The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth
Gerrard Winstanley
evnuk at gaia.org
Sun Jun 5 19:47:25 BST 2005
"the rise of market fundamentalism as the established state religion
has greased the way for such developments and turned the media into an
approving choir. The result has been an orgy of enclosure"
Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth
David Bollier
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0415944821/qid=1117996459/
sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/026-6223523-9817238
Book Review - Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth
by David Bollier
by Jonathan Rowe
Silent Theft: The Private Plunder of Our Common Wealth
http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=987
by David Bollier
£22.00, Routledge,
260 pages, 2003
- When our times finally come to rest in the history texts, I think
they will be called the Age of Enclosurethe age of privatization. It
is a time when everything has become a commodity, and everything is
for sale.
- The opinion establishment was in raptures over the resulting money
gush. Now that the party's over, they pine for a return. Yet as the
concept of the market comes to define all human experience, so too
does the market's central paradox: the way it creates scarcity even as
it produces abundance.
- A market requires scarcity. You can't sell what people already have,
or feel they can do without. Thus, for example, health becomes scarce
or at least dearas it becomes attached to a commoditized system of
expert interventions and pills. More broadly, we feel a scarcity of
that which the market displaces and degradesof restfulness and peace,
of unspoiled open places, of neighborliness and human interaction, of
clean air to breathe and honest food to eat.
- Most of us are aware of this at some level, I suspect. We experience
it as a vague, chronic gnawing, a sense of being under siege, a
nemesis without a name. We see our civic spaces turn into ads for
corporations, childhood turn into a marketing free-fire zone. We see
the basic elements of lifewater, seeds, the genetic codeturn into
commodities like pop-tarts and beer, subject to the same corporate
contrivance and hype.
- We can see the aggressor. But what exactly is the thing aggressed
upon? How can we defend it, if it is a hundred different things, and
not one thing we can name?
- In Silent Theft, David Bollier provides that name, and with it a
narrative from which a defense might grow. What appear to be a
multitude of separate issues, he saysglobal warming here, the
patenting of seeds over there, the looming destruction of the public
library a bit further offare really part of one big issue. It is the
destruction of the commons, the pillaging and commandeering of that
which belongs to all of usif belong is the wordfor private and
usually corporate gain. This is not the government or public sector.
It is the diminishing space that lies outside the government and the
market both.
- The commons has been under attack for centuries, ever since the
British parliament enclosed the common lands and forced peasant
farmers into cities where they became an impoverished labor force.
(China is doing the same thing now on behalf of industrialized
agriculture.) Today, thanks largely to technology, the process is
exceeding all previous bounds. The ability to manipulate genetic
material makes it possible to own it, for example. The internet, which
was supposed to liberate information, instead has provided a chilling
means of owning and charging for it.
- At the same time, the rise of market fundamentalism as the
established state religion has greased the way for such developments
and turned the media into an approving choir. The result has been an
orgy of enclosure, and Bollier documents the major ones. There are
chapters on the giveaway of public assets, such as broadcast airwaves
and mineral deposits on public lands; the enclosure of computer code
and the internet; the privatization of culture and public spaces; and
the corporate takeover of academia and the quest for knowledge, among
numerous others.
- It's a broad swath, but with a simple theme. As the title suggests,
this is a book about takings, a kind perpetrated by the very interests
that complain about takings when done against themselves. In fact,
Bollier shows that the government these interests complain about has
been their loyal accomplice. It is the government that gives away the
public airwaves and mineral rights to public lands; the government
that has expanded the copyright and patent laws far beyond Jefferson's
intent, thus setting the stage for the emerging oligopolies of the
mindand the ownership of life itself.
- And of course, it is the government that created the legal fiction
called the corporation that perpetrates most of these takings in the
first place. There's a lesson here in what used to be called
"political economy." Those who complain about government the most, use
it the most for their own ends.
- For many readers, the mere mention of the commons will call to mind
the notion of tragedy. That's because of an essay called "The Tragedy
of the Commons," written in the 1960s by the biologist Garret Hardin.
