there are experiments that articulate a newpolitics, in that they attempt to offer practical solutions to theproblems of material and environmental insecurity in ways that alsooffer more individual and social self-determination. These micro-experiments are small in scale and they tend to be open andaccessible to a v^de range of people. As well as being alternativeeconomic relations between individuals they bring social andenvironmental benefits. The nature of industrial production alongwith the waste and over-consumption, which it often encourages,brings the negative environmental consequences with which we areall too familiar. The micro-experiments, often by their very nature,revolve around a more sustainable logic. They are sustainable in thatthey are not so directed by the vagaries of the market, and run aslong as the people involved want them. Also, many of these micro-experiments are green due to their internal logic, and do not needgreen issues bolted on to them. For instance, the whole logic ofrepair and recycling at the heart of some of the experiments inurban redesign and self-build housing discussed below areinternally sustainable. I do not want to discuss the whole of theecological debate here. However it does seem clear that somemicro-experiments do have an ecological dimension in that theyencourage less consumerism, greener practices at the level ofeveryday life, and encourage greater simplicity. For example,Income-Pooling Schemes try to provide a more financially secureexistence through voluntary activity. Members of an Income-Pooling Scheme voluntarily share their income with other membersagainst times when their income maybe reduced. Members of theseschemes are often overtly committed to 'voluntary simplicity'(Illich, 1973) and only take out of the scheme what they need.There is a commitment to rejecting over-consumption.

The micro-experiments I want to discuss also have implica-tions for the social environment, and for the experience of thepeople within that environment. Many are guided by the logic ofincreasing individual or group control over the practical aspects


of life. Whilst this tends to mean an increase in the capacity forself-determination and a reduced reliance on external institutions,it also means that the nature of social interaction is releasedfrom the purely economic logic of money relations and occurs ona more truly human scale. Local Exchange Trading Schemes(LETS), which are discussed in more detail below, are very clearexamples of micro-experiments which allow for economicinteraction and exchange in a way which is not purelyinstrumental. These developments and others, in varying degrees,can be seen as clear examples of what iUich has referred to as'convivial'. He defines conviviality as '...the autonomous andcreative intercourse between persons, and the intercourse ofpersons with their environment... I consider conviviality to beindividual fi eedom realised in personal interdependence and, assuch, an intrinsic value' (iUich, 1973:11).

It is these features which make the micro-experiments sopotentially exciting for contemporary politics and perhaps forfiiture economic well being of many ordinary people. This is not tosay that they are without their problems. The micro-experimentsdiscussed below have their failings. However, I want to concentratehere on the potential that they hold for a future social and economicinteraction. I do not want to say much about their problems. Thisis for two clear reasons. Firstly, these alternative forms areembryonic and therefore to criticise them for their incompletenesswould be to do a disservice. Capitalism, as the dominant economicand social system, is clearly not without its failings. However thoseconcerned with trying to make it work do not concentrate on itsfailings. I suggest that we who are interested in alternatives do thesame. Secondly, and more importantly, given their very nature, themicro-experiments are more sensitive to their own problems andfailings. The fact that the alternatives discussed below are run andmanaged by those who take part in them, rather than by someexternal authority, means that the very act of being part of such amicro-experiment is synonymous with recognising and dealingwith the problems when they arise. Given their nature, no one is ina position to control such alternative social and economic formsand thus no one can prevent them from evolving and changingfrom within. In this sense we can say that the ideas and rationalitybehind some of these micro-experiments are more importantthan any particular failing, as dealing with such failings is part of thevery nature of their alternativeness. It is the alternativeness andimagination of this politics that is important.


Some Critical Theory

The Critical Theory of Marcuse, Gorz and Illich can illuminatesome of the key features v«thin such micro-experiments. As Corzargues, politics at the end of the 20th Century, given changestowards a post-industrial economy needs to '...improvise thefuture as never before', to determine the ' . . .direction of our escape'fi-om the consequences of post-industrialism and the insecuritiesit brings (Corz, 1985,1999). Such consequences raise questions ofthe inadequacies of past political strategies based upon easilyaccepted notions of full employment, economic growth, and thelink between commercial profitability and general economicprosperity for all. Environmentally, this politics tends to advocatea new direction geared towards a model of production andconsumption which is less wasteful, and which generates lessreliance upon external institutions providing the wherev^thal forlife and well being. It encourages more self-determination andenables people ' . . . to be more capable of producing what theyconsume... giving the widest possible section of the populationaccess to the means of self-production and thus to self-productionitself (Corz, 1985: 4). As we shall see in more detail below, Corzargues for a move 'beyond the wage-based society' (Corz, 1999).

