Oooo that looks good. Thanks for the recommendation! That Lifehouse book that I mentioned describes Occupy Sandy at some length, so this would probably complement it well. I need to look more deeply into how the various “Occupy” movements implemented mutual aid.
I tend to look at all of this in psychological and sociological ways rather than in technical or financial terms. Speaking very generally, when it comes to working in groups of any kind, there are two challenges that seem prevalent to me:
- Encouraging people to take self-initiative when it comes to doing important tasks (“do-ocracy”)
People have a tendency to not do anything when it is assumed that others are already taking care of it (“diffusion of responsibility”). Excluding cases of purposeful sabotage, there may also be “free-rider” problems where shared resources become degraded because some people may use them without contributing to their maintenance.
…To use an analogy, do we have to hire a janitor if everyone picks up after themselves? Sometimes people even have the nerve to look down on janitors despite the critical role that they play in making spaces relatively safe and comfortable! (A form of “class discrimination”?)
Therefore, at it’s core, I would say that this type of “self-organization” does not usually occur unless every individual has a strong sense of belonging and there is camaraderie amongst the group as a whole (“social cohesion”, or to use the economics term, “social capital”).
- Communication breakdowns that lead to the blocking of a consensus or coming to a false consensus
People may not voice their concerns within the context of a group. For example, it might be out of fear of being judged harshly for holding an unpopular opinion (“groupthink”), or assumptions might be made about what everyone else desires (“the Abilene paradox”). People might also be repeatedly “punished” or “rewarded” for holding a particular viewpoint until all nuance is lost (“purity spiral”).
At that point, it helps to focus in on specific behaviors (“direct action”), and have methods that help to resolve any gridlocks by analyzing the impact of those actions and hashing out a path forward together (e.g.: “The N-Street Consensus Method”).
In my opinion, there are only a couple of models of social organization that can account for these aspects and be applied with any depth (e.g.: Sociocracy and Ostrom’s Design Principles). Fusing these together with some complementary method of resolving conflict (e.g.: Restorative Circles) seems like a way to make communities that are sustainable and actually enjoyable for everyone to be a part of.
Yes, exactly! This was my point about Bluesky “seeking other business models”.
That’s fair. I was familiar with a little bit of the CoHost situation, not as much with Dreamwidth or Pillowfort. Very insightful points! Thank you for sharing them.
I had mentioned something similar to this in one of the previous links. I will quote a few parts of it here:
Print on demand, online audio distribution, and self-publishing frequently serve a function that is similar to that of a self-hosted website: an attempt to escape the confines of the “corporate”. The same is true for things like indie game development.
All of these fields / interests could be connected together into a cooperative system where they are mutually supportive. For example, notice that video games are interactive experiences filled with art, music, and writing united by programming. And much of it uses technology that should follow principles like Free Software and Permacomputing.
Most “corporate culture” is rigidly hierarchical, with a relatively small “elite” that “manage” a huge number of “worker roles”. The thing that makes a union powerful is that, when the majority of people within those “worker roles” are on the same page, they can redirect the operation of the “company” as a whole. This is because that small “elite” is literally incapable of doing all of that work alone. We don’t need “leaders”. We need self-responsibility on part of every individual that is directed towards collective harmony.
Rather than use the power that comes from organization to try to “bargain” for safer working environments, fair distribution of effort and resources, and so on, it could be used to collapse the hierarchy completely by voluntarily reorganizing under a different structure that is more likely to provide those necessities, one that we build ourselves.
All of the “intellectual property” (including the step-by-step processes by which it is made!) should be “owned” by everyone who helped to create it. And further, we need direct collaboration between “creatives” and “audiences” until they are both one and the same. Maybe we could accomplish this with a cooperatively-owned crowdfunding platform (something like Comradery) crossed with a peer-to-peer network to share everything that we create, which includes guides on how to DIY all of it.
The use of “money” (and all of the manipulations and abuses associated with its accumulation) will start to fall away the more that each is self-sufficient and connected together by mutual aid. […] All of this is a peaceful process. Nothing has to be destroyed, only wholly transformed. It can be done towards everyone’s benefit as well…
Some time ago, I was working on an article about video game addiction and workplace abuse. There are many people working within game development that are being abused terribly, and games are being made with manipulative techniques used to hold people’s attention captive.
These issues highlight the necessity of projects like those mentioned above. The making of video games can also be so much more than simply “entertainment” because the attainment of useful knowledge and skills can be “gamified”.
…Now apply this same kind of approach across all aspects of society, not just entertainment/education, but especially those connected to essential needs (e.g.: water, food, shelter, energy, etc.). All organizations of any kind are people that are united by common causes. That includes businesses, governments, and so on. In order for us to survive, all of those causes are evolving towards something founded upon Agapic Love, and those that don’t will naturally fall away.
The imaginary “empires” of this world, built upon making people into idols and placing one over another, are finally coming to an end. Let’s do everything we can to make the transition as smooth as possible by trying to create things that work out of genuine love for others, rather than fighting against the things that don’t work out of a sense of hate. 
I’m obviously joking but on a more serious note, it’s quite interesting how some views manage to become the default and the rest of the population has to live with them and there’s nothing they can do about it.