Social Commons

Description

Francine Mestrum (Global Social Justice):

“Why do we use this concept and what do we mean by it?

Firstly, the term ‘social commons’ is meant to be analogous with the protection of the so-called ecological ‘commons’. Defending ‘the commons’ means focusing on that which is shared by all human beings. It is the very foundation of collective life of humanity. It also means resisting the current commodification of everything and a breakaway from the dominant logic. The ‘social commons’ are human-made commons, meant to protect individuals and societies.

Secondly, the notion of ‘social protection’ is, paradoxically, being hollowed out by the new global initiatives of the ILO, the World Bank and other international organisations. Some of their proposals have an important potential for improving the situation of poor people, but others barely go beyond the already existing poverty reduction policies. We think that in the long term, more is needed.

Thirdly, we noticed that the concept of ‘social protection’ has a very low appeal to young people who were raised in a neoliberal world in which individual freedom and competitiveness are presented as being natural. But these same young people do understand the value of solidarity and sharing with others. Changing the concept of social protection to social commons may change the perception and the understanding of an idea that may positively shape their future. It may also open up new analytical insights and lead to a new praxis fit for the 21st century. Fourthly, and most importantly, we think that not only individuals need to be protected, but also societies. With its focus on competitiveness, neoliberalism is destroying social relationships, societies and communities. This collective dimension is particularly important when one knows that poverty is never a problem of poor people alone, but is the problem of societies with a skewed income distribution. It thus cannot be eradicated if the whole of society is not involved in solving it. This requires solidarity and active participation of all. Universalism will therefore be a major characteristic of ‘social commons’. This is based on the fact that social relationships are not purely contractual but are constitutive of each one’s individuality. Indeed, society is necessary for the survival of individuals.

Then again, what exactly do we mean by ‘social commons’? The concept is based on an understanding of all – unequal - interests in society and of our common responsibility and possibility to care for them. The ‘social commons’ focuses on the collective dimension of the protection that is needed and on the collective endeavour to achieve it. The ‘social commons’ are thus not ‘public goods’ but refer to the ‘common good’ – that what humans share. Their emergence requires a participative approach without neglecting the necessary involvement of the State. It is collective action and the result of this action. It is based on a belief that people can master their present and shape their future within the framework of mutual respect and respect for nature.

The ‘social commons’ also aims to end the fragmentation of different social, economic and solidarity rights into different bits and pieces defended by different, often competing, social movements. Close cooperation in order to protect the poor, men, women, children, aged or disabled people, formal, informal and precarious workers, with assistance, social security, public services, labour rights and environmental rights. Too many grey zones have been created in the recent past, blurring the lines between different categories of citizens. These old and new problems cannot be solved without a comprehensive approach, cooperation and solidarity.

It is also a transformative project by which we mean that its achievement will require changes in other sectors of society that cannot be delinked from it. In the first place, this is true for the economy, which will have to be re-arranged so as to satisfy all needs, focusing on the use value of goods an on non-exploitative labour. It is also true for democracy, which will have to make room for a broader participation of all members of society in many different sectors. The boundaries of the ‘social commons’ are open. They start with stopping the impoverishment processes and can lead to production, distribution and decision-making.

In the same vein as the concept of ‘buen vivir’, the ‘social commons’ wants to defend individual and collective live, as well as the life of nature. It is the right of societies to organize themselves and decide on the way they want to live. It is meant to give people and societies social and economic security, to satisfy their material and immaterial needs. It is a comprehensive approach aiming to offer bread and roses. It goes far beyond the rituals and symbolic actions of traditional societies, but is based on the same premises of protecting the collective life of citizens and societies.” (http://www.globalsocialjustice.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=463:promoting-the-social-commons&catid=10:research&Itemid=13)

Discussion

Promoting the Social Commons

by Francine Mestrum:

"All major international development organisations, from the World Bank over the ILO and the European Commission, plan to promote social protection in all developing countries. This may seem bizarre, since, at the same time, social protection mechanisms are being dismantled in the region where they first came about: Western Europe and Scandinavia. It is important to know, then, that words do not have the same meaning for all, and the ‘social protection’ of the World Bank is not the same as ‘social protection’, let us say in Sweden. In other words, there are no ‘welfare states’ emerging in Africa. But these plans are now being implemented and social movements have largely been absent from the debates. Where are the alternatives? What can we do to avoid social protection being at the service of markets?

In today’s world, more than one billion people are extremely poor, almost half of the world’s population is just poor, and inequality is soaring. In many parts of the world, wages and labour conditions are particularly bad, and social services are hardly available. This means we do need social protection, though we should be prepared to re-think the formulas that were invented a century ago. Political, economic and social circumstances are now very different from what they were after the second world war, and no country can find solutions and implement them efficiently on its own. Popular demands have also changed.

We should be looking, then, for a new paradigm that offers economic and social security for all. We may think in the direction of ‘social commons’, since the needs of people, wherever they live and in whatever political or economic regime, are all the same. We might find divergent solutions, but there will always be common characteristics. ‘Social commons’ aim at achieving a common good, a situation in which people are free, equal and emancipated, in a world based on human rights and solidarity." (common good mailing list, March 2014)