Whilst many of the arguments about the micro-experimentsgeared towards expanding autonomy and self determination areeminently practical, much of the politics around this appears at firstsight Utopian. The imaginative alternatives espoused by Corz andIllich move away fi-om traditional politics of economic growthand redistributive issues. Marcuse (1969) has discussed in detailsome of the salient features of this type of new politics. He showshow the traditional productivist system ensures both an industrialdiscipline and an over-reliance on consumerism. In contrast to this,Marcuse advocates a 'new sensibility' and a 'solidarity', which hasimplications both for the material organisations of productionand for humanity's relationship with the natural environment.Whilst such notions are still eschewed by traditional politics of bothleft and right as Utopian, the technological and economicdevelopment of capitalism, the reduction in the amount of labourpower needed to maintain a certain level of production, and thecorresponding potential for expanded autonomy from materialinsecurity have opened up more 'utopian' possibilities. For instance,Marcuse, Corz and Illich all agree on the centrality of fi-ee time asthe primary existential resource to allow for the development of

196 , Capital & Class #72

alternative ways of living and producing. It is the expansion of freetime which is the basis for the expansion of the realm of autonomyand conviviality. In society today we are already seeing theredistribution of time, in that many people are either unemployedor underemployed. As Gorz shows, this process is likely to continue,if not increase, but the process needs to be humanised. But social,communal and proto-economic structures need to be in place ifexpanded free time is to be experienced as a resource. Without thesestructures expanded free time will often be experienced as isolationand boredom by many people, rather than something which offersthe potential for greater autonomous and creative activity (Gorz,1983,1985,1989). Marcuse argues that the urgent political questionsare now no longer 'how' can needs be met, but more ones of'whatare/should the needs of individuals be', and consequently howcan the realm of autonomy be expanded once these needs aremet. Marcuse recognises that it is not for him to delineate what theseneeds are a priori to the act of liberation itself, he simply argues fora more overt politics of needs within the context of a discussion ofproduction, set against the possibility of expanded freedom. Themicro-experiments discussed below carry widi them a commitmentto such a questioning of needs and consumerism as much as theybring alternative practical solutions. Experiments such as LETS andself-build housing projects seem to develop a sub-culture thatechoes Marcuse.

Marcuse and Gorz, as well as lllich see this 'greening' of socialand cultural life as also the development of the individual capacityfor self-realisation. Some of the experiments considered belowexpress the interplay of practical reason and new ways interacting.For instance, Gorz (1983) draws the relationship between a newpolitics/sensibility and anti-consumerist/green politics (see alsoPapanek, 1995). He argues that a 'richer life' is related to consumingless rather than more. Income-pooling schemes, car-sharingschemes, self-build housing, and anti-consumerist approaches toproduct design and repair articulate these underlying values. Theyall articulate Illich's notion of'voluntary simplicity' (lllich, 1973).

The provision of basic needs by capitalist markets and the Staterest upon the assumptions of fuU employment and economicgrowth. This leads to certain types of production, over-consumption and environmental problems. However, it alsoleads to the erosion of individual/communal skills for self-reliance. The technological and consumerist-oriented approachesto orthodox politics rest upon offering individualised solutions


to collective problems. It is this 'individualisation of the problem'which Corz criticises, and the micro-experiments in the self-provision of basic needs discussed below overcome. Micro-experiments such as LETS can be seen as bringing together theproduction, consumpdon and social nature of provision and assuch are examples of what Corz has called 'socialised production'and 'self-managed consumer co-operatives'. Such experimentspotentially overcome the 'modernisation of poverty' (Illich,1977) whereby new forms of material insecurity and disadvantageexist in the midst of great affluence. The reliance on consumerismfor our material security has lead to '.. .the disappearance of allpopular know-how on which self-reliance was based—treatingcommon complaints and illnesses; cooking; repairing (or evenbuilding) our houses, furniture and tools; caring for babies;keeping fit' (Corz , 1985: 27). This is rejected many micro-alternatives in favour of re-enlivening of communal productiveactivity and creative communal solutions to material insecurity.

