A gift economy in a modern nation

rewster

I'm thinking generally about the idea of a gift economy in place in an at least somewhat modern nation, of at least somewhat large size (bigger than Luxembourg, perhaps). What would such an economy look like, and what would it take to scale such an economy up from a tribal level (as it existed in among for instance many American Indian tribes) to a nation or empire?
There are obvious limits to the number of relationships a person can have.... so what mechanisms might be required in order to allow entire regions to participate in such an economy? Is it possible for a gift economy to even exist at this scale?

What level of economic specialization would occur in this economy? Would there be sufficient division of labor?

Ok, I guess 5 questions is enough for now.:)
 

Solomaxwell6

Banned
The only way I can personally see this developing is a system of double gifting; essentially, a trade system. Basically, you go to the market or whatever, find something you want, and give a gift of equal value for it. It would be trading, but the trading would, symbolically speaking, be gifts, if you understand what I'm trying to say.
 

Rockingham

Banned
Ummm...whats a gift economy?

If I understand the meaning correctly, a minor aspect of the gift economy could eb incorporated into the share market..... perhaps you give someone miney, but inreturn they must invest it in a company of your choice, and give the same amount of money to another person, who must also invest it in that company and give someone else an equivalent amount of money... and so on...

It would only work with morons who were to stupid to realise the key flaw, however:rolleyes:
 

carlton_bach

A traditional gift economy can only function as long as the majority of the population engages in subsistence work. It is not really reliable enough to depend on for your survival at the lower edge. That said, I could see a modern society retain a gift economy for a certain class of goods or certain social interactions (in a very limited way, most modern societies do). The key would be a distinction between commonplace goods (food, drink, fuel, medical supplies, tools, energy, communication services and other everyday needs) and status goods (this could go as far as clothing and vehicles, but more likely just includes real estate, ornaments, maybe weaponry, certain animals, possibly certain foods, household goods or garments that are associated with high status). THe common goods would be traded on the market. Status goods, on the other had, could not be traded but only acquired as gifts. Their makers would be placed under the patronage of powerful individuals (unless this society develops a theory of labour that allows them to be paid even though they are associated with high-status articles). These powerful people would exchangwe gifts with each other and use their privileged access to status goods to bind low-status people to them by obligation. At some point there is a nexus where status goods can end up 'exchanged' for common goods, but this is considered demeaning and therefore not regarded as a trade (a common worker in need of, say, a plot of land for his married son to build a home on would be given one by his patron; he would then be obligated to work for his patron, but this would not be viewed as payment but the expression of proper gratitude from one unfortunate enoughto be unable to make a proper return gift).

Some interesting directions intribue could take here, too. If someone has something I want, I can obligate him to give it to me by making him enough gifts. He can't give me back something I've given him, and he can't not give back gifts (that is the fundamental mechanism underlying a gift economy). Elections are going to be interesting, too.
 

Justin Pickard

Linux, creative commons, and the open source movement.

Seriously though, the best way to achieve this would be through technology, say something like pervasive computing.
 

alt_historian

Rockingham said:
Ummm...whats a gift economy?

If I understand the meaning correctly, a minor aspect of the gift economy could eb incorporated into the share market..... perhaps you give someone miney, but inreturn they must invest it in a company of your choice, and give the same amount of money to another person, who must also invest it in that company and give someone else an equivalent amount of money... and so on...

It would only work with morons who were to stupid to realise the key flaw, however:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well, I must be one... Why don't you enlighten me?
 

rewster

Justin Pickard said:
Linux, creative commons, and the open source movement.

Seriously though, the best way to achieve this would be through technology, say something like pervasive computing.
Click to expand...

So then, rather than a small tribal gift economy somehow surviving the rise of nations, industrial age, etc. , it would be easier for a nation currently with a market economy to switch?

Obviously you'd need some very disruptive technologies, because basically that's only going to happen if money becomes obsolete. In other words, the price of just about everything is driven so low by extreme abundance that people just give stuff away for free.

I can see it happening with consumer goods, with fully automated factories, but unless we have android robots that can do surgery, teach kids, and clean sewers, the demand for services will remain. I suppose you could make the argument that having any good you want (food, shelter, ipods, etc) would make people comfortable enough (having their hierarchy of needs mostly met) that they would be willing to altruistically pursue their career of choice as a purely volunteer effort. And that's possibly true enough... we certainly wouldn't even need everyone to participate, as there are many people currently working in manufacturing, agriculture, etc. whose labor would no longer be necessary.

