Access to Contexts – Hoarding Vs Intentional Commons , in social networks
“Authoritarian Individualism” ( ? )
– or the cultural results of “Competitive Individualistic Culture” ( ? )
Is the ( provocative ? ) term I used today,
in an exchange with a friend living in Brussels,
for expressing the “hoarding of opportunities”
related to our shared context.
More specifically, a perceived “need of control” on surrounding contexts,
which can have as consequence
the hoarding of access to “space” and a potential “flow” of interdependencies.
Instead of a potential for inclusiveness,
enabling personal choice of ones own attention
without a specific sense of need for hoarding of one’s context.
A mode of “contextual property”,
which in my definition,
can enable a right of access to contexts we facilitated to converge or create,
as long as the other does not hoard, but contributes to such context.
Some kind of “copyleft/access” license which does not enable the other to hoard what we share in the first place.
—
In other words, the issue I underline may come from
a difference in “borders” set in our realities:
Example:
I may choose to constantly keep my reality “open”, day and night,
including all my resources, knowledge, social networks, and access to living spaces,
while my friend’s “borders”, and that of other people I met in a city such as Brussels,
currently seem to be limited to the direct perceived personal interests, defined in time and space by my friend,
and more often related to direct consumption of leisure opportunities,
which, according to my interpretation, complement while sustaining a lifestyle
of “psychological and emancipatory deficiencies”
of an apparently extrinsically motivated conditional working lifestyle,
compensated by access to an opportunity inter-dependency space conditioned by monetary transactions.
In yet other words,
my friend’s experience of an individualist lifestyle
seems to be different from my individualist lifestyle.
In my own case, All my resources are set available to a network of people “I choose” to connect with.
Usually people I share common intentions, values, objectives with.
In other words, I can set myself as an operational access node within a “intentional commons”.
The big question is “how to enable synergies” between such two modes,
while not enabling the control of “intentional commons” forms of autonomous / free association individualistic lifestyles,
by “conditions for participation” of a “hoarding type of individualism” ?
Conditions often related to personal consumption and gratification on the moment,
and not necessarily staying at the service of opportunity making towards shared intentions.
Such “individualist authoritarianism”, according to my own experiences,
often limits the sets of “choices” within the “conditions” and norms of such forms of “individualistic” memes.