Topic Tuesday ~ A little about Tolpuddle Martyrs and the Matchgirls strike

One last post about trade unions and again a little less opinionated 😉

May 24th, 2016

I have used the previous two Tuesday’s to offer my thoughts on how workers today seem to think about their rights and Trade Unions. One point I have made is the fact that employees do not appear to remember the history of trade unions and about the sacrifices early union members made to gain our rights.

Worker’s Rights are not a given. They are not a “benefit” the company might or might not provide us. We have to stand up for our rights and Unions do help us with that fight.

I know it might sound old-fashioned and very 70’s or even 1880’s but look at what many companies today do to their workers: Allow yourself to see how there are companies who do not acknowledge unions, who take away tips from their employees or who do not pay extra for unsocial hours. And the list could go on.

So who are those who fought for our rights and what have they suffered?

I will give you some examples from the UK:

Tolpuddle Martyrs (please check out Ellen’s much more entertaining post about the same topic 😉 )

In 1834 in the Dorset village of Tolpuddle a few farm workers had founded a trade union to protest against yet another pay cut. They earned 6 shillings a week which is 30p in today’s money, and I doubt even in those days that was enough to make a living and feed your family.

It was not unlawful to found a trade union; however, they have taken an oath of secrecy, and their employer took this as an excuse to put an end to the trade union as well as use these men as an example. They were charged with taking an illegal oath and ended up in prison.

At first, they were to be sent to Australia for seven years which was close to a death sentence because you either did not survive the journey or you did not survive the circumstances in the prisons down under. Their sentence caused an uproar with workers all over the country. Later on, a massive demonstration took place in London, and an 800 000 strong petition was brought to parliament to free the Dorset workers.

In the end, the government had to give in, and it is commonly seen as the beginning of the trade union movement in the UK.

You can see this landowner tried to keep his workers pay as low as possible, and used a trick to get those who wanted to fight against unfair pay out of his way. However, workers united and fought for their rights, and they won in the end.

The Matchgirl’s Strike

In the late 1800s, many countries had forbidden to use the very dangerous yellow phosphorous the make matches. The UK, however, believed that would be an obstacle for free trade and still allowed it.

Mostly women and children worked in match factories and yellow phosphorous caused yellowing of their skin, falling out of hair and phossy jaw a form of bone cancer. If a child or woman had fallen ill of it, they were dismissed.

The infamous Bryant & May match factory in London applied on top of this a system of fines if the women and children dropped matches, went to the toilet without permission as well as talking. So mostly they did not even get their meagre wage of 5 shillings a week.

Annie Besant heard about this situation and went to see the women and children find out for herself. She also learned that they had to work 12 hours or more per day. So she decided to report about this in her newspaper “The Link”.

To avoid bad publicity due to this newspaper article Bryant & May tried to force their workers to sign a paper saying they were happy with their work situation. Still, a group of women refused and were dismissed. However, Bryant & May did not expect the reaction of their workers: immediately 1400 women went on strike.

Many VIP’s in those days supported the strike under which were playwright George Bernard Shaw and Catherine Booth of the Salvation Army. Also, many newspapers called for a boycott of Bryant & May, and within three weeks the company gave in, re-employed the dismissed women and also stopped the fines system.

This successful strike inspired the formation of many trade unions in the UK and was another step to today’s modern union system and more rights for workers.

Of course, the unions did not only have successes. The famous “General Strike” of 1926 where mine and steelworkers fought against pay cuts, change of working hours and worsening of working conditions did not bring a change and left many workers jobless for many years.

However, overall union action does improve employees working situations, in my opinion.

What do you think? Do unions make a difference for employees work situations? And did you know about the Tolpuddle Martyrs and the Matchgirl Strike?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Resources:

Spartacus Educational

Tolpuddle Martyrs

BBC News

Graham Stevenson.me

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please stay a little longer and find my poetry posts on The Bee Creates… on Weebly. Thanks!

You are more into photography? Then please check out my photo posts on Bee Wordless on Blogger.

You can also find my photos on Dreamstime (affiliate link, you do not need to buy anything but if you do I get 10% from your purchase).

Just one more thing before you go: The hospital that is treating me is fundraising for a dedicated breast cancer unit which would allow same-day diagnosis and better premises for patients and staff.

Please, if you can spare a little money hop over to their Just Giving Page and give as little or much as you can. Or share the page on your social media. Your support means a lot to me! Thank you very much.

Thanks my dears, for staying with me until the end. I appreciate your presence. Please stay safe, stay kind and remember that you rock!

Affiliate link (you do not need to buy anything but if you do, I get referral rewards. Thanks)

WooCommerce

Topic Tuesday ~ More Thoughts on Trade Unions

As I wrote last week, I think it is more important than ever to unite and support unions so our working rights are not slowly taken away. So I re-post a short series I did in May 2016 about trade unions. This week I am not as opinionated as last week :-).

May 10th, 2016

Trade Unions and Worker’s Rights bother me.

I have been thinking a lot about last weeks post and have decided I dedicated May’s Tuesdays to Topic Tuesday and Trade Unions. Last week I wrote that I believe working people today do not know how Unions work and how important they are.

On my research into trade unions in the UK, I came across a homepage called “Unions Make Us Stronger: TUC History online.” It is a page about the history of UK Trade Unions but also an excellent resource for anything connected with workers rights and trade unions. In its introduction, it says: “Trade unions have played, and will continue to play, a decisive role in shaping economic and social developments in Britain – yet much of their history is at present unknown and inaccessible to the public.”

I hear so many of my fellow workers complain about their work and pay situation, but at the same time, they seem to think nothing can be done about it. They just put up with it and keep complaining. And I have come to wonder why.

Now I haven’t been to school in the UK. So I do not know how much children learn about the industrial revolution and the work of the likes of Karl Marx. When I was in school, the industrial revolution, Karl Marx, Robert Owen or the idea of capitalism and socialism were thought to be important, and it was taught in school. However, Germany was part Western democratic and part Eastern communist. So the Western region where I grew up in had to prove towards the East that Western democracy doesn’t support capitalism and the exploitation of workers and employees. Or at least that is what I believe.

Today most communist countries in the world are gone and have failed as a form of society. So western democracy does not have to prove to the communist East anymore that they are helpful to their workers and employees. I feel the power of companies has increased, and workers rights get taken away slowly. That they do it slowly makes it difficult for workers to see through companies schemes.

And companies show us a compelling reasoning for taking away rights: “If we do not take away that worker’s right our company will lose profit, and that will end in you losing your job.” No one can afford to lose their job, so most of us put up with what’s coming our way.

The latest example in Great Britain is the so-called living wage which is supposed to give workers a better income and therefore a better financial situation. However, most companies level the higher cost in basic wages out with taking away benefits like higher Sunday pay, higher pay for working unsocial hours (night shifts), paid breaks and free food. At the same time, they make out they are beneficial to their workers.

I believe this is wrong. I do deserve to have a wage that enables me to pay my bills and have enough to eat. But I also deserve some extra payments when I have to work unsocial hours like nights or Sundays. In my opinion, that should not be waged against my basic pay. Especially not as politicians, CEO’s and other high profile professionals get paid exorbitant pay, rises and NOT get their benefits cut. On average in the UK, 100 FTSE bosses get paid 130 times more than their average employees. No matter how much profit or losses a company makes, their bosses get more money while their employees get money and rights taken away.

