This is my second-to-last blog post for this Cape Town trip. I will
include a more reflective post in the near future in order to complete my class
assignment. I had hoped this post would be as wonderful as the others because
my experience was so awesome, all the way to the end.
I saw the Big5 animals on a Safari, got a little to close to
an Ostrich, saw Cape Penguins and experienced the point where the Atlantic and
Indian oceans meet.
During these last couple of weeks I was able to work a lot
more with Lindela on building the future for BEEP. We worked to help the
students and leaders to succeed however possible. This experience was simply
great. Here is a picture from Kendall and I’s last hike. It
was much like the first, except this time it was just the two of us. No fox
suit.
I would have posted more pictures, but I really didn’t have
the time. I was so caught up in the trip that I forgot to keep up with my blog.
I also forgot how to take care of myself, which is a story for another time and place.
Instead of a mass of pictures, I will leave with this post with a small journal
entry I wrote for my other class. I think it sums up why I love BEEP so much,
and also why it can be so frustrating to work within.
Here is the entry:
“Against "Efficiency": A Rigorous Defense of BEEP as
an Alternative to Neoliberalism
I was meant to criticize BEEP in this journal, but I am not
going to. I truly believe that BEEP is amazing. Instead of criticizing BEEP, I
am going to carefully lay out the most obvious criticism of BEEP, explain the
implicit assumptions of this critique and then explain why they are wrong.
"BEEP is Inefficient"
From the outside in, BEEP seems extremely disorganized. People
are often "late", no one seems to be "in control" of what
is being taught, no one seems to be delegating to anyone and subsequently, sometimes
many people are just sitting in the office or elsewhere doing absolutely
nothing that is "productive." The value based assumptions of each of
these arguments are based in the importance of maximizing productive time,
creating hierarchal structures of power distribution, perfectly delegating work
and finally, becoming constantly productive.
The assumption in the efficiency
critique of BEEP is that maximizing time, perfect delegation, hierarchal power
structures and ultimately, constant productivity are good. I disagree. These
three assumptions form the basis of the final conclusion of these
"efficiency" critics: BEEP cannot "grow." This leads me to
the focus questions for this journal:
-Why is "efficiency" good?
-Where does "efficiency" come from?
-Who does "efficiency" benefit?
-What would it mean for the world to move beyond "efficiency"?
A simple critique of maximizing productive time:
A BEEP where everyone maximized their time would have no room for the hours of
discussion that happen between the members of BEEP. Then BEEP would not be a
community, but a factory producing new opportunities for Lindela (and maybe
some of the other top-tier members), but would work everyone to the bone just
to acheive that.
A simple critique of perfect delegation:
A BEEP where Lindela from the top perfectly delegated would mean no one in the
organization would have the agency to craft the meaning of BEEP and what it is
all about BEEP. They might be able to make small decisions, but Lindela would
be the captain, running a ship where the sailors were trained to do what their
told first and think later.
A simple critique of power heirarchies:
A BEEP where power was distributed from the top down would mean Lindela would
have perfect control. He could tell every single person what to do to achieve
his own ends, and they couldn't say no. For the kids who don't make money from
BEEP, that might be okay. However, for the people whose livelihoods depend on
Lindela, this would make him their master. It also would consolidate Lindela's
power in defining the organization. A fundamental part of BEEP is that the
people on the bottom and everywhere in between have the agency to define BEEP
however they so choose. A power heirarchy would slowly sap that agency, from
the top-down.
A simple critique of constant productivity:
A BEEP where people are constantly productive would serve Lindela's ends by
forcing his workers to do everything they can to maximize his goals at their
own expense. This is the fundamental basis of inequality. It would make BEEP a
parasite, sucking the life out of its members to push Lindela to the top (and
maybe one or two others under him, if their lucky).
"Efficiency" for whom?
This "efficiency" is fundamentally meant to help the elite at the
expense of everyone else. Occupy Wall Street was a joke, but at least they got
one thing right. "Efficiency" is premised on destroying the 99% to
build up the 1%. A BEEP premised on "efficiency" would propel Lindela
to the top, and destroy its members in the process. Luckily, the critics
haven't got to Lindela yet.
BEEP: A structure of mutual production
BEEP is such a mess in the view of neoliberal "efficiency" critics
for one reason: it is premised not on parasitic production, but on mutual
production. This is not against efficiency in the abstract, but what we mean
when we say "Efficiency" as a ideogical super-structure. BEEP is
about efficiency in mutual growth. Growth together; a concept that could literally save
the world."
