The 'Gift Economy'

By Tim Jenkin

Usually when people talk about the 'gift economy' it is with reference to our hunter-gatherer ancestors who exchanged things by giving to each other rather than by selling as we do it today in the age of money.

When humans were in a position to live off the bounty of nature without having to produce their own means of existence there would still have been a desire to exchange things. Tribes living near the sea might have developed methods of catching fish while those living inland might have had access to fruits not available at the coast. As there was no trading as we understand it because there was no exchange medium (money), the bounty of one area would have been 'exchanged' for the bounty of another simply by the one side 'giving' to the other. Such giving was not a one way process as the 'gifts' came with implied obligations, usually in the form of the expectation of a return gift. It was a chicken and egg situation where it was impossible to say which side was the initiator of the gift cycle.

The giving of gifts were not random one-sided events. They were actions in response to a perceived need or an implied or explicit request. Gifts are responses to needs but are given voluntarily rather than under duress.

The important thing about gifts is that they are circular and continuous. A response gift does not have to be equivalent to a received gift. The circularity ensures that in the long run there is equivalence, not at each stage. Giving was thus a way of ensuring a supply of what was needed. As the focus was on the giving rather than the receiving, the gift economy was also a way of ensuring harmony, concern, compassion and the even dissipation of energy.

In our familiar one-way, money-based exchange economy gifting makes no sense. We do not expect anyone to respond to our needs so we fulfil them by exchanging a symbolic value-equivalent of what we require (money) for the goods and services that we need. Every exchange (money for goods from the buyer's perspective; goods for money from the seller's perspective) has to be exactly equivalent because each transaction is an end in itself, not part of a continuous, reciprocal, mutually beneficial process as it is in the 'gift economy'. The flow of energy is stop-start rather than being a continuous stream. As the transfer of goods is uni-directional and there are no expectations of reciprocity, the money half of the goods for money/money for goods loop can clog the works if it is hoarded.

The idea of giving in order to receive is completely alien and counter-intuitive to participants of the money-based economy. As every exchange is intermediated by money and the focus on both sides is on receiving, there is no bond between buyers and sellers and there is no concern for the other. This leads to the dissolution of social bonds and to a focus on the self.

It is the greatest fear of those with something to sell that they will not receive their equivalence in money, and of those with money that they will not receive the equivalence in terms of the amount they want to spend. It is for this reason that those with something to sell are tempted to gain more in terms of money than the value of what they have to sell and those with money will do everything to ensure that the value of what they receive is greater than the amount of money they wish to tender. In short, everyone is fearful of being 'ripped off'. Money-based exchange guarantees mistrust, bad faith and corruption.

The CES is an attempt to reinstate the 'gift economy' in the 21st century so that we can bring back the spirit of generosity where the greater pleasure is in giving rather than receiving.

In the CES there is no intermediation between giving and receiving as there is with monetary exchange. When you 'give' something (sell) you receive nothing in return except the expectation to be able, at a later time, to receive something from someone else. That something needn't be the equivalent of what you gave but over the long term you want to be sure that you receive more or less the equivalent of what you have given (i.e. your balance averages at around zero).

When you receive something (make a 'purchase') you also give nothing in exchange for it, but by receiving you have either reduced your claim or expectation from the community (if you are in positive balance) or you are now obliged to provide 'gifts' to others - you have an obligation or commitment to the community. Your 'gifts' back to the community, of whatever value, will reduce or negate your obligation or place you in the position where others are obligated to you.

This cycle of giving and receiving can only continue if there is constant giving. The system becomes constipated if you fear that by giving you will not receive.

So CES users, please do not bring over from the monetary exchange system your habit of concentrating on the receiving or the getting. Place your focus on the giving and then you will see that there really is abundance and not scarcity. When you include money in the price of your offerings it is a sign that you do not trust the system because you are thinking more of the receiving than the giving. Money corrupts the 'gift cycle'.

Give, have faith, and you will receive abundance!

27 May 2010

« Back