Corz (1982, 1989) demonstrates the relative weakening ofwork as a defining aspect of individual and social life. He re-asserts the 'abolition of work and the liberation of time' as a keyfeature of a future, imaginative politics. In his latest work.Reclaiming Work, Corz (1999) eventually sees the outrightrejection of waged work for certain sections of the population infavour of more stable expressions of work and ways of meetingmaterial needs. Here Corz argues for the redistribution of sociallynecessary work and socially produced wealth to allow for thebreaking of the relationship between waged work and income.With a guaranteed 'sufficient income' (i.e. an income which ishigher than merely a basic income, and is sufficient in and of itselffor reasonable prosperity) individuals could become more 'multi-active' in their use of their own labour power. Illich (1978) alsotalks of recasting the meaning work and (un)employment. Thecommon perception of work as being tied to formal employmentand wages neglects the potential for work to be self-directedand oriented towards use and collective solutions. For instance,given technological unemployment, individuals are being driventowards a return to more self-determined productive activities.The perception of work as tied to waged work neglects thepossibilities in official unemployment offering the free time forindividuals to engage in self-creative labour. Civen both thepractical and existential resources, freedom from such wagedwork could become a positive experience. Indeed, given the


inevitability of technological unemployment, such micro-experiments which try to initiate such a re-enlivening of creativelabour power may become vital for many people in the future.

If waged work is to be reduced, then lllich (1978) makes thepoint that ways need to be found to allow for the creative capacitiesof individuals to be used to meet their individual or communalneeds. By rejecting the professionalised control over needs andone's ability to satisfy them, IUich advocates a politics which rejectswhat he calls 'citizen impotence' in favour of, '...self-confidentcommunity, neighbourhoods or groups of citizens' engaged indevising ways of meeting needs outside of the professionalised,market-oriented system. This is what IUich means by 'usefulunemployment'. This implies the rejection of money as themeasurement of all value, and the increased valuation of morehumanised and convivial forms of organisation and moresustainable approaches to Ufe. To allow for this more convivial socialagency, IUich identifies the access to 'tools' as a key factor. By'tools' we can understand both the obvious practical aspects (suchas technology and hardware), and also other existential resourcessuch as free time, space and access to ideas and new skUls. Suchaccess also implies certain social arrangements which facUitatesthis. Micro-experiment such as skills exchanges, communityworkshops, communal design surgeries and self-build housingprojects (both practical and legal/bureaucratic aspects) meet someof these practical and social/organisational needs. In expressingcommunal (inter)action in ways other than those mediate by theState or money relations to facilitate mutual aid and supportthrough more voluntaristic action, they challenge the 'radicalmonopolies' of 'disabling' professional systems (IUich, 1978).

Micro-Experiments

Various micro-experiments have been alluded to above in passing.Let us now turn to the specifics of some of the micro-experiments,which articulate practical, green and convivial alternatives. Peopleexperience the need for food and shelter, transport and mobility,various other products that make life easier on a purely practicallevel. They also experience the need for social contact and communalinteraction. It is clear that the micro-experiments considered hereoffer ways of meeting some of these basic needs in an alternativeway, as weU as offering the potential for social contact. The first.


and I think potentially most vital example of an alternative micro-development which articulates some of the issues I have discussedabove are the various LETSystems which have developed aroundthe country over the past few years. LETSystems are currentlygrowing at the rate of one per week (Lang, 1994; see also Dobson,1995). In terms of offering a greater degree of material security inthe face of the insecurities of a post-Fordist economy; in terms ofoffering a context for the creative expression of one's capacity towork to meet one's own needs; in terms of encouraging a greatercommunal interconnection between people; and in terms ofallowing individuals greater self-determination: in all these waysLETSystems have much potential. LETSystems allow people withtime but little money to afford more than they would otherwise.They allow people who cannot find a job to use their capacity towork to meet their needs. Dauncey (1992) shows the 7 key qualitiesof LETS to be: inherent simplicity of organisation; 'money'becomes a source of information and social co-ordination notpower; total decentralisation and an absence of hierarchy; everytransaction is personal and economic interaction is oftensimultaneous with social interaction; it encourages initiative, self-esteem and convivial interaction between individuals; it fosterscommunity self-reliance; it restores trust and fi-iendship in trade.

