wspademan said:

Liam Rattray said:

It is an impossible artifact of neocolonialism to "empower those in need." …Consider rephrasing

 

---

 
Liam, Thanks for the suggestion. I'm not sure what the objection is to "empower" or to "those in need". The whole point of Common Good Bank is to empower all of us economically by giving ourselves the right (and responsibility) to decide what gets invested in. This will of course make the biggest difference to those of us who are currently the most disenfranchised, that is the most "in need" of empowerment. Suggest a rephrasing?

I agree with Liam.  The term "to empower" implies that you own the power to begin with and it is yours to give.  We already have the right and responsibility to decide what we invest in regardless of our level of need.  Change the language, please.  I like the idea but this language just raises red flags–neocolonialism as well as paternalistic liberalism.

do you have solar loans for hawaii

Common Good Bank profits will go to a Community Fund to advance the common good — half locally and half to empower those in need elsewhere.

It is an impossible artifact of neocolonialism to "empower those in need." All we can do as priviledged folk is to help provide access to resources to those in need and to stand in solidarity through their struggle; realizing that their liberation is intimately tied up in ours. Consider rephrasing the community profits section.

Good day,
Liam

I just clicked on the link in the email you sent me that says:

Be one of our 4,000 founding depositors

Sign up at http://www.commongoodbank.com

But what I got to was this page. If you want depositors, send them to a page that allows them to sign up and make a deposit!

Money (greed, wealth accumulation) is the root of all evil.
Property is theft.
Indigenous peoples around the world have been destroyed or put on reservations because they did not practice wealth accumulation or believe that what Spirit has created man can take away.
The corporations own the planet. Worse than that, they own the minds of most of humanity.
In the face of that ultimate corruption not about to go away, a Common Good Bank is the best we can do.

How long before this bank is up and running?

A concept with fundamental understanding of the nature of economics in social structures. While environmental issues AND CRITIQUES are integral to societal well-being, too often the ECONOMIC ASPECTS ARE IGNORED.In a future society we need to build, the economic relationships involved in a better, more equitable model are crucial. Cooperative, democratic ownership and managment of all social production is the only way to ensure real democracy…civic (where we live) as well as economic (where we work). This bank idea might be one of the forerunners of such new approaches and new paradigms. We commend you and will add your site to our LinksList. See our model for a new society while you visit. Ask questions, make comments. Your outreach is so encouraging….your thorough analysis of Capitalism essential to replacing it! Only post-Capitalism can we have a truly liberated socity based on democracy, green energy, industry, building & transportarion, We must mature our focus on building a NEW SOCIETY. CommonGood Bank is a possible first step! Thanks, PFANS

I love your URL and its discussion of money. But …
Why "money"? Most cultures have lived on the concept of "reciprocity." Even the ancestors of the EuroAmericans used reciprocity to produce and distribute good and services. That is concentration was on the needed goods and services needed for the common good. Every individual produced and distributed goods and services needed by others. There was no buying or selling. The individual, or cooperative, gave what they produced to whoever needed. By doing so they earned the respect and cooperation of all other members of their network. The more thy gave the more they were given. (like it says in the Bible).

Today many cultures still practice reciprocity. In fact most families have some practices of non money production and distribution. A full economic system based on reciprocity may be a long way to go. But giving more or ourselves to our community, and exchanging gifts with other communities may be a way to revive the concept of working for the common good.

Below is a book review I produced for a newsletter many months ago.

Bill Ellis

THE FABLE OF L’HOMO ECONOMICUS is destroyed by Dominique Temple and Mireille Chabal in La Réciprocité et La Naissance des Valeurs Humaines (Éditions L’Harmattan, 5-7 rue de L’école Polytechnique, F-75005 Paris FRANCE, 1995, in French). Modern Economics and the EuroAmerican culture are based on the assumed reality of homo economicus. That is, that the only motivation of humans is material self-interest. This book examines all cultures throughout history, including our own modern culture, and demonstrates that human motivations and human values have been distorted only in the last couple of hundred years, and more vehemently in the last few decades, to become based on values which are destroying the humanity and life on Earth. Reciprocity is more fundamental and more friendly to both humans and nature.

Reciprocity is the antithesis of exchange or selling. Reciprocity, or “gifting,” has taken on many forms in different cultures. In some it is imbedded in religion. People produce and distribute goods and services in celebration of their spiritual beliefs. Their work is a gift to the gods, to the Earth, and to humanity, without thought of material return. In other cultures production is for the common good. That is, people see themselves imbedded in their families and communities. They exist only because of their relationships to other people and their bioregion. And these relationships depend on the productive role they play — how much they can support and give to society. In still others, material welfare is paramount; but one gains insurance of her or his material well-being by giving to others. “To him who gives shall be given.” Each person gains prestige in society by how much s/he gives. That prestige demands reciprocity to the giver and to the family of the giver. The more one impoverishes himself in betterment of the community the more the community is beholden to the giver.

This reciprocity on which almost all cultures are based is uniquely vilified by neoliberal economic theory which refuses to recognize that production and distribution can be based on anything but greed and exchange — giving up something only to gain something else. This distorted economic theory of exchange goes well beyond just “the market.” Economic reasoning has invaded sociology, education, politics, ethics and the law. Homo Economicus is believed to base all values and judgments on economic exchange values, what one can gain materially. It is only in this distorted Western society that reciprocity has been subjugated to the concept of exchange.

Bronislaw Malinowski, Claude Levi-Straus, Marcel Mauss, Marshall Sahlins and other anthropologists have shown the deep roots of reciprocity; Aristotle, Homer, Hobbes, and other political philosophers trace reciprocity from the Greeks as the base of our Western society; and Hegel, Adam Smith, Durkheim and Polanyi and other economists, describe reciprocity’s relevance to the age we are in. But it’s the future which really concerns Temple and Chabal. Money, exchange, and globalism have replaced the human values inherent in reciprocity with motivations which are leading to social, ecological, economic and political destruction. Reciprocity exists deep in ourselves, our families, and our communities; but it is suppressed by our belief system and its resulting social institutions. We see reciprocity in President Bush’s “thousand points of light”, in the burgeoning NGOs around the world, in volunteerism, in our familles, in our communities, and in many grassroots social innovations. Our future can be assured only if we release this constructive force of reciprocity. Or as the authors end this book, “Si l’esclave veut etre libre, il ne lui faut pas seulement différer la mort, mais dominer sa propre vie par le souce de celle d’autrui, maitriser la vie avant qu’elle ne le condamne a mort.”

The opportunity to participate in a ground-leveling project has been a lifelong dream of mine. I look forward to having some small part in it.

Continual, never-ending growth is bad, though… You cannot grow forever, nor should you want to. That is one of the problems with our current financial system and why there is such a division between the rich and the poor. There is a finite amount of resource and power on the planet. The more you have, the less others have.

Perhaps not losing money in the beginning is good… But eventually, growth should stop. Because if we (all of us, any group, anything in reality) try to grow to infinity, we will necessarily fail. And that failure will be more painful the closer we have gotten to it.