Downloaded from: http://pichost.me/1591833/
A system of cooperation needs to follow the ways that people already cooperate, Saul Alinsky’s meeting people where they are. Any system of cooperation must find ways to incorporate cooperation into everyday life without making it into a doctrine. There is no doctrine in cooperation, there is only process. The process is not fixed as doctrine is fixed. Process is organic & malleable.
When I study systems by their organization, I find that organic systems come closest to portraying human cooperation. Bear with my analogy here: A plant sends out feelers & branches in multiple directions. When those feelers find sunlight or space or whatever the plant seeks, the feeler prospers & grows. When it finds an impediment or an obstacle, it either stops movement or changes direction. Either result is based on the needs of the plant. Now before this starts to look like collectivism, the organic structure is a model of cooperation based on a consensus, so the root & main trunk of the plant in the organic structure represent the consensus. The feelers are individuals or small groups who push the consensus to where it needs to go. If the consensus is that we need to have better security, then each feeler is seeking the places that need to be protected. If the consensus is to build a barter system that provides needs to individuals, then the feelers are attempts to create needed commodities for the consensus to barter & exchange. The idea or the consensus must be continuously part of all the members of the organic cooperative, their actions are determined by the consensus. Anything they do outside the consensus is based on the self-reliant individual’s volition. It doesn’t reflect on the consensus unless it violates or goes against the consensus.
So for instance in the case of the bartering cooperative, individual volunteers can barter within the cooperative but also sell or trade outside the cooperative as well. They cannot be coerced into bartering only with the cooperative. They can volunteer to do so, but they can not be compelled. If coercion is used, cooperation has vanished.
This is the gist: cooperation only exists voluntarily between self-reliant individuals. Cooperation cannot be coerced. That would be turning cooperation into collectivism. That is not the nature of cooperation. Cooperation is a natural human function that negates the need for coercion & force. When people speak of eliminating the state, they shouldn’t envision a new hierarchy. Instead, anarchists envision cooperation. The building of cooperation comes through consensus. A consensus is only as large as its constituency. If consensus is only between two people, that is the extent of its constituency. No coercion can force another person to join the consensus in good faith. Anytime someone attempts to claim the authority to coerce another, they have committed a crime against humanity (I don't use that term lightly. The claim of authority has always been at the center of the worst crimes against humanity, & those crimes would not have been committed without the claim to authority). As equals, we cannot claim authority over another. Because the moment that we claim that authority, we have to use coercion & force to hold that authority. This violates the basic premise that we all have equal rights to life & liberty.
What seems like a given - this basic premise of equal right to life & liberty - is not a consensus. Those who promote collectivism do not concede this basic premise. They are always willing to use force to compel others to their beliefs. This isn’t cooperation. Cooperation isn’t an ideology, it is a process. Cooperation is a human action that requires empathy, imagination, communication & shared values. Consensus develops the shared values. Only the values that have consensus can be part of any cooperative effort. The empathy required for cooperation is the ability to see one’s self in others. By doing so, an individual can imagine opportunities to share work, play, creation, anything, once they can empathize with another individual. Without empathy, cooperation is a non-starter & collectivism finds the ground to purchase. Let me phrase that another way: without empathy, it is easy to seek collectivist means to achieve one’s ends. When we don’t feel empathy for others, we can do some really horrendous acts in the name of doing good. This is why Jesus’ command to love your enemy as yourself is a cooperative statement & not a collectivist statement. With empathy, we can find ways to work together in cooperation rather than coercion.
We need imagination in cooperation because imagination leads to the new ideas that can become the advances that benefit all. Imagination comes in many guises & generally creates both innovative & mundane ideas. Some make life better, some simply provide entertainment. Some imagination leads to collectivism, which inherently leads to violence, once the individual has determined that their imagined idea should be put into place by force.
Individuals have violent imaginations. What needs to occur for those within proximity of that individual is to not build consensus with this violence except the consensus that violent imagination must remain in the abstract & never become actionable. With empathy & imagination, cooperative individuals may find ways to build consensus with even someone who has violent tendencies & channel those tendencies into other arenas. Violence has a source. At the heart of violence is the nature of the world we inhabit. Violence is perpetrated by larger creatures onto smaller creatures to fulfill dietary needs. There is no end to violence. There is only purposing of violence. How do we purpose violence into positive needs? Hunting for food is one. Sports is another. Video games could be an outlet for violence, but an outlet isn’t necessarily a positive outcome. Violence is not self-defense, but violence can be channeled toward self-defense through martial arts that practice the martial art in non-aggressive methods. So there are ways to channel violence into self-defense & non-aggression. Do I need to explain here that non-aggression is not pacifism. Non-aggression incorporates self-defense. Self-defense is not violence. Collectivists always blur the lines between violence & self-defense to perpetrate war. The real issue is preventing violence from being a means to accomplish agendas that demand coercion & compulsory acceptance. Cooperatives have agendas (by consensus only), but these agendas focus on the needs of the volunteers of the cooperative & never seek to force these agendas on anyone, especially people who don’t share the consensus of the cooperative volunteers. In the collective mentality, the agenda is always to promote those at the top & enforce their ideas on the rest. In opposition to the collectivist, cooperation requires a non-aggression stance.
The United States has fought multiple wars claiming to fight for democracy & freedom. As these wars clearly demonstrate, violence & force will never bring democracy or freedom to others. War will continue to provide the excuses for limiting our freedoms. War will continue to degrade the limited democracy we now have. Aggression will never lead to democratic societies & will never extend freedom. Only through non-aggression can society become democratic & free.
No comments:
Post a Comment