Of course, most of the time, once the first notions on the subject have been integrated, we quickly understand the relevance of COMMONS for the Collective part. Whether for contributions to the Company in general or for the actors concerned in the sense of the collective, all persons, groups, the Community.
But we must NOT reduce the impact of COMMONS to this aspect of the Collective alone!
This would suggest that COMMONS do not profoundly influence the lives of all of us as individuals.
Currently, for the best to set up and build, COMMONS are the most appropriate and relevant form for the creation of a New Civilization. Because the most appropriate economic and social organisations for one era are not the same as those for another, which will itself have its own context and developments to put in place. It just so happens that at this particular moment, at this particular crossroads of evolutions, or possible regression[In case of doubt about this eventuality, refresh your News aggregator], COMMONS are the most relevant way.
Because not only do they allow a better Collective, but also (and I am even trying, or even forcing to write) and above all they allow the best for individuals in their own lives. The strength of the Collective is of no interest if it does not lead to a better for each individual. That is the purpose of this Collective. It only makes sense if it makes it possible to set up, for each individual, his Best Specific. Everyone has a better specific. Some may call it career objectives, personal development, life choices, others Destiny. It doesn’t matter what the word means as long as the reality of the individual’s achievement of the best is there. And COMMONS are the best way to allow and facilitate this personal accomplishment. And this in three forms:
First, everything that is a Common Good, shared services; whether at the local, National or Universal level; is an additional layer of resources, well-being, ease, civilizational evolution for each of us. Whether it is the invention of electricity, or even older, of running water (which, in countries that are equipped with it, we no longer perceive the “magic” that allows us to have abundant water in our homes with a simple gesture), all inventions (Automobile, refrigerator, vacuum cleaner, washing machine, television, computer, telephones, Internet etc…..) passed into the Public Domain (in the sense that no Company has a monopoly on the manufacture of the type of object or service) allow an improvement in the life of all human beings who use them. Whether it is time saved, physical energy expended less, efficiency more, tasks that could not be done before, etc…. COMMONS of this type have made it possible to improve Human Civilization in general. And likewise all the norms of security, social minimums (Pensions, paid leave, medical insurance, etc…) are also forms of COMMONS (Even if we have not yet understood much that these Norms, Laws, decrees, circulars, are indeed COMMONS of Civilization).
It is clear from these examples that the individual impacts of COMMONS are real and relevant. But they are exerted through the benefits coming from the Collective, from COMMONS from which everyone benefits. But the presence and existence of COMMONS will also, in the long term (because it has to be implemented), allow each individual to participate differently in the Goods and Services Production process.
Because secondly, in addition to the individual benefits of COMMONS, in a world where they prevail over other organizations, there are opportunities for each individual to exercise their full creative potential. The existence of COMMONS or the possibility of creating them will make it possible for each of us to better express and live our creative potential by allowing a better compensation (Fair and equitable) for our actions. Indeed, if the individual carries on his activity within the framework of a COMMONS, he does not carry it out for the (too often alone) benefit of one or more shareholders. But for himself. In the context of a COMMONS, the benefits of a person’s activities are proportional to his or her efforts and creative abilities. Let us take the example of a fishing area dedicated to COMMONS with very precise operating rules, in particular to ensure the renewal of natural resources by setting maximum catch limits. Any individual with a fishing concession in COMMONS will be able, depending on his work, to obtain a share of the resources, and the income that goes with it, in proportion to his efforts. He fishes a little, he will get a little fish and therefore a little income from the sale. He fishes moderately, he will get an average income. He fishes as much as possible of what is allowed, without exceeding the quota (remember that one of the first objectives of Physical COMMONS is to manage natural resources over time), he obtains the maximum possible income.
One could argue that this limitation of income, due to the preservation of natural resources, would be an obstacle to maximizing possible income per individual. Let’s say that the maximum fish quota is 100 Units per year (no matter what the unit, 1 fish, 1 quintal, 1 ton) and that a talented, voluntary fisherman reaches this quota in 3 months. Wouldn’t there then, by the very form of COMMONS, be a limitation on income per person? A type of organization that would limit genius and individual work capacity? To that 3 answers.
1) Isn’t it better to focus on the sustainability of a Resource rather than its hasty plundering in the short term? As we have seen before, this is precisely one of COMMONS’ objectives. Some behaviours are antagonistic to this functioning and must therefore be blocked.
2) Moderate, or at least regulated, gaps (Because what does it mean to be moderate? a gap of 1 to 3, 1 to 10?) in income between actors is it not desirable from the point of view of justice, ethics and social issues?
3) The contribution of the New COMMONS is decisive in the argumentation of this question. If the individual in question feels frustrated or limited in not having the maximum earnings he thinks he can have in a COMMONS because of the intrinsic regulations present there, nothing prevents that individual from participating in MANY different Commons. ! Whether it is other Natural COMMONS, such as forests or mining operations. Or COMMONS of other types such as Digital COMMONS. We will give an example of this type of COMMONS below. Thus, if his strength, ability, genius, allows him to quickly reach a quota in a COMMONS, nothing will prevent him from exercising his talent in another one or in several others.
So the Commons allow each individual to express their creative abilities and reap the rewards.