We should let the LETSystem speak for itself. The followingis taken from a typical LETSystem's statement about itself andwhat it does (Calderdale in Yorkshire):

A Local Exchange Trading System is basically a barter system. Ithelps people in the community to exchange skills and services. Butit is more sophisticated, bigger and more effective. LETS schemesare based on a successful scheme pioneered by communities inBritish Columbia...

Unlike a barter system, working one to one, LETS allows membersto buOd up credit with one member and spend it with another...

Among its many advantages, Calderdale LETSystem: Helps to• share skills to support the local community...;• Is run and managed entirely by its members...;• Saves resources...

Calderdale LETSystem is a voluntary, not for profit group run andmanaged with the co-operation of its members. We have a core


group, open to all, which helps with the day to day running of thesystem...

Trading is done in units of exchange which we caU FAVOURS.LETSystem members are given a credit book and sent a regularupdated directory of the skUls and services offered by members.This allows you to pay for the services in FAVOURS and youraccount is debited accordingly. No interest is charged or paid ondebits or credits...

Members call up the services they require or visit shops andbusiness in the system...

Calderdale LETSystem offers an incentive to people to use localservices and shops, thus stimulating the local economy andhelping the community to thrive and prosper. People may use thesystem as much or as little as they wish and can choose to chargein any combination of FAVOURS and pounds...

The system offers opportunities to develop new and useful skiUsand create new social networks... (Lang, 1994).

The skiUs and services offered by LETSystems vary, but are oftenquite extensive. The bigger LETSystems become, the more skiUsand services they wUl be able to offer and the more demand forthose skills and services there will be. Leamington Spa LETSdirectory, which is fairly typical and by no means a big LETSystemshow a wide range of skUls and services being offered. It offers theseUing of second hand goods through to the offering of baby-sitting, transport, general home repair and gardening serviceswhich are often common in LETSystems. It also, however, offersfood for sale on the LETSystem and a smaU amount of rentedaccommodation. It shows, at least in principle, that the basicmaterial needs of people could be met, even with a relativelysmaU LETSystem. Over and above the economic benefits of LETS,there are social benefits. They can and do provide a focus forcommunal activity, they aUow people in an increasing privatisedand anonymous social world to meet each other and developmore convivial ways of living. LETS removes the conventional de-personalisation in everyday work as individual traders engagein more human economic interaction through face to facenegotiation. In offering skUls and services on the LETSystem,


individuals are able to offer something that they value, feel goodat and enjoy doing. This allows for more satisfaction and reducesthe alienation often experienced in conventional waged workand increases a sense of self-realisation. Finally it is reported bythose involved in LET schemes, (Dauncey, 1992; Lang, 1994)that people make friends through the LETS activity and talkexcitedly about the social aspects of LETS membership.

As I have argued, there is the potential in a micro-experimentlike LETS to allow for more material security and individualautonomy. The wider political implication of something likeLETS, now and for the future, implies a discussion of politics anddemocracy. In his discussion of 'Associational Democracy',Hirst (1993) defines it as being a principle of social organisationwhich argues that ' . . ..human welfare and liberty are both bestserved when as many of the affairs of society as possible aremanaged by voluntary and democratically self-governed -associations' (Hirst, 1993: 112). Clearly the example of LETS isan example of this associational principle being put into practice.In terms of the future development of local communities and theeconomic weU being of individuals, LETS may hold the potentialfor the development of this associational principle. Hirst sees thisprinciple as a neglected 19th Century idea whose time hasperhaps come as we move into the next millennium. Asscepticism in both 'State collectivism' and 'free-marketindividualism' grows, examples like LETs may becomeincreasingly politically viable and important for the future ofsocial organisation. At the macro-level some wider co-ordinationwould be needed. This implies the need for associationalistinstitutions which offer a societal orientation geared towards co-ordinating business and services across society, towardscommunal ends. One example of such a societal orientation is thepolicy geared towards the redistribution of work and free timeoutlined by Gorz, to allow individuals to increase their economicsecurity and also pursue other self-determined activities. Atthe micro-level, associational democracy as offered bydevelopments such as LETS, may make up to a degree for thefailures of markets and States to provide material security forindividuals. They may offer more sensitive, more efficient as wellas more humane structures where individuals can use theircreative capacities to meet their own needs and interact moreconvivially with others. They overcome the 'individualisation'which Gorz identifies.


