Surviving Capitalism (Not) : The Corporatization of Social Commons

We’ve lived so long under the spell of hierarchy—from god-kings to feudal lords to party bosses—that only recently have we awakened to see not only that “regular” citizens have the capacity for self-governance, but that without their engagement our huge global crises cannot be addressed. The changes needed for human society simply to survive, let alone thrive, are so profound that the only way we will move toward them is if we ourselves, regular citizens, feel meaningful ownership of solutions through direct engagement. Our problems are too big, interrelated, and pervasive to yield to directives from on high.
—Frances Moore Lappé, excerpt from Time for Progressives to Grow Up

Sunday, January 2, 2011

The Corporatization of Social Commons

by Zeynep Tufekci from Technosociology.

We are increasingly aware of the erosion of the traditional commons such as public services, public parks, and social safety nets, all of which are being cut back to the bare-bones. Corporations and their governments are replacing these with privately owned "public" spaces such as shopping malls.

But, as this perceptive writer warns us, there is much more under the radar--the insidious trend whereby corporations are gradually creating our "commons" in the form social network media. This commons is also controlled by private interests, learns everything it can about us, and sells the information to other corporations to better market their products to us. Moreover, corporations likely make all this information available to the government, a "commons" which they own and control as well.

For most people, most of the time, that does not create major issues (even while creating dramatic consequences for few), but the totality of these interactions creates a tragedy of commons – actions that may be reasonable for individuals creates an environment which has dramatic consequences for everyone. In our case, the consequence we are headed for is a world of near-complete surveillance of everyday actions that is searchable, permanent and public. We are slowly but surely creeping into this world and it is high time for a serious public discussion to take place.

I think that this article is an important antidote to all the rosy messages emanating from the cheerleaders of localization, like David Korten and Rob Hopkins (see this) who fail to see these encroachments on our diminishing commons, and who portray localization as a romantic journey into blissful independence and social utopia.

Localization is fine if it localizes and socializes all the 95% of the world's resources owned and controlled by private interests. Otherwise, it will only offer us the opportunity to struggle for survival on the leftovers and scraps of the Brave New Corporate World. Unfortunately, these spokespersons of the localization movement and darlings of corporate and government media ignore this reality. Meanwhile, the One Percent continue depleting resources and wrecking havoc on the ecosystem; and localization, as Korten and Hopkins define it, will pose no problems for them.