from:
CROSSOVER SUMMER
CAMP 2002
WORKSHOP READER

Free Cooperation - Utopia
with Christoph Spehr

"It's the end of the left as we know it (and we
should feel fine)" - The theory of free
cooperation

The necessary, fundamental transformation of left
theory and practice is still incomplete. Radical
insights and important critiques (against any form
of objectivism, hierarchy, authoritarian politics)
are, on the contrary, being challenged by ideas
that we should go back to "the economy", "the
social question", "hard facts" etc. ("the young hard
thinking", as Claudia Bernhard has put it). On the
other hand, a post-modernist "anything goes" is
not what we have in mind, either. We can't accept,
for example, that every form of social order is
alright because it's "a question of culture" and
cannot be critisized.

The theory of free cooperation is an attempt to
give answers to questions such as: If we let go of
"scientific objectivism", what can our critique be
based on? If we drop ideas like "the full
development of the forces of production will create
a free society", what is our utopian horizon? If the
many different social struggles and movements
cannot be subsumed under a single analysis or
category, is there a common link between them?
When the "great narratives" of the 20th century
are deconstructed and de-legitimised, when there
is no more theory that "fits everything" - is there
still a "collective story", as Gayatri Spivak has put
it? And, most of all: how do we act, in real life?
Such a theory, of course, is nothing that can be
"invented" by any one person. It appears: in the
practice and the ideas of social movements
worldwide which have challenged oppression as
well as the blind spots of traditonal leftist thinking
and politics. But there is work to be done in order
to articulate this as a theory; as a framework for
communicating and for solidarity, and as a tool for
the clarification of aims and for action.

The theory of free cooperation opposes coerced
cooperation and propagates free cooperation. It is
based on the assumptions that:

- Nobody can decide for others what is good for
them or what they want.

- People should be taken serious in what they say
they want. (One should not operate with terms like
"real needs", "real meaning", "manipulation".
There's nothing hidden.)

- The distribution of property, access, rights etc. is
a historical fact, it has no higher legitimation,
because everything is based on the collectivity
and historicity of labour and cooperation. There is
no "just" distribution that could be recognized and
realized so that all would be equal.

- Cooperation is a useful term because it does not
divide into "production" and "reproduction".
Cooperation is not just work, for example; you can
also cooperate by accepting what others do and
this should be considered as an active role. The
term cooperation considers that you cannot
exactly mark any outcome as "this is the effect of
what this single person has done" (like the term
"work" suggests). Likewise, "coerced cooperation"
is open for aspects of domination as well as of
exploitation.

- In the end it all comes down to the rules: Who
makes them? who can change them? who can
challenge them? what power do different people
or groups have to influence or develop them?
According to the theory of free cooperation, a
cooperation is free if:

1. all rules can be challenged. There are no "holy
rules" for the cooperation that cannot be touched.

2. all members of this cooperation have the same
power to influence or develop the rules. This
power is not given by formal structures of
decision-making; it has to be the real power to
influence the rules because all members are free
to withdraw their cooperation, leave the
cooperation, set limits to their cooperation or give
conditions for their cooperation.

3. the "price" of this (what you lose when the
cooperation splits up, becomes looser, or does
not work fully) is similar and possible for all
members of the cooperation. Otherwise it would
be simply blackmail and not a free cooperation.
You can see how this works in children playing
with another. They cooperate; then they disagree.
One quits ("I don't play with you any more"). They
split and play with others; or (mostly) they come
together and play on, with changed rules, so that
both are content with it. This is free cooperation
and they just do it. So free cooperation is a sort of
bargaining, but it does not need a special
articulation or given structure; it is an action, done
by body and mind. You do not need to attend my
workshop or read my books to do it.
What, then, is the political left all about? My thesis
is that this is exactly the distinction between "left"
and "right":

1. a "left" (emancipatory) position affirms and
defends all three conditions of free cooperation, in
every given cooperation, on all levels of the social
- whereas a "right" (counter-emancipatory)
position denies them.

2. the third condition of free cooperation, the
"price" of splitting up or of withdrawing
cooperation being equal and possible for all
members, is the central focus of leftist politics: an
ongoing,neverending task of changing rules and
material conditions so that this equality of the
"price" is maintained, on all levels of the social, in
every given cooperation.

3. "What happens then, is all up to you." (The
Matrix)
From this and from the study of social movements
and struggles of the last decades, some more can
be said about how leftist/emancipatory politics
work: winding down power structures, instead of
"using" them; articulating one's own concepts of
bargaining and decision-making; developing
social abilities that are needed for that; aiming at
critical democratisations that avoid the mistakes of
liberal/formal democratization; organising people
for independence. Given cooperations have to be
reformed so that "who cooperates/works shall also
decide"; that people who are silenced and hidden
in their cooperation (we use their workforce and
cooperation, but we do not let them decide or
bargain about it) get a voice and get power; that
forms of division of labour are cooperative
structures (some people enable others to do
special things) and have to be controlled from
"below".

The workshop is open for everybody. In the
beginning I'll give an input (about half an hour).
Then we'll discuss it. In the afternoon, I'd like to
talk about your experiences and my experiences
with "coerced cooperation" and "free cooperation",
taking concrete examples. My essay "Gleicher als
Andere. Eine Grundlegung der freien
Kooperation" ("More equal than others. A
foundation of free cooperation") can be
downloaded (only in German) here:
www.rosaluxemburgstiftung.de/Einzel/Preis/rlsprei
s.pdf.

But it's not necessary to read it before (of course,
I'd be happy if you do, but it's about 80 pages).
I'd also like to show 2 short videos, "Time is on my
side" and "Vorwärts, ihr freien Schweine" that we
made in Bremen (we find them quite funny). If we
have a beamer or something, we could use them
as an "opener" or as an "refresher" after the
break; otherwise we could show them in the
evening.

Who am I? I'm 39, male, white, have 2 children
who teach me a lot about cooperation, live in
Bremen. Together with others I run the "alaska -
Zeitschrift für Internationalismus"; we also
organise public meetings and conferences (e.g.
the "out of this world"-congress about science-
fiction and utopian perspectives). I write books
("Die Aliens sind unter uns. Herrschaft und
Befreiung im demokratischen Zeitalter" was the
last to be published), give lectures and readings.

You can e-mail me at:
yetipress@aol.com