Not that android robots are all that far beyond fully automated factories. If they aren't far beyond, then a culture of abundance would obviously lend itself to a gift economy.


The only other way I can see this happening is a very drastic change in perception... where humans see their current condition as both very satisfactory and very secure... but without some sort of technology advance I don't see why that would happen.
 

Rockingham

Banned
alt_historian said:
Well, I must be one... Why don't you enlighten me?
Click to expand...
My point was, they recieve soem money, and assume they are actually making a gain..... but in reality, they are no better off then if they had not recieved the money, but bought the shares anyway:rolleyes:

Simply, its merely a way advertising a particular company...but its just as bigger gamble as the sharemarket is in RL. The key point is that many people may not realise that.
 

alt_historian

Rockingham said:
My point was, they recieve soem money, and assume they are actually making a gain..... but in reality, they are no better off then if they had not recieved the money, but bought the shares anyway:rolleyes:

Simply, its merely a way advertising a particular company...but its just as bigger gamble as the sharemarket is in RL. The key point is that many people may not realise that.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd say your example looks more like pyramid selling.

That is, a vertical pyramid.... OK, 'column selling'.
 
Electric Monk

Electric Monk

Has anyone read Maneki Neko by Bruce Sterling?

"Maneki Neko" is an upbeat, funny story that portrays a logical extension of the late, lamented "gift economy" upon which the Internet was built. The central principle was that if people contributed what they could to the system for free, everyone would wind up better off.

In Sterling's near-future Japan, Tsuyoshi Shimizu is one of many people who follow the prompts of the ubiquitous network. When the net tells Tsuyoshi to give a weary stranger a coffee, or buy a bottle of aftershave, he does it without worrying about the reason; in return, anonymous packages arrive with useful gifts such as baby clothes and pickles for his pregnant wife. Strangers on network business identify themselves to one another via hand-signals, but different regions of the net have different signal dialects.
Click to expand...
 

Thyme

Perhaps it could be tied to a patronage system. I can sort of see a system that is theoretically semi-socialist/populist, but the actual power is in the hands of engineers/military officers/bureaucrats who are courted by the old rich. Accessibility to the right parties/culture and gifts keep the recipients living above their theoretical means.
 

alt_historian

Thyme said:
Perhaps it could be tied to a patronage system. I can sort of see a system that is theoretically semi-socialist/populist, but the actual power is in the hands of engineers/military officers/bureaucrats who are courted by the old rich. Accessibility to the right parties/culture and gifts keep the recipients living above their theoretical means.
Click to expand...

Why does this have to be an oligarchical setup?

Anyone read the Mars series? There's a partial gift economy in that, it appears to work pretty well.
 
Electric Monk

Electric Monk

alt_historian said:
No, I haven't. The society sounds pretty good from that description.
Click to expand...

If you google it (Maneki Neko Bruce Sterling) I do believe the story can be found on the second link, otherwise it can probably be found in A Good Old Fashioned Future at your local bookstore or library.

alt_historian said:
Anyone read the Mars series? There's a partial gift economy in that, it appears to work pretty well.
Click to expand...

Couldn't get into it despite trying a couple times: what do they do?
 
LacheyS

LacheyS

The gift economy arose among the underground of Mars. Each cell had their own speciality, trading on a black market, with all the other cells. Each cell's philosophy was to pay the highest price they could for trade goods and sell at the lowest possible price to the traders, like Coyote, who travelled from cell to cell.

IIRC, it was Vlad Taneev who set up the governmental economic system after the Second Revolution. It regulated the monetary system.

Went off and did some research. I hope this link works to Kim Stanley Robertson's Martian Vision, by Carl Swidorski.
 

alt_historian

LacheyS said:
The gift economy arose among the underground of Mars. Each cell had their own speciality, trading on a black market, with all the other cells. Each cell's philosophy was to pay the highest price they could for trade goods and sell at the lowest possible price to the traders, like Coyote, who travelled from cell to cell.

IIRC, it was Vlad Taneev who set up the governmental economic system after the Second Revolution. It regulated the monetary system.

Went off and did some research. I hope this link works to Kim Stanley Robertson's Martian Vision, by Carl Swidorski.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, it explains the envisioned system a lot better than I could. Although I didn't see it as socialist, as such, more a system using the best bits if various pre-existing ones. Although that aspect is explored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top