As a member of the union, I had the chance to vote for or against the pay deal the company I work for offered and I voted against it because I think it is wrong to take away paid breaks and Sunday payments. That is a right Unions fought for, and I believe it is a waste of their sacrifices to let these perks slip away. Most of my fellow union members and workers did not seem to think like that. They only seem to have seen a rise in basic pay by a “brilliant” 20%. The pay deal went through.

And I suspect the reason for it is the fact that they do not know enough of the history of the unions and the sacrifices workers before us made to give us our rights. They consider these not as rights but as perks the company was good enough to give to us. They also do not seem to be aware of how unfair the pay situation is in the UK (and elsewhere I suspect). And they seem to think you can’t do anything about it anyway. However, I believe, you can.

First of all, you have to see that even though you are employed, you have rights, and you need to know your rights. In one employment, I have heard a boss say to an employee with mental health problems that it does not matter how an employee feels they have to come to work because they get paid. So just because I get paid by a company they can ask of me whatever they want? I do not think so. But you only do something about this if you are aware that you have the right to stay at home when you are ill. And you can do something about this in a much more powerful way if you are a member of the union and have others stay behind you and at your side to fight for your right.

So secondly become a member of the Union. They teach you about your rights, and they help you if your rights are endangered. Of course, no Union or union movement is perfect. There are always problems and their members and officials are just humans like all of us. But when it comes down to it, they have, and they will help you to gain your rights.

And the more members a union has, the more powerful it is. I can only repeat that because it is really quite simple.

So what do you think? Are Trade Unions still important and are you a member?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Resources:

The Union Makes Us Strong

Striking-Women.org

The Guardian: Employers claw back Living Wage in cuts to perks, hours and pay

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please stay a little longer and find my poetry posts on The Bee Creates… on Weebly. Thanks!

You are more into photography? Then please check out my photo posts on Bee Wordless on Blogger.

You can also find my photos on Dreamstime (affiliate link, you do not need to buy anything but if you do I get 10% from your purchase).

Just one more thing before you go: The hospital that is treating me is fundraising for a dedicated breast cancer unit which would allow same-day diagnosis and better premises for patients and staff.

Please, if you can spare a little money hop over to their Just Giving Page and give as little or much as you can. Or share the page on your social media. Your support means a lot to me! Thank you very much.

Thanks my dears, for staying with me until the end. I appreciate your presence. Please stay safe, stay kind and remember that you rock!

Affiliate link (you do not need to buy anything but if you do, I get referral rewards. Thanks)

WooCommerce

Topic Tuesday ~ Trade Unions and why you should join

I posted this series in May 2016, but I feel it’s more important than ever to reiterate the importance of Unions for worker’s rights. I apologise in advance to anyone who likes to have a take-away. In this piece, I am very opinionated 🙂

May 3rd, 2016

On Sunday was “Labour Day” or “International Worker’s Day” and I take this occasion to think a little about trade unions.

I have been a member of a trade union ever since I work.

There has never been a question for me to join because I feel workers are always more influential when they are united and organised, and that is the only way to get our rights. It never occurred to me that other workers might find it too “expensive!” to join.

However, I’ve heard that reason for not joining a lot lately as well as “They don’t do anything for me!” Well, of course, they don’t if you don’t join!

Our union has done a lot for me. It saved me my job at least twice. It also has made my working situation bearable.

Our union fee is about 8-10£ a month. That could be seen as too “expensive” but well: How often do you go and get a takeaway which at least is the same amount of money? So you rather get crappy food and ruin your health for a tenner than support workers rights and help make unions strong again? Yea, I can see sense in that!

Only between 30 and 40% of the staff of the company I work for is in the union. Even if the union would want us to strike the company could still function on 60-70% of staff. It would be difficult, but it would work. That would not happen if 99% would be organised in the union and all of us walked out.

No wonder our rights are taken away from us bit by bit because the company knows they have nothing to fear. And to be honest, I do not get it!

Have people forgotten how unions work? The more are members, the more can walk out and put pressure on a company, and the more rights workers get. Also, the union has more money and can achieve more.

Another argument in Britain is that Margret Thatcher took away lots of rights and power of the unions, and that is why they can’t do anything anymore. Well, when the unions started, they had no rights or control at all. They fought for it. They made it happen, and many union members lost their lives to get us our rights!

It is not only the Conservatives in the past who try to get our rights taken away. The actual Conservative government tried very hard to change opening hours on Sundays. They wanted it to be longer. My union encouraged me to campaign against it and to tell my MP how it would affect me and what I think of it. After all, an MP wants to be voted for again next time an election comes around. If he does something unpopular, he or she won’t get more votes. So I told him that longer Sunday opening hours means less time with my family and more pressure by the company and I am not happy with it.  It was not only our union which worked for it but others too and duh: It worked. The law didn’t go through! Which proves workers and unions still have power if we execute it.

But that is probably another thing with today’s workers. We rather have a gadget or person do things for us than to get our ar… up and be the change we want to see. But that doesn’t work. It only works if we stop complaining about our fate and start campaigning for the change we want to see.

The first union members understood that. It was incredibly dangerous to be a union member, and still, they did it. They joined and they fought and some of them got imprisoned, sent to Australia or even died. Should their sacrifices be for nothing because we are too brain-dead to understand how unions work and rather get fat on takeaways or try to bear our bad work situations with antidepressants and make more companies rich by taking away workers rights?

Sometimes I despair with today’s world and it’s human beings. It seems obvious to me that being in the union helps to make our working life better because the more members a union has, the more power it has no matter what politicians try to do. But the powerful know that most of us workers do not understand anymore how important unions are and how they work. They also do everything to distract us from our own situation and to keep us from remembering.

So please stop working in their favour. Start to think for yourself and take the power given to you by joining a trade union!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Please stay a little longer and find my poetry posts on The Bee Creates… on Weebly. Thanks!

You are more into photography? Then please check out my photo posts on Bee Wordless on Blogger.

You can also find my photos on Dreamstime (affiliate link, you do not need to buy anything but if you do I get 10% from your purchase).

Just one more thing before you go: The hospital that is treating me is fundraising for a dedicated breast cancer unit which would allow same-day diagnosis and better premises for patients and staff.

Please, if you can spare a little money hop over to their Just Giving Page and give as little or much as you can. Or share the page on your social media. Your support means a lot to me! Thank you very much.

Thanks my dears, for staying with me until the end. I appreciate your presence. Please stay safe, stay kind and remember that you rock!

Affiliate link (you do not need to buy anything but if you do, I get referral rewards. Thanks)

WooCommerce

image of breaking wave on rocks and quote by Thomas Huxley

Just can not forget that idea of a new vision/ Kann einfach die Idee einer neuen Vision nicht vergessen

June 2020

Yes, it keeps creeping up on me: that need to imagine this planet in better shape and as a good home for all of us. Over the years, I looked into different models of society and have written about ideas I have how the world would be fairer for all of us. The last one was in August 2019.

I can’t believe it is that long ago I wrote about it. I also can’t believe that it keeps coming back. Maybe I just need to keep spinning my own yarn of a vision for the future to bring a small thread into this reality that might make a difference? Can I be that bold?