The so-called "tragedy thesis" has hung like a pall over the concept
ever since. It is a rote recital in the economics texts. Basically it
says that commons are prone inevitably to over-use, and that the only
answer is a regime of private property rights. Turn the common lands
into real estate and everyone is better off.
- Bollier shows that the tragedy thesis is a myth, embraced by
economists because it suits their preconceptions. In practice it has
become a "Procrustean rack," he observes. "Circumstances that do not
fit its premises must be stretched or slashed to fit, or ignored."
What's ignored is that commons work often and wonderfullythe piazzas
(public squares) of Italy, for example, and the community gardens of
Manhattan. "The New York City community gardens thrive precisely
because they are not governed either by the market or the government."
- All that's needed, in most cases, is a structure of law or custom
that enables the commons to flourish. The market can't work without
rules, and a commons can't either.
- In fact, often it's enclosure that invites the tragedy. Academic
research flourished when it operated as a commons, for example.
Academics published their work openly in professional journals. Reward
came from the respect of one's peers, not patent claims and money.
Pioneers like Jonas Salk, who discovered the original polio vaccine,
did not seek patents for their work. They thought science should serve
human kind, not gouge it.
- Today, by contrast, academia is in a patent frenzy, prompted by
corporate research dollars and a new cash-grabbing ethos. The result
has been an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia. Researchers
practically need a patent lawyer by their side as they negotiate a
growing minefield of competing patent claims. Scientific research is
"ratcheting itself towards paralysis," Bollier observes, from the very
thingproperty rightsthat is supposed to serve as "incentive" for
discovery and innovation.
- The point here is not that the commons somehow could replace the
market. It is, rather, that the commons is a parallel realm of
freedom, resource, and endeavorone that the market itself depends
upon and that is equally in need of government protection and support.
Bollier offers numerous examples of a new commons movement, from
Linuxthe computer operating system developed through a commons on the
World Wide Webto service barter networks and land trusts.
- The concept of the commons has large political potential. It is the
missing link between the ecosystem and the social system, between the
destruction of species and the destruction of languages and cultures,
between cyber space and open space, between the depletion of the ozone
layer and the depletion of our peace and quiet. If this does indeed
become known as the Age of Enclosure, then Silent Theft will go down
as one of the crucial texts that helped the age to see itself and thus
pointed the way out.
Runaway market culture has convinced us that everything is better off
owned by companies, not citizens. Land, scholarly research, internet
protocols, life-saving medical discoveries, and the very DNA of plants
and animals - rather than stay in the hands of the people, its all
being sold off on the cheap. Its the difference between Linux and
Windows and its a battle that could shape countless areas of Western
life.
Synopsis
'They hang the man and flog the woman That steal the goose from off
the common, But let the greater villain loose That steals the common
from the goose.' - Traditional nursery rhyme Until a 1998 federal
court decision, a Minnesota publisher claimed to own every federal
court decision, including Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education.
A Texas company was recently allowed to calm a patent on basmati rice,
a kind of rice grown in India for hundreds of years. The Mining Act of
1872 is still in effect, allowing companies to buy land from the
government at USD5 and acre if they pan to mine it. These are
resources that belong to al of use, yet they are being given away to
companies with anything but the common interest in mind. Where was the
public outcry, or the government intervention, when these were
happening? The answers are alarming. Private corporations are
consuming the resources that the American people collectively own at a
staggering rate, and the government is not protecting the commons on
our behalf. In Silent Theft , David Bollier exposes the audacious
attempts of companies to appropriate medical breakthroughs, public
airwaves, outer space, state research, and even the DNA of plants and
animals. Amazingly, these abuses often go unnoticed, Bollier argues,
because we have lost our ability to see the commons. Publicly funded
technological innovations create common wealth (cell phone airwaves,
internet addresses, gene sequences) at blinding speed, while an
economic atmosphere of deregulation and privatization ensures they
will be quickly bought and sold. In an age of market triumphalism,
does the notion of the commons have any practical meaning? Crisp and
revelatory, Silent Theft is a bold attempt to develop a new language
of the commons, a new ethos of commonwealth in the face of a market
ethic that knows no bounds.
More information about the Diggers350
mailing list