will on david
will ruddick (@wor) on david graeber
via michel bauwens tweet [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/1985515946036118027]:
* “the fable of barter’s primacy”.
Will Ruddick (@wor) reminds us of the liberating presence of David Graeber:
https://willruddick.substack.com/p/david-graebers-everyday-communism
(I was lucky enough to spend 4 days with David during our CSG deep dives)
“My first introduction to Graeber began where so much of my confusion began: money and debt. Debt: The First 5,000 Years illuminated…. Debt, he argued, started as a promise between people, and capitalism twisted that promise into a cudgel: “debt is the perversion of a promise.” He was the first to fully disproved for me the the fable of barter’s primacy, and freed my imaginations – so that everyday acts of generosity, trust, and obligation could come back into focus as the real ground of economic life.”
notes/quotes from will’s nov 2025 post (linked above):
David Graeber’s everyday communism
Gratitude to a fellow pirate for helping us find our way
To me it felt like David Graeber was handing me back a tool I forgot we all had: the human capacity to make the world otherwise..t “The ultimate, hidden truth of the world,” he reminded, “is that it is something that we make, and could just as easily make differently.”
graeber make it diff law et al
Rereading him now feels like sitting again with a generous big brother – one who could burst myths and my long held beliefs with a laugh, then quietly pass the wrench so you could fix what actually mattered.My first introduction to Graeber began where so much of my confusion began: money and debt. Debt: The First 5,000 Years illuminated…. Debt, he argued, started as a promise between people, and capitalism twisted that promise into a cudgel: “debt is the perversion of a promise.” He was the first to fully disproved for me the the fable of barter’s primacy, and freed my imaginations – so that everyday acts of generosity, trust, and obligation could come back into focus as the real ground of economic life.
just not any form of m\a\p.. ie: obligation ness et al
He called that ground everyday communism (with a small c) : the simple, almost invisible assumption that if I need a hand and you can help, you will.
“The principle of ‘from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs’ will apply,” he wrote, not as utopian decree but as description of ordinary decency.
Once you see it you start seeing it everywhere: in kitchens and workshops, in Kenyan rotating labor associations and savings circles, in neighbors fixing a roof after the wind. It is also where his influence seeps most deeply into Grassroots Economics: what we now describe as the commitment pooling functions (curation, valuation, limitation, exchange) are already alive inside those everyday solidarities.
will on commitment pooling.. to me another ie of any form of m\a\p.. so cancerous distraction to the dance
Communities curate what matters; people feel and recognize value in relation; limits are honored without humiliation; requests are made and answered without a price gun. I’m so thankful that his anthropology was never stale academic distancing … it was a steady hand on my shoulder saying: you are already doing this.But he also saw how capture creeps in. *The free flow of everyday communism can be routed through choke points (creditors, landlords, bureaucracies) until the promise of reciprocity becomes a schedule of obedience. He spent a whole book on the labyrinths that make this feel sadly normal. In **The Utopia of Rules, his punchline is grim and funny at once: “bureaucracies of coercion” shrink our imaginative range.
* thru any form of m\a\p.
**utopia of rules et al
He has a deep deep ethic of non-domination.
I feel it as keeping the social metabolism open; don’t let the nervous system be hijacked.Listening to his lectures online I can still see the mischief in his eye. His book Bullshit Jobs was his compassion for people trapped in elaborate performances of usefulness, often “flunkies, goons, duct tapers, box-tickers, and taskmasters.”
He held space for the shame and excruciating sorrow people feel when their hours are spent on something that would not be missed if it vanished tomorrow. I don’t think anyone could really miss the wound he was pressing.
I read his work as offing a simple medicine: give people the time and freedom to refuse what deadens them and to direct their energy toward care, craft, and commons..t
art (by day/light) and sleep (by night/dark) as global re\set.. to fittingness (undisturbed ecosystem)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness
In rereading his work I can understand why he entertained the much-debated idea of a universal basic income (UBI) – not as a silver bullet but as breathing room. A universal, unconditional floor, he thought, weakens the grip of national currencies as instruments of compulsion, and lets everyday communism expand.
david on ubi.. ubi vs sabbatical.. et al
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
I can think of his stance like a giant biodigester turning colonial-style capital back into fertile commons. In a similar way that philanthropy can reduce suffering but isn’t the end goal – I can see he never wanted UBI to replace public goods; he wanted it to blunt the weapon so commoning could proceed without the endless “prove your worth” conflict.
need to try/code money (any form of measuring/accounting/people telling other people what to do) as the planned obsolescence.. where legit needs are met w/o money.. till people forget about measuring..ie: sabbatical ish transition
Practically I hear him saying start practicing freedom now. In Direct Action and The Democracy Project he conjured movements where people organize horizontally, deliberate in good faith, and act as if the world they desire were already rehearsing itself in their assemblies. “Democracy,” he wrote, is our capacity “to come together… and work out the resulting common problems,” especially when the “bureaucracies of coercion” recede.
direct action an ethnography.. the democracy project
and to me another cancerous distraction.. any form of democratic admin
He reminds me that the federation layer, is where diversity blooms: more commitments, more redemption paths, fewer choke points, a metabolism that rebalances on its own terms – without being forced through one hegemonic monetary system.
I loved how at home he was in the past. He revisited kingship and sovereignty, tracing how sacred charisma and the “stranger-king” become templates for state power. He refused the tidy ladder of human “stages,” celebrating histories where people changed seasonally between egalitarian and hierarchical forms, and honoring three stubborn freedoms: to move, to refuse, and to make new social worlds.
It wasn’t romanticism for historical times – it was an empirical permission slip to experiment. This was exactly the courage I and many of us needed to keep learning and growing federated commons,Even as I read some of his early theoretical work, I see him tending the same garden. In Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value he insisted that value is not a ghostly number but the meaning of our actions when they join a shared project. He took apart the idea that humans are merely selfish utility maximizers. Those models, he argued, hide brittle assumptions about who we are and what we owe each other.
In other words everyday communism in the basic protocol functions of pooling our commitments – these “primitives” are not the property of markets; they are human faculties that can be expressed and composed differently, as interfaces across niches, if we free the routing. Not replacing one financial monocrop with another, but letting native ecologies of commitment recover their channels.
to me.. if commitment ness.. then another form of replacing ness..
I can feel him asking us to remember what we already do for one another, to protect it from capture, and to let it federate. His words taught me and many of us at Grassroots Economics that we weren’t inventing a strange new machine so much as remembering an old protocol and giving it modern hands to hold.
The world he pointed to was not a destination but a daily practice: neighbors settling accounts by care; circles balancing ledgers by trust; pools publishing their needs and gifts, clearing with one another like streams finding the sea.
oi
“Economies around the world have, increasingly, become vast engines for producing nonsense,” he wrote, but he never lost faith in our capacity to produce meaning instead.
maybe we’d not even be about meaning ness.. if legit free
I can hear his laugh when a online meeting got too serious, and his gentle nudge when a plan forgets the people it’s for. So let’s honor David Graeber the way he would have liked: by practicing everyday communism without apology, by widening the channels, by becoming “white-hat pirates” who board the ships of needless suffering and repurpose their wealth for commons.
Rest in peace, David. You left us maps, stories, and a stubborn faith that we can reroute the world toward care …
and you left us the courage to try.
______
_____
_____
____
_____
_____
_____
be you. 