There must be a reason though why it keeps coming back!

So here are my thoughts from 2011 and my comment from 2017:

June 2017

This idea has come back with a vengeance to me lately. Not sure where to go with it though:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

February 2011

Democracy is a form of political organisation in which all people, through consensus (consensus democracy), direct referendum (direct democracy), or elected representatives (representative democracy) exercise equal control over the matters which affect their interests. 

That is what Wikipedia says about democracy. Well, I think western societies are not too bad with that, but if you have a look a bit closer and talk to the “common” people, it looks like they do not feel like they are part of the consensus. It seems to me like many feel powerless, not listened to, not cared for, and they think about politicians of a bunch of rich people who have lost all connection to how normal life is. But there is also a lot of taking back of that “being part of the consensus”. Demonstrations against financial cuts, expressing your opinion in Blogs and Forums and all kinds of organisations show that.

All this and the spreading revolutions in the Middle East make me think about what I wrote on January 31: A new vision! 

So how would a fair society look like to me?

Well, I would like children to be raised and educated firstly as humans and not as English, German, Egyptian, Indian etc. In the end, this planet will only survive if we work together, not against each other. I would like to have a subject at school called “Peace Studies” where pupils learn how to solve problems without aggression and war. There are ways we have seen them many times in the last century and see them every day in our lives. I would also like a subject called “Tolerance” where pupils could learn how to deal with other opinions and beliefs and how to respect them.

I would like work experience for politicians every year for 4 weeks in their area of expertise preferable in a country they are not well known and with the wages and lives of the people who usually work there. It would not be a significant change as they can go back to their lives, but it would certainly give them a real-life insight into what they are deciding about.

I would like that politicians are not allowed to have any other jobs than their political career as lobbying and corruption is happening too easy if they do both. They should instead spend their time with the people they decide about to learn how life really is. And not how statistics or political ideas suggest.

I would like economies only work with countries and politicians who respect Human Rights. I would like governments firstly decide with Human Rights as guidelines and not profits or power. 

Well, that is just a few thoughts I have. That definitely does not make a new vision. But Marx and Engels probably started talking about their idea in the pub around the corner, and then it grew and grew.

Maybe there are other people out there who have good ideas, and we might start another vision.

link thanks to Wikipedia

And just something to make me question my long-held ideas about society:

video credit: HooverInstitute  via YouTube

Juni 2020

Ja, das kommt immer wieder zu mir zurueck: Das Beduerfnis mir diesen Planeten in einer besseren Situation und als faires zuhause fuer uns alle vorzustellen. Ich habe mir ueber die Jahre oft unterschiedliche Modelle fuer Gesellschaft angesehen und schrieb ueber meine Ideen wie diese Welt fairer fuer uns alle waere. Das letzte Mal in August 2019.

Ich kann’s nicht glauben, dass das so lange her ist. Ich kann’s auch nicht glauben, dass es immer und immer wieder zu mir zurueck kommt. Vielleicht muss ich einfach immer weiter mein Garn der Vision fuere eine Zukunft fuer uns alle spinnen, um einen kleinen Teil in diese Realitaet zu bringen und einen Unterschied zu machen? Kann ich so mutig sein? 

Da muss es doch einen Grund geben, warum es immer und immer wieder zu mir zurueck kommt!

Hier also meine Gedanken von 2011 und ein Kommentar von 2017:

Juni 2017

Diese Idee kam in letzter Zeit wieder kraeftig hoch. Ich weiss aber nicht wohin damit bis jetzt.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

February 2011

Demokratie (gr. Δημοκρατία, von δῆμος [dēmos], „Volk“, und κρατία [kratía], „Herrschaft“, vgl. -kratie) bezeichnet einerseits das Ideal einer durch die Zustimmung der Mehrheit der Bürger und die Beteiligung der Bürger legitimierten Regierungsform, der „Volksherrschaft“. Diese Idealvorstellung wird inDemokratietheorien konkretisiert, die jeweils eine bestimmte Vorstellung von Demokratie beinhalten: so die direkte Demokratierepräsentative Demokratie,DemarchieRadikaldemokratie oder Basisdemokratie.

 
Das ist es, was wikipedia ueber Demokratie sagt . Tja, ich denke westliche Gesellschaften sind da ganz gut dabei aber wenn ich etwas genauer hinsehe und mit den “normalen” Buergern rede, schaut es so aus, als ob die sich nicht so fuehlen, als ob nach deren Zustimmung gefragt wird. Es sieht fuer mich so aus, als ob sich viele machtlos, nicht gehoert, nicht versorgt fuehlen und denken, dass alle Politiker nur ein Haufen Reicher sind, die jedwede Verbindung zum normalen Leben verloren haben. Aber da ist auch eine Menge Initiative, um dieses “Gehoert werden” zurueck zu erobern. Demonstrationen gegen finanzielle Einschnitte, freie Meinungsaeusserung in blogs und Foren und jede Menge Organisationen zeigen das.   
 
All das und die ausbreitenden Revolutionen im Nahen Osten erinnern mich daran, was ich am 31. Januar geschrieben habe. Eine neue Vision! 
 
Wie also wuerde ein faire Gesellschaft fuer mich aussehen? 
 
Tja ich moechte gerne, dass Kinder zu allererst als Menschen und nicht als englisch, deutsch, aegyptisch, indisch ect erzogen und gebilet werden. Dieser Planet ueberlebt am Ende nur, wenn wir alle zusammen und nicht gegeneinander arbeiten. Ich haette gerne ein Fach in der Schule, das “Friedenserziehung” heisst, worin Schueler lernen koennen, wie man Probleme ohne Gewalt und Krieg loest. Es gibt Wege, das zu tun. Wir haben das oft im letzten Jahrhundert gesehen und sehen es auch jeden Tag in unserem Leben. Ich haette auch gerne ein Fach, das “Toleranz” heisst, in dem Schueler lernen, mit den Meinungen und dem Glauben anderer umzugehen und diese zu respektieren.
 
Ich haette gerne ein Praktikum fuer Politiker jedes Jahr fuer 4 Wochen in ihrem Arbeitsgebiet und bevorzugt irgendwo, wo sie keiner kennt und mit dem Gehalt und dem Leben der Leute, die dort normalerweise arbeiten. Das wuerde vermutlich nicht viel aendern, da sie ja in ihr normales Leben zurueckkehren, aber es wuerde ihnen sicherlich einen realen Einblick in das Leben geben, ueber das sie zu entscheiden haben. Und nicht wie es Statistiken oder Politische Ideen vorschlagen.
 
Ich moechte gerne, dass Oekonomien nur mit Laendern arbeiten, die die Menschenrechte respektieren. Ich moechte gerne, dass Regierungen sich in erster Linie von Menschenrechten leiten lassen und nicht von Profit oder Macht.
 
Tja das sind nur ein paar Gedanken, die ich habe. Das macht sicherlich noch keine neue Vision. Aber Marx und Engels haben vermutlich auch einfach nur in der Kneipe um die Ecke angefangen und dann ist es gewachsen und gewachsen. 
 
