Looking Forward. By Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel Go to Table of Contents 3. Egalitarian Consumption

... the moment a man gets money so many men are trying to get it away from him that in a little while he regards the whole human race as his enemy and he generally thinks that they could be rich too if they only attend to business as he has. Under stand, I am not blaming these people... We must remember that these rich men are naturally produced. Do not blame them. Blame the system. -Robert Ingersoll A Lay Sermon "...by allowing groups to first decide collective consumption, the system ensures that "public goods" will be"purchased" with proportionate input from everyone affected before private decisions are made." Good sense is of all things in the world most equally distributed, for everybody thinks he is so well supplied with it, that even those most difficult to please in all other matters never desire more of it than they already possess. -Rene Descartes The Discourse On Method "All we are saying is that since each person's consumption affects the whole community, people operating in solidarity with one another may wish to express their feelings about unusual, socially intrusive or dangerous requests. "

Consumption Councils Participatory consumption will be organized into a system of increasingly larger consumers' councils and federations. Inside each council consumers make decisions collectively, sensitive to the right of individuals not to be bullied by majorities and to the importance of promoting variety. Clear communication between councils allows collective oversight without domination or infringement on privacy. Each individual determines what she or he wants in light of the well-being of the workers who produce what one hopes to consume. In neighborhood consumers' councils members discuss the implications of consumption proposals for workers and formulate their requests accordingly. For now, we assume that allocation procedures help neighborhood councils know what allowance is available for improvements in the neighborhood and for private individuals' purchases. Three principles guide consumption decision making: 1. Decisions about collective consumption will be reached collectively and judged by all affected councils. 2. Decisions about budget allocations to each council member will depend on past histories, work experiences, and needs, subject to collective oversight to ensure equity and to allow experimentation. 3. Decisions about what individuals wish to consume will be subject to collective criticism by fellow council members, though with specific guarantees for preserving individual freedoms and privacy. In our model, each neighborhood council is part of a larger ward, county, region, state, and national federation of councils. Larger units reach collective consumption decisions first since their choices often have implications for what lower unit and individual needs might be. For example, the decision for a county to establish a fully equipped athletic facility would naturally affect whether a neighborhood would want its own small athletic facility and whether individuals would want athletic equipment of their own. Thus, by allowing groups to first decide collective consumption, the system ensures that "public goods" will be "purchased" with proportionate input from everyone affected before private decisions are made. Private decisions, in turn, will be made in light of collective choices. Participatory Policies When people assess their wants and request products, what norms apply? What rules protect personal rights? Since money in its usual sense isn't used, a point we will address in more detail in coming chapters, what assures equity? How are the well-being of the collective and each individual balanced? If you think about how you would want others to relate to your consumption and how you would want to be able to relate to theirs, "natural norms" readily emerge. If you were seeking more than average, you would think it fair for others to ask why you should be allowed to have more than they. Similarly, you would want the right to make such inquiries of anyone who was requesting more than average. We can imagine many explanations that would cause us to accept someone else's above-average request. For example, someone might have unusual needs owing to illness or to the requirements of some short-term project she was undertaking. In that case she might offer to consume less later in order to consume more now; in effect borrowing from later rights. Or someone might have consumed less in the past, thereby justifying above-average consumption now. If a person did request more than average, she might be questioned, and if her answers were unconvincing, she would be asked to moderate her request. Even if someone ordered an average allotment or less, questions might arise about why someone would want items that seemed personally unsafe, just as families might raise such questions now. But no individual would be required to provide answers to such inquiries, nor would such requests be deniable by consumption council partners on such grounds. Indeed, the process could be anonymous, with the details of proposals entered in private and assessed without names attached so that there would be no built-in carte-blanche, busybody mode or even an excessively normative method of thinking about consumption. All we are saying is that since each person's consumption affects the whole community, people operating in solidarity with one another may wish to express their feelings about unusual, socially intrusive or dangerous requests. If a consumption request indicates that I have an alcoholic neighbor, while anonymity will prevent me from knowing who, I can still urge restraint and counseling to the anonymous individual. The sanctity of each person's choice is thus preserved by their privacy and their right to consume anything that won't endanger others up to their budgetary allotment, and also by the right to consume, if preferred, entirely as an individual by being a one-person council, though such behavior would entail losing many collective conveniences. On the other hand, the collective's right to adjudicate excessive requests and to argue against antisocial or otherwise deleterious consumption is also preserved. We can now describe a first pair of norms for consumption behavior. 1. To guarantee equity there must be a measure of average per capita consumption for individuals, neighborhoods, regions, and states, and there must be a way to ensure that individuals, neighborhoods, regions, and states don't consume above average amounts unless they receive permission from others to do so. Requests for goods and services that place an above average burden on society's productive potentials may be rejected by consumer councils on equity grounds. 2. To guarantee the right to privacy and personal control of one's purchases, average- and below-average requests must not be subject to aggressive oversight and, should they want to suffer the losses involved in forsaking the benefits of collective consumption goods, individuals must be free to act as their own one-person consumption councils. At first, this system may sound excessively time-consuming or intrusive. As we proceed, we will see how it will actually take less time and respect each actor more than capitalist consumption does. As for accounting, though it sounds like it would require a traditional market pricing and payment system, we will soon present alternative allocation procedures more consistent with participatory goals.