LETSystems encourage activity rather than passivity. Such formsof associational democracy need not be regarded as a 'secondary'forms of organisation which deals with civil society, as it were, afterthe State has finished (Hirst, 1986). LET structures can becomponents of 'primary' institutions of social organisation andhave central, important roles to play in the everyday lives ofindividuals.' LETSystems can be seen as important forms of'economicdemocracy' which provide autonomy fi-om the power of wealth,markets and unemployment. Combined with the necessary degreeof State regulation and protection, such structures can develop into'new forms of democracy' (Held and Pollitt, 1986). This could leadto greater political efficacy and an increase in the level of practicalcontrol which individuals or groups have over their lives, over andabove the largely symbolic politics of electing representatives.

Lucien Seve (1978) has shown that the individual capacity foragency wiU only result in action if there is a 'capacity for success'.One resource which determines this 'capacity for success' is thelevel of political efficacy. LETSystems offer this important resourceand allows individuals or groups to have greater practical controlover their everyday lives. It allows people to transform theircreative potential into something that meets their needs withoutthe permission of external powers.

Other micro-experiments which seem closely related toLETSystems in providing greater material security and convivialityare experiments like Income-Pooling Schemes and Credit Unions.Credit Unions are not new, and have been tried many times over theyears. However, in certain economically deprived area, they areenjoying it seems something of a renaissance. In Birmingham todaythere are 28 Credit Unions.' In form. Credit Unions are similar toLETSystems in that they are voluntarily run by members of thecommunity. They are overtly set up to provide access to loans for the'financially excluded'. It is estimated that around 2,000,000 peoplein Britain today are without, or are unable to obtain a bank account.They provide loans to these excluded individuals to allow them agreater degree of financial choice at low cost, in easily repayableschedules. Typically a £100 loan would be repaid at £2 per week.

Urban Re-design Projects

Other imaginative and associational projects can be seen in someurban re-design projects. Again we can see in some of these


projects a coincidence of an alternative economic logic whichrejects reliance on markets and the State, with a communal levelof democracy and an advocacy of conviviality and sustainabUity.For instance, the BrazUian city of Curitiba changed its policies onurban management to link sustainability with citizenparticipation, or 'creative citizenship'. Jamie Lerner, the mayorof Curitiba, initiated policies which enlisted the support of thecommunity in cleaning up the cities shantytowns by exchangingtravel tokens, books and food for bags of rubbish. Unemployedshanty-dweUers were given the opportunity to seU their owncraft goods in non-corporate shops. Citizens could sell theirlabour to the city in exchange for greater benefits and so nothave to rely on formal waged employment offered by privatecapital. Given these initiatives, Curitiba now has 100 times morelandscaped open space in the city than it had 20 years ago. It hasnetworks of pedestrian and cycle paths and a city developmentshaped around a public transport system. It has a self-built'university of the environment', built from recycled telegraphpoles in a disused quarry where citizens can study principle andtargets for urban sustainability. It has a self-buUt glazed operahouse in another disused quarry, and in a third, a 25,000 personnatural auditorium for concerts and festivals (Rogers, 1997).

In a similar vein, Papanek (1995) has discussed the practicalitiesof design and the nature of the products we use in everyday life. Hisdiscussion echoes concerns with material security, environmentalsophistication, 'voluntary simplicity' and conviviality. Papanekargues that the process of design could and should be made moredemocratic and enable the practical control over everyday life foreach individual to be expanded. He argues for 'peopleparticipation' in the design of the things that surround us, as aprocess which brings together practical, material issues andquestions of creativity, sustainabUity and autonomy. He writes.