Vielleicht gibt es da draussen ja noch andere Leute, die gute Ideen haben und so starten wir vielleicht eine neue Vision. 
 
 
der Dank fuer den Link an wikipedia
 

 

Image of a pebble beach and metall poles in a row, blue sky above

Blast from the Past: Societies come and go/Gesellschaften kommen und gehen

September 2019

I start to think we are at the very end of ours….

August 2017

I have been wondering about this topic a lot lately. And the question still remains:

May 2011

I do not assume we want to think about this: There have been great cultures like the Romans, the Babylonians, the Mayans and many more. They had their time and then they vanished due to different reasons. There are more or less written and painted documents about them maybe great buildings but there is hardly anything living left of their cultures.
Lifes reality is like this: Something is born, grows, has its crowning point and then it dies. Life does not happen in a straight line that never ends. Life happens in circles if we want to see that or not. That is also true for societies and cultures. The question is: At what point are we?

image of goyne from right to left over which sun rises behind menacing clouds.

September 2019

I fange an zu glauben, das wir am totalen Ende von unserer sind….

August 2017

In letzter Zeit habe ich oft ueber dieses Thema nachgedacht. Und die Antwort auf die Frage ist immernoch offen!

Mai 2011

Ich glaube nicht, dass wir darueber nachdenken wollen: Da hat es grossartige Kulturen gegeben, wie die Roemer, die Babylonier, die Mayas und viele mehr. Sie hatten ihre Zeit und dann sind sie aus verschiedenen Gruenden verschwunden.  Da gibt es geschriebene und gemalte Dokumente, vielleicht auch grossartige Gebaeude, aber da ist kaum etwas Lebendiges ueber von ihrer Kultur.

Die Realitaet des Lebens sieht so aus: Etwas wird geboren, waechst, hat seinen Hoehepunkt und stirbt. Leben funktioniert nicht wie eine gerade Linie in die Unendlichkeit. Leben funktioniert in Kreisen, ob wir das akzeptieren wollen oder nicht. Und das trifft auch fuer Gesellschaften und Kulturen zu. Die Frage ist nur: An welchem Punkt stehen wir?
White Tea mug with Love written in red writing. Background eyes and top of head of Bee

Imagine…

video credit: John Lennon via EMI on YouTube

Hello good people of the blogosphere, how are you faring? I hope life is treating you well and if not you know my good vibes are on your side.

Not quite sure how to start this post even though I have started it several times over the last couple of weeks in my head while doing life as it happens.

I am uneasy. My mind goes into all sorts of dark corners and I don’t like it. The best husband (Jeremy Clarkson voice) in the world and I have often said lately that we can’t believe what is going on in this world. That Britain has never been so angry and racist, that after the wall came down we thought there is actually hope and we certainly never expected someone like him whom we shall not name in the White House.

I’ve spent many a blogpost ranting and raving about what is wrong with this world but there was also a time when I was looking for visions for a new and better world. Just couldn’t find one that made me think “That’s it!” And then there was that thought. I can’t remember when it came to me. Maybe it fell into my consciousness like the thistle seed falls onto the ground and takes root. Once it’s there you can hardly ever get rid of it.

That thought is “What if what we need now isn’t love but dreams?”. What if imagining what we would like this world to be would lead to it becoming reality? After all, Dreamtime is a concept that lives in Australia since millenia. Well, looking the term up shows that like so often it was a mistranslation. Never mind.

Didn’t Descarte dream something and came up with a scientific method??? I am sure the inventor of peanut butter dreamed it and apparently the inventors of the sewing machine and the Terminator too. I know these examples are rather random but still, there must be something about dreaming that brings us to creating stuff.

I am also just simply sick and tired of hearing, reading or thinking about him we shall not name in the White House and consorts. All these ponderings brought me to the conclusion that I need to become positive and why not just write down what I do want. How the world according to the Bee would look like.

I would start with John Lennons suggestion to imagine there are no countries. In my opinion, they are just inventions anyway and as countries like Poland and Belgium show can be changed in the blink of an eye. They are certainly not god-given and in my opinion the root of all evil. “Nothing to kill or die for…” as John Lennon puts it, wouldn’t that be glorious?

It’s difficult for me to understand how humans can believe they have a right to the land they were born to. It’s utterly random. You might as well have been born at the other end of the world so why do you think just being born there gives you the right to throw others out when it suits you or not share the wealth you have?

Wealth! That would not exist in my world. No one would be allowed to inherit anything from anyone. Well, besides the DNA from your parents, of course, but hey we can’t do anything about that. All have to start from zero and make their way with their own abilities and strengths.

Not sure though I can imagine a world without money. Somehow I can’t imagine that even though I have often written that the internet, in my opinion, gives us the possibility to trade directly and therefore we could barter with each other. So, if I, for example, need bananas and the person who has bananas needs someone to teach his or her kids English or German we have a deal. We would probably have to lose the idea of something being of worth and how much that worth is. Is it possible to just exchange goods and services on the basis of our needs?

In my world, the rite of passage would be to move to other side of the world and find out how people live there. Find out what makes them tick and how they feel about stuff. I would like young people to understand that everybody no matter where we come from just want to make a living and give our children a better future. This would also help a youngster to find out who they are themselves and what they would like to do with their life. Oh yes, after that year away they would need to become an eremite for some time so they have the quiet to understand what their path in life is.

The Bee’s World would give everybody the chance to do what they feel they are good at. With the internet, we can exchange things and services directly so it shouldn’t matter if all carpenters live in London and all teachers in Tokyo. Well, there is, of course, the problem of the climate. But in my world, we are sustainable and have invented transport that doesn’t rely on CO2 emissions. We would use renewable energy and sustainability would be our value, not convenience.

And we would respect that everybody has beliefs and that all these beliefs have value. But they would need to be based on human rights. So if your belief is “I can rape women and children” then hell no your belief has no value whatsoever. Also, human rights mean human rights and not the right of white people or males. If you are a human you have the right no matter the gender or race.

I like Extinction Rebellions idea of peoples assemblies as the form of organisation very much. People meet and get advice from specialists on the topic they have to decide on. But if there would be politicians they would have to come from the area they are responsible for. So agriculture ministers would be farmers, shepherds, gardeners etc. And they would need to spend at least one month a year working in the area they are responsible for to keep in touch with life.

Oh, and there would be no prisons. I am not so naive that I think there won’t be any people who have some criminal energy in them and live that energy too. But I think there are other ways of dealing with their wrong-doing. Community work, education and mental health treatment should do the trick depending on what the problem for that person is.

An then there is the problem of power. My experience of humans is that we often do stuff because we want to feel secure and to do that we feel we need to have power over the people around us. I have come to believe that this is a problem of our brains. There is this ancient part often called our lizard brain which mainly works on instinct but has that idea that we need to fight for our survival and maybe makes us believe a situation is a threat while in reality, it isn’t. I also believe that newspapers like “The Sun” and populists like Marie LePen barter to that lizard part of our brains. They know exactly that we automatically react rather intense on any perceived threat and so they create an image of threat around the topic they want to change. And then gain power. Maybe we need to learn from the good old Vulcans and learn to master that Lizard brain with meditation and mindfulness maybe to avoid believing these people.

