LETS Connect at Home | Contents Listing | Previous Page | Next Page
In my experience of mixing with LETS activists one vision is not shared by everyone. Further much energy goes into ideological discussions about who is right and manoeuvring for dominance rather than into finding ways to work together. I think this happens because we all do LETS because we "believe in it", and not out of self-interest, so there is no common point of focus to ground the discussions. This has been exacerbated when people have got frazzled by long hard work for little or no money and discussions become emotive. There are, sadly, a number of significant break downs in relations. It reflects badly, both on the integrity of the various groups working on LETS and on their effectiveness that we do not co-operate more. Though there has been much willingness from various parties at various times to resolve this.
Similar tensions exist within some LETSystems too, generally the fear that some elite or individual wants to control the system. I think this is symptomatic of the often unrecognised fact that LETSystems challenge many assumptions about organisations and ways of working together. The way I see it, and I hope someone will correct me if I am wrong, "a LETSystem is an association of individuals who agree to recognise a common currency in order to trade together for their personal benefit and without exploitation". What it is usually conceived of as is a "club" where people work together for a common aim. I think that is in part out of habit, though highlighted in the case where a local authority or some such has been involved - since they do have an aim for the LETSystem. This can have a number of effects, it generates committees and meetings, at the least these provide ground for fear of elites to grow. This may lead to strong disagreements which in some cases split LETSystems. Also there is often a cultu defined, e.g. green/alternative, which limits participation. The predominance of this, particularly in the UK media has marginalised LETSytems. Ultimately I don't see a problem with a variety of systems, particularly if they can collaborate through the medium of multiLETS.
Finally the problems with building up LETSystems themselves. Put simply the problems in recruiting to LETSystems is that people generally don't believe they will benefit and fear they will be ripped off. This means using LETS is a process of learning about yourself and others, usually but not always a pleasant one. It can take courage to be a pioneer too.
I feel there is a danger of LETS being written off because things don't happen fast enough. I would like to discourage that because I would rather LETS got support because it is a good idea than wait for things to get so bad that people do it themselves the hard way.
Scott Clifford Bradford LETS
The pattern is simple:
COMMUNITY - common ownership, no-one (and no committee) is "in charge".
PERSONAL - individuals have a choice in how they will live their lives - no coercive behaviour.
PRACTICAL - easy to implement conforms to the existing legal system.
But the pattern is often very difficult to see, because it corresponds to very little of our experience of life within the (so called) developed world.
Since conventional money, and therefore conventional economics, can lead us into great distress around both ownership and coercive behaviour, we must leave these behind when we enter the ethics of LETS.
Angus Soutar, LETSgo.
LETS Connect at Home | Contents Listing | Previous Page | Next Page