The job of the designer is to provide choices for people. Thesechoices should be real and meaningful, allowing people toparticipate more fully in their own life decisions, and enablingthem to communicate with designers and architects in findingsolutions to their own problems, even—whether they want to ornot—to become their own designers (Papanek, 1995: 60).

A key example of this for Papanek is vernacular architectureand housing. In certain non-consumerist societies housing is


understood as a process rather than a product to be bought andsold, and is usually self-built, using local, traditional knowledge.They usually are 'ecologically apt' and use local materials in asustainable and repairable way with a light ecological footprint.Such an approach to building and the ability to build one's ownhouse, as an individual or part of a group is being explored byincreasing numbers of people in the West. The simple andconvivial technology needed for this offers the possibility ofgroups of people meeting their need for shelter, by far the largestand most expensive purchase most people make, away from thelogic of the property market and the infiated interest costs whichthis offen brings. The Walter Segal Trust^ provides informationand advice on this. It show how easy self-buUding can be, that verylittle prior skill and training is necessary and that it is relativelycheap to accomplish. As such it is an example of an informationexchange which enables people to gain a much greater degree ofcontrol over the practicalities of their material lives. Self-buildhousing of cheap, high quality houses by those who will live inthem challenges the 'disabling professions' (Illich, 1978) ofproperty speculators and builders. It provides the possibility ofa re-skilling of people who are also able to repair and renewtheir own, therefore sustainable, properties. Such a creative inputculminates in a democratic and practical control over the processof housing for the people involved, and better quality housing toa design that the individuals determined for themselves. It alsomeans that the sense of self-confidence is gained and theexperience of housing for those involved is improved. Individualor group self-building of something as fundamental as housingis a way of providing greater material security whilstsimultaneously providing a sense of communal solidarity and anexpression of self. This is expressed by Broome and Richardson:when discussing their own self-build project they write,

We took matters into our own hands and found we had donesomething to the quality of our lives. The roof over our heads ismore than a roof; it is our roof and it is a good roof. We havemade our own decisions about design and quality instead ofhaving them imposed on us (Broome and Richardson, 1991: 28).

We see therefore in self-building another example of a micro-alternative to the market and consumerism which simultaneouslyoffers greater material security and a more autonomous


expression of one's self or communal capacities. There can be noclearer examples of convivial technology in action than acommunal self-build housing project.

Conclusion

Whilst the micro-experiments discussed above cannot be describedas a panacea for all the problems of society, and will not mean thatpolitical opposition to the WTO and global capitalism is no longernecessary, they nevertheless hold some potential for the future ofalternative politics. Optimism in such micro-experiments lies intheir practical nature, allowing people to begin to meet some of theirneeds in ways not controUable by markets, professions or theState. The neo-Marxist theory discussed above resonates withthese micro-experiments. In his discussion of free time, 'multi-activity' and 'widening the gap between society and capitalism',Gorz (1999) seems to echo such a 'new sensibUity'. We can see inthese micro-experiments something like what Gorz calls the'diversification of sources of income' and 'new forms of solidarityand cohesion'. We can see such micro-experiments as pointing tothe 'exit routes' which Gorz tries to explicate. Over and abovethis however, I would argue that the nature of some of these micro-experiments gives them an added dimension. Firstly they clearlyarticulate ways in which ordinary people may achieve greatermaterial security over and above purely financial income. One ofthe problems with Gorz's model is its failure to make thisdistinction, and its continued adherence to a money-centredmodel in its discussion of guaranteed income. The consequencesof an adherence to this money-centredness may be that any suchdevelopments would provide individuals with a continuedguaranteed capacity to carry on shopping and therefore not lead toqualitative change. Self-buUd housing, income pooling and otherexperiments do not continue this money-centredness and speakmuch more to other forms of material security and ways of living.Gorz is obviously aware of the subjective dimension to this debateand the need to 'free up people's minds and imagination' butsometimes the detaUs of his discussion offer this as a possibUityrather than analysing how and where it might come about. Someof the micro-experiments discussed here provide that dimension.