These are just some of my random thoughts on how my world would look like. I often wish lately we could come together and dream about a world that would give all of us what we need and where we have saved this planet and keep it flourishing. Bringing all our ideas together and shape our future on what we want not what we don’t want. I wish we would believe that it is possible and that we can save our species from extinction because right now I am not so sure we can save ourselves.

But something big is coming. I can feel it in my bones but what it is isn’t formed yet. My intuition tells me that the coming months are essential on how this big thing, how our future is shaping up and I wish we would all sent our positive ideas towards this future instead of concentrating on the gods of our shrinking universes. They don’t deserve our energy. Our future does though.

Video Credit: Muse via YouTube

Blast from the Past: Altruistic Economy/ Altruistische Oekonomie

This entry was first posted in June 2011

Robin Upton is creating an internet gift economy and researches Altruism which he combines with the so-called “Altruistic Economy”. He is a consultant and researcher born in 1970. Here are some of his ideas and insights. It is by no means conclusive and he says about his theories that they are a model and not yet fully worked out.

Traditional economics assumes that people are highly informed, rational, selfish, lazy, greedy, amoral,
they ask: “What is in it for me!” Therefore people want more by doing less. In a way that is how businesses work. Shareholders who do not work at all in the Business they give money to get the most out of other peoples hard work. But people are not 100 % like that they do care for their families for example and want a better life for them. But to get that they have to work with the system. Without money, you can not buy anything or get a good education for your children. The money system is a top-down system: Central banks create money on computers and distribute downwards through governments, employers, banks etc.

The banks earn e.g. through loans that people have to pay back with more money than they borrowed
so many get into more debt. But the few on top earn more and more. The actual world income situation shows that. The gap between poor and middle-class earners and rich people gets bigger and bigger (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/21/business/main4535488.shtml).

A new idea of economy is that of a  Grassroots Economy. Altruistic Economy is based on the ideas of Grassroot Economy and is people-centred and personal in nature but global in reach. It expresses people’s need to care for each other. In pre-money societies, it was important what people think of you. Meaning: if you help the family or tribe it is remembered and gives you a good reputation, therefore, people will help you as well. This kind of relationship gets more complicated if there are more than 150 people that you interact with as you can only maintain direct relationships with about 150 people (Dunbar’s number). A key thought in Altruistic Economy is though: there is no limit to peoples indirect connections (see Facebook’s friends of friends) with the help of the internet.

In Altruistic economy, it is important what you contribute as it gives you a good reputation and therefore you get more help or connections as it worked in pre-money societies. E-bay’s Sellers reputation ratings have shown that this works well. In everyday life, we also often chose companies or garages for example that our friends have good experiences with. This seems to work a lot better than advertising for example as advertising focuses on making money not on giving you good value.

The idea is to express a need on the internet: maybe you need a nanny. On the other hand, you are good at repairing cars. There would be a board that connects peoples needs. The nanny who needs her car repaired takes care of your children and has her car repaired. If both do a good job you give a good rating on that board and both of you get more jobs or goods. Even though identity theft is an issue they say it is more transparent than the actual system of centralised money as the interactions are more direct so you get the information about the person you deal with directly and not via any maybe manipulated media.

Altruistic Economy is also: “an information
network. It does not give power to anyone, but gives everyone a chance to
express their feelings about  what goes on in the world. Once viable software is
developed, a strong network effect means that personal recommendation will spread
it very quickly, using the increasingly availabile mobile internet access“.

This is just a short insight in the idea of Altruistic Economy. For more in-dept information see: http://www.altruists.org/

sources: 

http://www.altruists.org/ideas/economics/altruistic/ and their downloads (What is wrong with money)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism

http://www.robinupton.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnN76OuUggI

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/21/business/main4535488.shtml

http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/03/the_dunbar_numb.html

This video was made in 2008 and shows a vision of 2018 🙂

Video Credit: KnowledgeWorks via YouTube

Die manche links dieses Eintrages sind in englischer Sprache

Robin Upton entwickelt die internet gift economy (Internet Geschenk Oekonomie) und forscht ueber Altruismus, was er zur sogenannten “Altruistischen Oekonomie” verbunden hat. Er ist ein Berater und Forscher geboren 1970.
Hier sind einige seiner Ideen und Erkenntnisse. Sie sind keinesfalls eine volle Ausfuehrung und er sagt ueber seine Theorien, dass sie nur ein Modell sind und noch weiter ausgearbeitet werden muessen.
Klassische Oekonomie nimmt an, dass die Menschen hoechst informiert, rational, egoistisch, faul, geizig und unmoralisch sind. Sie fragen zu meist: “Was springt fuer mich raus!”. Aus diesem Grund wollen die Menschen mehr verdienen aber weniger dafuer tun. Es sieht so aus, als ob Firmen genauso arbeiten: Aktionaere, die nie in der Firma, der sie Geld geben, gearbeitet haben, haben den meisten Gewinn davon.  Aber die Menschen sind nicht 100 % so. Zum Beispiel sorgen sie sich um ihre Familien. Aber um fuer sie zu sorgen, muessen sie mit dem Geldsystem arbeiten. Ohne Geld kann man nichts kaufen oder eine gute Ausbildung fuer seine Kinder bekommen. Das Geld System ist ein hierarchisches, das von oben nach unten funktioniert. Die Zentralbanken kreiren Geld mit den Computern und verteilen es nach unten an Regierungen, Banken, Arbeitgebern ect.
Die Banken verdienen dabei durch Kredite, die die Kreditnehmer mit Zinsen zurueck zahlen muessen. Sie muessen mehr bezahlen als sie geliehen haben und kommen so in mehr Schulden. Aber die wenigen am oberen Ende verdienen mehr. Die aktuelle weltweite Einkommenssituation zeigt dies: Die Spanne zwischen Arm und Reich wird immer groesser. (http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article958049/Einkommensunterschiede_immer_groesser.html)
The banks earn e.g. through loans that people have to pay back with more money than they borrowed
so many get into more debt. But the few on top earn more and more. The actual world income situation shows that. The gap between poor and middle class earners and rich people gets  bigger and bigger (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/21/business/main4535488.shtml).
Eine neue Idee von Wirtschaft waere eine  Grassroots Economy (Wirtschaft von unten) . Altruistische Wirtschaft grundet sich auf der Idee der Wirtschaft von unten und ist von persoenlicher Art aber erreicht Menschen global. Es entspricht dem Beduerfnis der Menschen fuer einander zu sorgen.
In den Gesellschaften vor der Geldgesellschaft war es wichtig was die anderen von Dir dachten. Das bedeutet: Wenn Du deiner Familie oder deinem Stamm geholfen hast haben sich die Menschen daran erinnert und auch dir geholfen, weil Du einen guten Ruf hast. Diese Art von Beziehung wird komplizierter, wenn man es mit mehr als 150 Menschen zu tun hat, weil man nur effektiv mit rund 150 Menschen kontakt haben kann (Dunbar Nummer). Ein Hauptgedanke bei Altruistischer Wirtschaft ist jedoch: Mit Hilfe des Internets ist die Anzahl von indirekten Verdindungen unendlich (siehe “Freunde von Freunden” bei facebook)
In Altruistischer Wirtschaft ist es wichtig, was Du beitraegst, weil es Dir einen guten Ruf einbringt und Du somit mehr Hilfe und Verbindungen bekommst so wie das in den alten Gesellschaften funktionierte. Die Verkaeufer Beurteilungen bei E-bay zeigen dieses System zum Beispiel und sie funktionieren ganz gut. In unserem alltaeglichen Leben erfahren wir das auch. Wir glauben oft den Beurteilungen unserer Freunde ueber Firmen oder Werkstaetten mehr als Werbung, da Werbung nur mehr Gewinn aber nicht unseren Nutzen im Sinn hat.
Der Gedanke ist also ein Beduerfnis im Internet auszudruecken zum Beispiel auf einer Art Plattform: Zum Beispiel brauchst Du einen Babysitter. Auf der anderen Seite muss ein Babysitter sein Auto repariert haben. Die Plattform wuerde beide in Verbindung bringen. Wenn beide ihre Aufgabe gut machen geben sie einander eine gute Beurteilung und damit bekommen sie wiederum mehr Aufgaben oder Gueter. Obwohl Identitaetsdiebstahl ein Problem waere scheint es ein durchsichtigeres System zu sein als das aktuelle zentralisierte Geld-System, da man die Rueckmeldung direkter bekommt und nicht zum Beispiel durch die Medien, die vielleicht manipuliert sind.
Altruistische Wirtschaft ist also: “ein Informationsnetzwert. Es gibt nicht jedem Macht, aber es gibt jedem die Chance seine Gefuehle darueber, was in der Welt vorgeht, auszudruecken. Wenn funktionierende Software geschaffen ist, wird der Netzwerk-Effekt persoenliche Beurteilungen schnell verbreiten, indem sie die wachsenden mobilen Internet-Zugang nutzt.”
Dies ist nur eine kurze Uebersicht ueber Teile von Altruistischer Wirtschaft. Fuer einen tieferen Einblick schaut bitte auf http://www.altruists.org/ nach
sources:
http://www.altruists.org/ideas/economics/altruistic/ und ihre downloads (What is wrong with money)

