Analysis: Beer and Revolution: Phx Bux

July 17th, 2009

So, I attended the second Beer and Revolution, after RSVPing on Facebook and not showing up to the first one.

The attendance was impressive, though I have no numbers.

The speaker was the/one of the brains behind Phx Bux — a local currency (or token/coupon exchange).

Though I understood and appreciated the passion, I was struck at the lack of vision of the speaker and audience. When asked what the end goal of such a project was, the answer remained unclear.

Is there not an understanding of an anarchistic, needs-based production/distribution system, the goal of which is to scale things down to the local/neighborhood level, where production requirements of essentials can be decided upon, and collectively produced, with each giving according to their ability and in turn each receiving what they need to survive? Isn’t the idea to overcome currency altogether?

The project is an exciting one, but the spearheads of Phx Bux seem to be considering it a small-scale, artistic experiment. That is all well and good, but what about the people that need more essential goods and services? The small businesses that have signed on include a comic book store, coffee house, and quite a few other places. But what about those who need food, not coffee? We must work toward a rise in the material standard of living, by expropriating (incorporating) the highest classes and distributing the wealth. The idea of revolution is not impoverishment — it is the ability to get people comfortable materially, to allow them the free time to be the substantive and well rounded, fulfilled partners, lovers, friends, family, and community members we all wish we could be.

To me, it demonstrates a fundamental divide between the so-called “anarchist movement” and the lives of actual, working people. It’s a strange lack of awareness, especially coming from the speaker — apparently a decade employee of a commercial, franchised copy and print house.

Also, there was a striking contradiction — the excitement for the project was tempered by saying that it was just a very small scale, artistic experiment. What a cop out! Can we have a little more optimism about these projects?

Anyway, just what is the vision of an anarchist economics? I’d recommend the pamphlet, “Anarchist Economics” by Jon Bekken (also check out the magazine he edits, the “Anarcho-Syndicalist Review”), as well as Peter Kropotkin’s ideas in his book, “The Conquest of Bread.” Some of Kropotkin’s economics can also be gleaned from the pamphlet “Peter Kropotkin: His Federalist Ideas,” by Camillo Berneri. More contemporarily, Murray Bookchin has expressed a modern, but basically Kropotkin-esque anarchist economics in his outline of a post-scarcity society.

The movement needs to work on its vision, and its being able to understand the subtleties and potential of seemingly small, perhaps irrelevant projects.

Lastly, toward the end, the speaker whipped out his soapbox and attempted to guilt-trip the audience in what amounted to a misunderstanding of the nature of capitalism. Not all economic activity is capitalist. The charge was leveled that we are all capitalists, and we are at fault for supporting the system. Firstly, this blame is misplaced. I know the hosts know what is up. The working class doesn’t need its lifestyle attacked any more than it already is. Of course, there is the concept of personal responsibility, but we are all trying to do the best with what we’ve been given, in the system we’ve been born into.

Also, my going to the grocery store is not me being a capitalist. A capitalist has capital, which implies the ability to own the means of production. This has no bearing on my supermarket shopping. In addition, the presence of capital indicates the presence of capital accumulation — the idea that capitalists earn a profit through the exploitation of workers (after all, where does that profit come from? It comes from not paying workers the full value of their labor.). Again, none of this is even relevant to the average person’s situation.

This brings up a disturbing thought — the indication is that the speaker looks at the anarchist movement as part of a privileged class, with more agency and therefore more blame than the working class. If this is a common conception, it is a dangerous, vanguardist one. The anarchist movement must be of and reflective of the working class. That chasm of understanding must be bridged.

Overall, it was a night of good people and good energy. I’d like us to work on the vision, though. How else can we build a broad-based movement than through the living demonstration of the world we want to create?

Filed under Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | Comments (5)