Secondly, and perhaps more fundamentaUy, the neo-Marxismof Gorz implies top-down solutions to the social and ecological


problems we face. Gorz's discussion of a move 'beyond the wagebased society' implies that the logic of changes in work andtechnology encourages the co-operation of capitalism and theState to bring about factors such as reducing the working week,and developing policies about time and income. For variousreasons, I am sceptical about this. For instance, we have seen thatmanagement is quite capable of incorporating notions of multi-skilling, multi-activity, imagination and creativity into pre-established boundaries of the orthodox capitalist enterprise. Atthe same time the working hours of many people increase.

The significance of the micro-experiments I have discussedabove is their very micro-ness. Their grass-roots and communalnature seems to mean that they encourage a conviviality andqualitatively different form of social interaction. Albeit oftenfrom a position of exclusion from the orthodox economy, manypeople who connect with these micro-experiments seem to bepersonifications of a revolutionary process. There is a dialecticalrelationship between the process of revolution and therevolutionary subject. I would suggest that certain aspects ofthese micro-experiments, to simultaneously meet material needsin qualitatively different ways as well as finding new forms ofinteraction between people and vnfh nature, are good examples ofthis. The bottom-up model for social change being developedin some of these micro-experiments therefore perhaps has moreimaginative potential not to mention practical efficacy. Whilst suchmicro-experiments have their own problems, they are systemswhich are run by those people who use them and are thereforeprocesses geared towards communal, democratic, solutions to theirown problems. They are inherently open systems, which allowchange to come from the membership. I have suggested above, thatgiven the likely continuation of material insecurity for the majorityof the population in Western societies as a result of the normalworkings of a capitalist economy, such micro-experiments asLETSystems, Credit Unions, self-build housing and the myriad ofother schemes, may become important in the fiiture. They offer thestructures for individuals to use their capacity to work to meet theirneeds in ways which are outside the formal, controlled, universeof capitalism. They offer individuals and communities the potentialfor greater democratic control over their everyday lives, and maybegin to form new types of economic and social democracy.They encourage re-skilling and self-reliance, a rejection ofconsumerism and therefore a more sustainable relationship with


nature. They provide the forum for more convivial socialinteraction, greater community interdependence and individualautonomy. Given the disparate nature of the micro-experimentsdiscussed they may not represent a coherent political strategy, theymay appear sometimes mundane and deal only with certainaspects of everyday life, but they do nevertheless represent analternative, imaginative approach to politics and potentially newframeworks for social and economic life. They representexperiments in imaginative economic, ecological and socialalternatives.

1. Moneybox Radio 4 Nov. 99.2. Walter Segal Trust web site address http://www.ukbrp.co.tik. In a similar vein

The Ecological Building Society provide mortgages for the re-cycling andrefurbishment of old industrial buildings for housing.

Notes

Broome, J. and B. Richardson (1995) The Self-Build Book: How to Enjoy Designing Referencesand Building your own Home. Green Books, Dartington.

Dauncey, G. (1992) After the Grash. Green Books, London.Dobson, R. (1995) Bringing the Economy Home from the Market. Jon Carpenter,

Oxford.Gorz, A. (1982) Farewell to the Working Glass. Pluto, London.

(1983) Ecology as Politics. Verso, London.(1985) Paths to Paradise: On the Liberation fi-om Work. Pluto, London.(1989) Critique of Economic Reason. Verso, London.(1999) Reclaiming Work: Beyond the Waged Based Society. Polity,

London.Held, D. (1993) Prospects for Democracy. Polity, Cambridge.Held, D. and C. Pollitt (eds.) (1986) New Porms of Democracy. Sage, London.Hirst, D. (1986) 'Associational Democracy', In D. Held and C. Pollitt (eds.)

New Forms of Democracy. Sage, London.Illich, I. (1973) Tools for Gonviviality. Calder Boyars, London.

(1977) Disabling Professions. Boyars, London.(1978) The Right to Useful Unemployment and its Professional

Enemies. Boyars, London.Marcuse, H. (1969) An Essay on Liberation. Beacon Press, Boston.Papanek, V. (1995) The Green Imperative: Ecology and Ethics in Design and

Architecture. Thames Hudson, London.Rogers, R. (1997) Gitiesfor a Small Planet. Faber & Faber, London.Seve, L. (1978) Man In Marxist the Psychology of Personality. Harvester Press,

Brighton.

artº gorz, lets, etc - j shorthose

Documents