Blast from the Past: About John Holloway and ways to a new society/Ueber John Holloway und Wege in eine neue Gesellschaft

August 2017

More about my research into new forms of society from 2011

May 2011

Today I tried to find out more about John Holloway who’s theories are one root of the “Solidaritaets-Gmbh (Solidarity- corporation limited)” that I was writing about yesterday.
I found an article on libcom.org in which he tries to explain his ideas in 12 theses and I merely managed to read to number 4 as I do not understand half of it. That frustrates me. There is someone who has a good idea to make this world a place to live in for all of us but he uses words, expressions, sentences that make no sense at all to someone simple like me. How can we change the world when those who think about the ways do so do not speak a language everyone understands? Is that not a way of power over others as well as just the university-language-trained can understand what he is talking about? Translation always bears the dangers of misunderstanding (wanted or not). If the theories to change the world need translation the danger is that people misunderstand it and it does not go where it is intended to.

What have I understood of the article?
Well, as far as I can see he thinks that all reforms so far tried to change society by gaining political power but all of them failed. In his opinion, the reason for that is that all today’s political systems are in their core part of capitalism and therefore can not change capitalism. Capitalism for him means that humans are forced to live their lives in a certain way (working for someone else to earn money to be able to gain a livelihood for example) but that is not how they usually want to live their lives. Working (he calls it doing) is owned by the businesses for example but not by the one who is doing (he calls it the doer) it. In his opinion “doing” is a power but not a power over someone. It is the power-to, not the power-over. And he sees the solution to change is to stop the power-over and to gain the power-to.
How would that change society? If I am good at gaining information and writing articles then I have the power to write articles. But I might not have the power to produce bread. Someone else might have that power but he might not have the power to gain information. In theory, if both of us work for ourselves and not for someone else we could make a contract that I give him the articles for his bread. No money needed and no business between us either. I have the power over my talent/my doing and can earn a livelihood with it as I exchange my talent with the talent of someone else. Well in theory. But the pro’s and con’s are still in discussion in projects like the “Solidaritaets-Gmbh” where people try to find solutions for those things that do not seem to work.
Now those theories seem to me very exciting. I will venture further into understanding them.

Here is the link to the article: Twelve thesis on changing the world without taking power

Links thanks to Wikipedia, Libcom and Solidaritaets-Gmbh

video credit: dgSolidarity via YouTube

August 2017

Mehr ueber meine Nachforschungen ueber neue Formen von Gesellschaft von 2011

Mai 2011

Heute habe ich versucht mehr ueber John Holloway herauszufinden, dessen Theorien eine Wurzel fuer die “Solidaritaets-Gmbh ist, uber die ich gestern geschrieben habe.

Ich habe einen Artikel dazu auf libcom.org gefunden, in dem er seine Ideen in 12 Thesen versucht zu erklaeren und ich habe es nur geschafft bis Nummer 4 zu lesen, da ich nur die Haelfte davon verstanden habe. Das frustriert mich! Da gibt es jemand, der eine gute Idee hat, wie man die Welt in einen Ort verwandeln koennte, an dem wir alle leben wollen und da benutzt er Worte, Ausdruecke und Saetze, die jemand einfaches, wie ich absolut gar nicht versteht. Wie koennen wir die Welt veraendern, wenn wir eine Sprache sprechen, die nicht alle verstehen. Is das nicht auch eine Form von Herrschaft ueber andere, da nur die Universitaets-Sprache-Trainierten verstehen, was er zu sagen hat? Uebersetzung birgt immer die Gefahr, dass man etwas (gewollt oder ungewollt) missversteht. Wenn die Theorien der Weltveraenderung Uebersetzungen brauchen, dann ist da die Gefahr, dass man sie falsch versteht und sie nicht dahin fuehren, wo sie hinfuehren sollen.
Was habe ich also von dem Artikel verstanden?
Tja soweit ich sehen kann, denkt er, dass alle bisherigen Reformen versucht haben die Gesellschaft zu veraendern indem sie versuchten politische Herrschaft zu gewinnen aber alle haben versagt. Seiner Meinung nach liegt das daran, dass alle heutigen politischen Systeme in ihrem Kern Teil des Kapitalismus sind und deshalb Kapitalismus nicht veraendern koennen. Kapitalismus bedeutet fuer ihn, dass Menschen dazu gezwungen sind, ihr Leben in einer bestimmten Weise (arbeiten fuer jemanden anderen, um Geld zu verdienen, um seinen Lebensunterhalt  gewinnen zu koennen) zu leben, obwohl sie das in der Regel so nicht wollen. Arbeiten (er nennt das tun) wird zum Beispiel von Firmen besessen aber nicht von dem, der es tut (er nennt das Tu-er). Seiner Meinung nach ist die Faehigkeit etwas zu tun, eine Macht aber nicht die Macht ueber jemanden, sondern die Macht, etwas zu tun. Es ist die Macht, etwas zu tun nicht die Macht ueber jemaden. Und er sieht die Loesung, um Veraenderung herbei zu fuehren darin, die Macht ueber jemanden zu stoppen und die Macht, etwas zu tun zu gewinnen.
Wie soll das die Gesellschaft veraendern? Wenn ich gut darin bin, Informationen zu gewinnen und darueber zu schreiben dann habe ich diese Macht. Ich mag aber nicht die Macht haben, Brot zu backen. Jemand anderes hat das, der aber nicht gut darin ist, Informationen zu sammeln. Theoretisch, wenn wir fuer uns selber arbeiten koennten wir einen Vertrag verhandeln und unsere Gueter tauschen ohne Geld zu brauchen oder jemanden (eine Firma zum bsp) , der unser “Tun” besitzt. Ich habe die Macht ueber mein Talent/mein Tun und kann damit meinen Lebensunterhalt verdienen, weil ich mein Talent mit dem eines anderen tausche. Tja theoretisch. Aber die Pros und Kontras werden in Projekten wie der “Solidaritaets-Gmbh” diskutiert, um Loesungen fuer das zu finden, was anscheinend nicht funktioniert.
Diese Theorien scheinen mir sehr aufregend zu sein. Ich werde weiterhin probieren, sie zu verstehen!
Hier ist der Link zum genannten Artikel: Twelve thesis on changing the world without taking power (Englisch)
Danke fuer die Links an: WikipediaLibcom and Solidaritaets-Gmbh

