Life After Hierarchy
December 30th, 2006For both my personal life and society in general I oppose hierarchy when it is unjustified. It turns out that in almost all cases in the world where we find hierarchal authority of one entity over another it is unjustified. For example, the corporate control over the world’s resources or the state’s control over its citizens. This heirarchal control is traditionally enforced traditionally by violence, but in civilized societies more sophisticated measures are used such as propaganda or what Noam Chomsky refers to as manufacturing consent. When working to root this societal structure out, it is probably necessary to have an alternative in mind.
Here are a couple of visions of a non-hierarchal world:
Jeff Vail describes (almost) self-sufficient communal units he calls rhizomes. It is a very interesting and radical vision for the world. In one example of the rhizome implementation, Vail describes a hamlet system, where individual agriculture communities consist of around 20 people and are semi-dependent on their nearby and distant neighbors.
My belief is that self-sufficiency and localization, although often desirable for various reasons, are not requirements for removing hierarchy. For me it possible to imagine a society (even on a global scale) that is run cooperatively that distributes resources fairly and equally to those who need it, while communities contribute in the corresponding ways. Michael Albert among others have written in detail what this might look like with Parecon. A Parecon society would look radically different than our current capitalist one, although it wouldn’t necessarily resemble a Rhizome network.
I believe that communication plays a key role in either vision. Jeff Vail states a preference for elegant technology which would not include electricity. He admits, however, that electricity is pretty much a requirement for the communication technology necessary for a sustainable rhizome network.
A non-hierarchal communications model may be the best fit for a non-hierarchal society. This technology may fit under what MIT calls viral communications.
I am currently interested in wireless mesh networks, a prime example of viral communications.
These networks move control to the end nodes. They are also adaptable, self-repairing, and completely scalable.
Because of their cheap cost and ease of use they are an ideal candidate for bridging the digital divide which I believe could have a democratizing effect on society bringing us one step closer to either of these visions. I am currently working with NetLeap, a group attempting to bring affordable access to people Atlanta using this approach.