Re-framing Cosmos

Commons
1

As a member of the Cosmos Council and the Synergy Circle, I have the privilege of taking part in a whole series of conversations that concern the larger vision of what Cosmos is, what it offers, and what its potential might be as an agent for longterm change in the world. Since “visioning” is part of the DNA of Cosmos since its inception, I feel the need to share some of our reflections with others who are in the dialogue, whether formally members or simply “lurkers” to use an old idea that perhaps needs to be renamed.

There is a lot to say, but I just want to put a minimum out in order to solicit discussion rather than provide a set of answers, or even questions, that are worked out.

So Cosmos is trying to re-invent itself. We have been an unofficial, self-organized collection of activities and participants, which has been largely supported by the extensive and unpaid work of a few individuals who have needed more support. Now we are in the process of developing processes that can attract new members and potentially also investors so we are not quite so “poor” and can at least support our staff.

But in the long term, I think we are hoping for something much more substantive than that would suggest. And as the Synergy Circle has discovered, the paradox at the heart of what we are trying to do is both the Achilles heel of the effort, making it hard to be clear about what we are offering and what we are asking, but also a potential springboard for radical change. We are trying to find ways to “systematize” the kind of spontaneous visionary activities, and relationships, Cosmos has been nurturing for a decade, and the development of a “structure” that will encapsulate, perhaps even only in part, those relationships is what has the potential to have a broader impact.

What will it look like, ultimately? The Co-op? An artists’ collective, yes, a place for engendering visions, perhaps, but especially a place, we hope, where relationships that support the “commons” become our de facto output. Currently Cosmos is primarily a cultural and social space (and perhaps also implicitly a “spiritual space” even though that language can get us into trouble), but there is no reason why it cannot become also an economic space, and it can expand in all of these areas.

Let’s dream big. What larger issues do you think might be addressed by such a “reframed Cosmos”? What might we attempt to do with our eclectic and highly talented pool of creatives? Thoughts?

1 Like
2

Probably not the answer you’re looking for but I think the larger, maybe even the largest issue will be the reframing itself. Paraphrasing a quote made popular by Mark Fisher, not sure who it’s attributed to though, either Žižek or Frederick Jameson…

…“it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism”

I think the co-op is going to have to walk an extremely thin, and perilous tightrope once economics enters the room. Hyperobjects like capitalism, when given an inch tend to take their proverbial mile. Incentives, efficiencies, cliquey behaviors, private agendas and maybe most importantly, expectations are all birthed and all have the ability, if we’re not careful to undermine the whole systemic/structure.

Leadership is going to be of paramount importance if this ship is going to be steered though these treacherous straights. But, I’m sure I’m not saying anything groundbreaking here.

At least currently, I’d like to see Cosmos float just under the surface of what could be called the level of viral social media discourse. When I say just under the surface, I mean JUST under the surface, maybe even enough to pop our nose out into the miasma of the McLuhan-esque/Baurdrillardian nightmare of media saturation we are subjected to, but only briefly and strategically.

Working together, a gentle “putting forward” of our creative ideas/passions/obsessions in the right places, at the right time might be a great way to start. Leave our mark in certain places that matter, choose our battles carefully, make sure we are reaching the people who care deeply about what we are doing and what we are trying to achieve.

But DON’T take the sledgehammer approach of throwing darts against the wall and hoping something sticks. If the sympathetic ear is reached, and that might mean we only reach one… we have at least the seeds of a network effect happening.

If we can gain a small foothold like that, planting our flag somewhere in the cultural milieu… then we can gently move forward and fan out, but organically… still staying ON the surface this time (not under it), only this time— with more exposure. Staying true to our passions will be essential through all of this which brings me back to the perilous tightrope scenario.

Moderation is everything, I think we are all here because we share the same creative passion to make the world a better place. If cracks become apparent in that, I think we have to step back and let Capitalism do what Capitalism does, but without us.

Ok, that’s a stream of consciousness ramble and it doesn’t answer your questions but… I’ll leave it there.

3 Likes
3

Thank You @Gennifrey_Edwards for initiating this conversation. .I also am a member of Synergy and Council with you, and I believe that Cosmos Co-op is still a self-organized collection of activities and participants; and we are also now an official legal entity within the capitalist economic system. As a Co-op , the existing government recognizes us as a legitimate business. We work for each other and our selves. We have opportunity to contribute and share resources. We have a platform to interact with the monetary-based economy in a way that helps all of us. As creatives and philosophers we can bring forth our thoughts and our art, have a shared platform and contribute to to all of our well-being. This truly is an opportunity to role model a new approach to modern, post-modern, meta modern life.

We are Cosmos Co-op. We are building a bridge of consciousness using art, words,music, and philosophy as the architects of change. This is not an easy task. The more like-minded, committed kind people work together, the closer we get to being the change we want to see. I appreciate all your brilliant thoughts on this.

3 Likes
4

I think your “answer”, @Neuroticdog , is exactly the kind of contribution I was looking for, with its attentiveness to the dangers of the Scylla and Charybdis waters we seem to be navigating. Thanks for your thoughtful response.

1 Like
5

I only joined the Cosmos community about a year ago. At that time it had already entered this transitional phase in which it is creating synaptic connections with many outside nodes, including the mainstream economy. To stabilize at this stage of growth, Cosmos does indeed need a greater degree of internal structural complexity. It’s been a joy watching this take shape.

Figuring out how to interface cleanly with the mainstream money-based economy, one way or another, seems to me a necessary component at this point.

Let me share my favorite metaphor for money in our capitalist society. I understand money as collective energy, just like electricity or heat in physical systems. Energy is neither good nor bad in itself. Energy is the potential to get stuff done. What we do with it determines whether it’s well or badly used. This IMO is the case also with money as a form of energy in human societies.

But in human societies there is an added dimension: conscious choice. Intentionality.

Money is the most efficient way we humans have yet come up with to manage how an effort (goods or services etc) made by one human that is of some value to another human can be measured, tracked and reciprocated in social systems larger than a village. Basically, I see money as a turbocharged barter system. It allows us to specialize and exchange—the basis of all multicellular life forms, actually. In human societies, specialization and exchange makes us all better off in theory, and sometimes in practice.

The problem in practice is, of course, that whatever is powerful can be powerfully abused. Every human society has had to deal with those who accumulate too much power and abuse it to the detriment of others. Speaking as a cultural historian.

How can we adapt Cosmos’s structure to allow interface with our mainstream money economy while preserving the integrity of our community?

The electricity that flows through my house keeps me warm and heats my water and cooks my food and lights my rooms and powers my devices and allows me to be part of wonderful communities like Cosmos Cooperative. It also has the potential to electrocute me or burn my house down. But the wires and lines that bring this power to my house are insulated, grounded etc., They are safe for me and for hundreds of millions of others because they’ve been installed by professionals who know what they are doing and are held to certain standards.

Let me suggest that we regard Cosmos’ interface with the money economy like we regard the flow of electricity through our houses. Our “insulation” can be a commitment to transparency and best practices, and our “grounding” can be a commitment to accountability.

Maybe this is the place for one of Ken Wilber’s mottos: transcend and include.

Thanks for opening this discussion, Gennefrey!

5 Likes