Blast from the Past: Inclusive Democracy/ Umfassende Demokratie

This entry was first posted in June 2011:

Inclusive Democracy is a political project as well as a political theory. It’s basics were found by Takis Fotopolus who is a political philosopher and economist. It was further developed by him and other writers of the magazine “Democracy and Nature” which was followed by “The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy“.

Its idea is to reintegrate society with economy, polity and nature and its roots lay in two major political traditions: the democratic and socialist. But it also includes more radical movements like the green, feminist, indigenous and liberation movements.

In their opinion, the actual state of the world is that of a multidimensional crisis caused by a system of ruling elites who hold most of the power which was created by an interaction of representative democracy, an economy which focuses on growth and all forms of hierarchy. Multidimensional crisis means a social, economic, ecological, political and cultural crisis.

They think that the actual world system can not be reformed but a new one has to be established which ensures a fair distribution of power among citizens on the cultural, political, social and economic level. One of their aims is a new world order based on Inclusive Democracies which are associated in a federation.

Inclusive Democracy needs citizens who are able to take conscious decisions based on autonomy and not on beliefs, closed theories or dogmas.

On a political level institutions of direct democracy have to be established eg. assemblies on a local, regional, national, continental and global level. All assemblies over the local level need to consist of delegates who can directly be recalled by the local assemblies. This is supposed to integrate society with policy and dismiss the state as a separate institution.

You also have to establish institutions of collective ownership of economic resources as well as ways of controlling them by the local assemblies. They aim at securing the basic needs of all citizens as well as their non-basic needs based on the individual choices about work and leisure. This is supposed to integrate society with the economy.

In the social realm, Inclusive Democracy needs institutions of self-management in production, offices and educational institutions which are lead by the aims of the local assemblies.

Ecological Democracy aims at reintegration of society with nature to avoid its exploitation to secure all basic needs of citizens which in their opinion can only be achieved by a harmonious relationship between society and nature.

One goal of Inclusive Democracy is to create a massive movement which integrates all campaigns for “ socialism, democracy, autonomy, as well as of the new social movements for equality regardless of gender, race, ethnicity etc.” (“Our aims at Democracy & nature ).

They try to achieve this by “the building of a Network of Citizens for Inclusive Democracy which will aim at the creation of an alternative democratic consciousness, through political intervention as well as cultural activities, with the final goal of contributing to the creation of a wider political movement for the transition to Inclusive Democracy. A first step in this direction might be the creation of study groups which provide the opportunity to deepen the knowledge of activists on the various aspects of the inclusive democracy project including the crucial issues of strategy and tactics.” (“Our aims” at Democracy & Nature)


http://www.democracynature.org/,

http://www.inclusivedemocracy.org/journal/,

http://www.wikipedia.org/

Sie meisten Links dieses Eintrages sind in Englischer Sprache:
Umfassende Demokratie ist ein politisches Projekt wie auch eine polititsche Theorie. Die Grundlagen wurden durch  Takis Fotopolus geschaffen, der ein politischer Philosoph wie auch ein Oekonom ist. Sie wurde von ihm und anderen Autoren des Magazines  “Democracy and Nature” das durch  “The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy” weitergefuehrt wurde.
Ihre Idee is es die Gesellschaft mit Oekonomie, Politik und Natur wieder zu vereinen und Ihre Wurzeln liegen in zwei politischen Bewegungen: der demokratischen und der sozialistischen . Aber sie beinhalten auch mehr radikale Bewegungen wie der gruenen, der feministischen, indigenen und freiheitlichen.
Ihrer Meinung nach ist der Stand der Welt eine mulitdimensionale Krise, die durch ein System von fuehrenden Eliten, die durch das Zusammenspiel von indirekter Demokratie, einer Wirtschaft, die sich nur auf Wachstum kozentriert und jeder Form von Hierarchie enstanden sind, hervorgerufen wurde. Multidimensionale Krise bedeutet eine Krise auf sozialer, wirtschaftlicher, oekologischer, politischer und kultureller Ebene.
Sie denken, dass das jetzige Weltsystem nicht reformiert werden kann, sondern eine Neues geschaffen werden muss, das auf einer fairen Verteilung von Macht unter Buergern auf kultureller, politischer und wirtschaftlicher Ebene basiert. Eines ihrer Ziele ist es, eine neue Weltordung zu schaffen die auf Umfassenden Demokratien zusammengefasst in einer Foederation gegruendet ist.
Umfassende Demokratie braucht Buerger, die bewusste Entscheidungen auf Autonomie gegruendet und nicht auf Glauben, geschlossene Theorien oder Dogmas beruhen.
Auf politischer Ebene muessen Institutionen direkter Demokratie gebildet werden wie zum Beispiel Versammlungen auf lokaler, regionaler, nationaler, kontinentaler und globaler Ebene. Alle Versammlunge ueber den lokalen bestehen aus Delegierten, die jederzeit von den lokalen Versammlungen zurueckgerufen werden koennen. Das soll Gesellschaft mit Politik wieder verbinden und den Staat als separate Institution abloesen.
Man muss zudem Institutionen etablieren, die wirtschaftliche Ressourcen gemeinschaftliche besitzen und von den lokalen Versammlungen kontroliert werden. Sie dienen dazu, die Grundbeduerfnisse aber auch die Beduerfnisse, die darueber hinausgegehen, eines/r jeden BuergersIn zu garantieren und auf deren Entscheidungen ueber die Menge an Arbeit und Freizeit basieren. Das soll die Gesellschaft mit der Wirtschaft wieder vereinigen.
Auf sozialer Ebene braucht es Organistionen von Selbstverwaltung in Produktion, Bueros und Bildung, die von den Zielen, der lokalen Versammlungen geleitet werden.
Oekologische Demokratie ziel auf eine Vereinigung von Gesellschaft und Natur um eine Ausnutzung dieser zu verhindern und die Grundbeduerfnisse der Buerger zu garantieren. Das kann ihrer Meinung nach nur durch eine harmonische Beziehung zwischen Natur und GEsellschaft hergestellt werden.
Ein Ziel von Umfassender Demokratie is es, eine massive Bewegung zu starten, die alle Gruppierungen fuer “Sozialismus, Demokratie und Autonomie, Gleichheit ungeachtet von Geschlecht, Abstammung, Herkunft” beinhalten soll. (unsere Ziele auf Democracy & Nature)
Sie versuchen dies durch den “Aufbau eines Bürgernetzwerks für Inklusive Demokratie, welches durch Vorträge, Seminare, politische Interventionen sowie die Publikation von Büchern, Zeitschriften und Zirkularen die Schaffung eines alternativen Bewusstseins anstrebt, um dadurch zur Entstehung einer breiteren Bewegung für den Übergang zu Inklusiver Demokratie beizutragen. Ein erster Schritt in diese Richtung könnte die Bildung von Studiergruppen der Inklusiven Demokratie sein, die die Gelegenheit geben würden das Wissen der Aktivisten in den verschiedenen Sparten des Projektes zu vertiefen, einschließend der kritischen Themen der Strategie und Taktik.” (unsere Ziele auf Democracy & Nature)
 

