In “The Giving Environment: Another Perspective on the Economic System of Gatherer-Hunters,” the #anthropologist Nurit Bird-David described an interesting social institution among the Nayaka, a forager society in southern India. Bird-David calls this “demand sharing.”
“Nayaka give to each other, request from each other, expect to get what they ask for, and feel obliged to give what they are asked for. They do not give resources to each other in a calculated, foresighted fashion, with a view to receiving something in return, nor do they make claims for debts.”
1/
Demand sharing is entirely voluntary and policed only by social criticism. Bird-David elaborates:
“X wants something, say, a biddi (a type of cigarette), and he asks Y to give him one. If Y were to refuse, he would be criticised for being stingy, so he gives X a biddi. Some time later, Y notices that X has some biddies. Wanting one, de does not remind X that he gave him a biddi a few days ago, nor does he ask X for a biddi in return. He merely asks X to give him a biddi because X has biddies and he does not. What has happened in the past is irrelevant. Still, X has to comply with the request for fear of social disapproval. Both can avoid giving away biddies by creating circumstances in which they are not asked, for instance, by hiding them. Both X and Y act in accordance with an obligation to give, but that is all. With respect to each other, they give and request to be given; they feel obliged to give and expect to be given; they criticise others for being stingy when they do not give; and they hide in order not to be asked to give and thereby avoid giving.”
2/
This reminds me of a common theme in David Graeber’s work: the idea of what he called “everyday communism,” a baseline of human sociability.
If you were to come across a drowning child whom you could easily save, you’d probably act to do so, even without any expectation of payment. If you saw someone walking closely behind you while you were entering a door, you’d probably hold it open for them.
That is, if the need is great enough or the cost is low enough, most people will readily share without reward.
3/
Even today, in capitalist modernity, we often find ourselves engaging in demand sharing. I’m sure many of you have bummed a cigarette, or given someone a light, or dropped a quarter to someone panhandling. In most of these cases, the other party is a total stranger. There is no obligation created for the future, no tally of debts created. There’s no expectation of reward, maybe just a sense that if you don’t share, other people will see and think you’re a stingy jerk.
Where we draw the line between demand sharing and demanding payment is fuzzy and different in every society, but *we* draw the line. We, together, decide which needs are great enough and which costs low enough to be generous without expectation of reward.
4/
I often run into people who make all sorts of assumptions about capitalism and socialism and anarchism and property and crime based on the premise that, very loosely, “people won’t do something for nothing.”
The idea is that our property relations, our patterns of labor, our laws and crime, under capitalist modernity are all somehow natural and organic expressions of human nature. Of course you can’t abolish capitalism, because people will only work if they’re promised money or some other material reward on return. Of course you can’t abolish the state, because we need police to protect our stuff from criminals who want to steal it.
And I think it’s important to highlight how much of this is socially constructed and how much of it can be socially reconstructed in different ways. Among the Nayaka, people give stuff to each other for free all the time! Sometimes, even in our alienated society in which we’re all competitively set against each other, we still give stuff to each other for free! In a society like that of the Nayaka, theft is essentially impossible because you can simply ask for and receive most anything you want.
These things are not set in stone.
5/end
@HeavenlyPossum Curious – did Bird-David talk about people who were seen as stingy – are they "punished" in any way, like people don't give to them or want to work with them? Or was it more of a social thing, like you just don't want to be seen as stingy, just for its own sake?
@ech
She did relate one anecdote about an old woman who demanded too much and annoyed everyone, so they started avoiding her and her daughter moved to a new hut two meters away that was too small for her mother to stay with her, if that gives you a sense.