Something critical/Etwas Kritisches

January 2019

I haven’t re-posted my old posts about a fair society yet. But its a topic that bothers me for a long time now and I am going to make more changes to my behaviour this year

August 2017

All week long I have re-posted entries from summer 2011 where I had been considering new visions for a fair world and a change in economic systems we use. I get the impression, that the internet might actually be the component that allows us to create this “fair society” as we easily can get and give goods and services directly without a sales man or organiser in between. I still believe that the internet is an invention that will change society like the wheel and book printing did. We just can’t see it yet. But here my thoughts from July 2011:

July 2011

There is a google-group called “understanding money” and they have been sent an article about a society without money. They followed the question but all their answers are: it won’t work as our society is too complex, there are not always enough skills to fulfil people’s needs, we would go back to stone-age and we need some more evolution to be able to co-operate.
The tone of the group is kind of patronising towards those who think a society without money would be possible.

Never the less they raise some points that I have been wondering about while trying to find a new vision for a society that is fair.

For example, it is all nice and well if I am good at teaching people but not good at repairing a car if there is no mechanic who or who’s children need to be taught. I guess the system could work if it would not be that direct. The mechanic might need a roof repaired and the guy who needs the roof repaired might have children who want to learn something. But that is all a bit insecure and it would need a big organisation to coordinate all needs. There is also the question of the worth: Children need to be taught for a long time while car-repairing and roof fixing does not need that long. How much do I teach the children for getting the car repaired and how much does the roof be repaired to get the children taught?????

Maybe the point is more about materialism. The question is: Do we really need all the things that we have? In theory, there could be a community place with all the computers and laptops free to use. Not everyone needs a computer the same time so why can’t someone else use it then? Do we really need all the big houses and loads of food or does half of it do it as well?

A fair society probably really has something to do with evolution: As long as material things are so important and sharing is more of a weakness than something desirable there will not be a fair society in my opinion.

I also more and more get the impression that the only real answer has to be a holistic one. Our problems can not only be answered by saying: Oh money is the source of all problems. Delete it and all will be well.

There must be a change of thinking and a change of wanting. But how do you initiate this?
And can’t there be a fair and complex society and a fair society with money?

January 2019Ich habe die Betraege zu einer fairen Gesellschaft noch nicht wieder veroeffentlicht aber das ist ein Thema, das mich schon lange beschaefftigt und ich werde in diesem Jahr weitere Schritte unternehmen, um mein Verhalten zu aendern

 

August 2011
Die ganze Woche lang habe ich alte Beitraege vom Sommer 2011 wieder veroeffentlicht, in denen ich  ueber Vvisionen fuer eine faire Welt und einen Wechsel im oekonomischen System, das wir nutzen, nachgedacht habe. Ich fange an zu glauben, dass das Internet so eine “faire Gesellschaft” ermoeglichen kann, da wir Gueter und Services ohne einen Mittelmann austauschen koennen. Ich glaube immernoch, dass das Internet eine Erfindung ist, die die Welt veraendern wird so wie es die Erfindung des Rades und des Buchdruckes getan hat. Wir koennen, das nur noch nicht sehen. Aber hier erstmal meine Gedanken von Juli 2011:
Juli 2011
Da gibt es eine Google-Gruppe, die “understanding money” (leider nur in englischer Sprache) heisst und sie haben einen Artikel zugeschickt bekommen, in dem eine Gesellschaft ohne Geld angedacht wurde. Sie verfolgten den Gedanken aber ihre Antworten zur Frage waren nur: Es wuerde nicht funktionieren, da unsere Gesellschaft zu komplex ist, es gibt nicht genuegend Faehigkeiten, um die Beduerfnisse aller zu befriedigen, wir wuerden zurueck ins Steinzeitalter verfallen und wir brauchen etwas mehr Evolution um faehig zu werden, zusammen zu arbeiten. Die Gruppe scheint ein wenig auf die herab zu sehen, die eine Gesellschaft ohne Geld fuer moeglich halten.
Unabhaengig davon jedoch sprechen sie Dinge an, uber die ich mich gewundert habe, so lange ich mich nun mit einer neuen Vision fuer eine faire Welt beschaefftige.
Zum Beispiel ist es schoen und gut, wenn ich Leute unterrichten kann aber kein Auto reparieren. Der Mechaniker braucht vielleicht niemanden, der unterrichtet. Vielleicht wuerde es funktionieren, wenn das System nicht so direkt arbeiten wuerde. Der Mechaniker braucht vielleicht ein neues Dach und die Kinder des Dachdecker muessen unterrichtet werden. Aber das ist alles ein bischen unsicher und wuerde eine grosse Organisation benoetigen, um alles zu ko-ordinieren.
Da ist dann auch noch die Frage des Wertes: Kinder muessen laengere Zeit unterrichtet werden, waehrend Dach und Auto reparieren nicht ganz so lange dauert. Wie lange muss ich also unterrichten, um das Auto repariert zu bekommen und wie lange muss das Dach repariert werden, um die Kinder unterrichtet zu bekommen?
Vielleicht geht es hier aber auch mehr um Materialismus. Die Frage ist: Brauchen wir wirklich all das, was wir haben? Theoretisch koennte es einen Gemeinschafts Platz geben, wo alle Computer und Laptops frei verfuegbar sind. Nicht jeder benutzt seinen Computer staendig. In der “freien” Zeit koennte doch jemand andere ihn nutzen. Brauchen wir wirklich alle, die grossen Haeuser und die Menge an Essen oder wuerde es die Haelfte auch tun?
Eine faire Gesellschaft hat vermutlich wirklich etwas mit Evolution zu tun: So lange materielle Dinge so wichtig sind und teilen eher als eine Schwaeche als etwas wuenschenswertes angesehen wird wird es meiner Meinung nach keine faire Gesellschaft geben.
Je mehr ich mich damit beschaefftige, desto mehr gewinne ich den Eindruck, dass die Antwort nur eine ganzheitliche sein kann. Unsere Probleme werden nicht einfach dadurch beantwortet dass man sagt: Oh Geld ist der Grund fuer alle Probleme. Vernichtet es und alles wird gut. Da muss es eine Veraenderung im Denken und Wollen geben. Aber wie initiiert man das?
Und kann es nicht auch eine faire und komplexe Gesellschaft geben und eine faire Gesellschaft mit Geld?