
The anthology of Marvyn’s writings covers the span of neoliberal domination over forty years (1980-2020), a time when market forces were once again allowed full rein, and citizens lost more and more social protection. Capital and production, free to move all over the world in search of cheap production costs, callously subjected the living standards of working people to the imperatives of growth and profits.
Marvyn often worked in cooperation with like-minded colleagues. His writings on the most pressing problems of the time reflect, in their thorough documentation and careful analysis, the outstanding quality of his research. Moreover, he never failed to advance original and pragmatic solutions to both Progressive Conservative and Liberal federal governments.
With the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), of which he was a founding member, he was behind the 1989 unanimous declaration in the House of Commons to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000. Marvyn and CPAG were influential in setting the level of the Canada Child Benefit (2015) based on the actual annual costs of raising a child.
The expanded Canada Child Benefit (CCB) led to a reduction in child poverty while neoliberal policies further entrenched it. Deep poverty, and unacceptable levels of inequality in income and wealth, were turning Canada into a two-tiered society. To Marvyn’s great disappointment and embarrassment, children in Canada continued to grow up and people to live in poverty despite the great wealth of the country.
That words strongly shape the way people see and understand their life circumstances was one of Marvyn’s unshakeable beliefs. The neoliberal narrative that the accumulation of wealth and power in the hands of the few, the corporate elite, would benefit the entire population, he considered blatantly false. He took umbrage with the political and economic discourse that had become the standard explanation of the infamous “trickle-down theory.” That it widely resonated with the general public when it should have set off alarm bells troubled him deeply.
The failure of neoliberalism to achieve a socially desirable and just distribution of jobs and incomes for all members of the Canadian community inspired Marvyn to search for a convincing antidote. The idea of Commons caught his attention. Placing the interests of all people over those of the few seemed a promising strategy to refute the dominant logic of neoliberalism.
In his encyclical letter Laudato Si, Pope Francis invited all people to enter into dialogue with him. He referred to the earth as the common home of all people and called for her rich resources, gifts to humanity, to be returned for the enjoyment of all. The papal message inspired Marvyn. He asked me to join his exploration of the idea of the ‘Commons’ because of my unwavering commitment to universal human rights. I was happy, honoured, and grateful to do so.
Mindful that the concept of “The Commons” had its roots in the ecological movement and our background was in social policy, we preferred “Social Commons” as a term that would better reflect the policy model of human needs and environmental protection we had in mind.
Until his unexpected death in 2016, Marvyn and I diligently searched how to effectively translate the idea of the ‘Social Commons’ into a practice of justice for all. We quickly realized that rhetoric could not replace action. Demanding the re-organization of the existing economic system would not create the necessary conditions of wellbeing which allowed all people now, and in the future, to thrive.1 What we needed was to come up with a doable strategy to make it possible.
Our first aim was to introduce the concept of ‘Social Commons’ to Canadians who were not yet familiar with it as a transformative paradigm. As such, it could inform social policy decisions and shape political practices, backed up by commitments of reciprocal responsibilities and obligations between local, national, and global communities. The inter-connectedness and inter-dependence of the world’s economies under the impact of neoliberal globalization have turned local problems also global problems and vice versa. Translating the saying “it takes a village to raise a child” to “it takes the world to raise a child” would accurately reflect their inter-relatedness.
Promoting the ‘Social Commons’ compelled us to focus on the aspects of social life shared by all humans. Following Karl Polanyi,2 we sought to break the almighty capitalist growth and profit motive in the interest of the wellbeing of all people in both their social and physical environment. The ‘Social Commons’ had to be an ethical imperative for an economy of wellbeing (living wages, stable and safe working conditions) and a protective state (social security provisions for life and work-related contingencies).
The writings of Francine Mestrum encouraged us to further pursue this direction. She too recognized the importance of reversing the robbing and dispossessing of millions of people of their jointly created wealth. For her it was an essential step towards the repudiation of the antisocial prevalence of self-centered individualism (me first) that could potentially have enough persuasive force to draw the existing political and economic structures into a progressive direction3.
To achieve such a turn in direction required fundamental change away from the still dominant neoliberal economic way of thinking. A reconfiguration of socio-economic relations within the policy framework of the ‘Social Commons,’ we realized, could not happen without an infusion of ethical principles into economics to form a global economic morality of the ‘we’ (humanity) over the ‘I’ (the individual). In the interests of social harmony and peace, we felt this would have to be done in a way that would avoid class resentment, conflict, and social and political polarization.
As neither the state nor the market could be expected to be up to this task, we identified civil society as a third sector and powerful force beyond state and market to make this possible. Civil society organizations, citizens’ associations and social movements have an impressive historical record of having given a genuine voice to the those who are economically marginalized and socially discriminated against. They continue to do so to this day. As civic society organizations have neither the governing mandate of the state nor corporate economic power, they have to rely on the power of ideas and words (and data, if available) with which to fight for “the moral and political legitimacy of people’s rights to …manage and use their own resource as a transformative force”.4
The recognition of the rights of all people worldwide to their shared resources demands civic engagement apart from state and market. However, participatory democracy faces significant challenges today when we see widespread political apathy and citizen disengagement. They are unwelcome and dangerous signals of resignation that have to be resisted. It is easy to be discouraged and remain detached. But if we are serious in wanting to build a better world, we cannot afford to be discouraged. The ‘Social Commons’ requires us to relate and interact with one another in the spirit of the communality of our humanity and our shared concerns. Collectively we can achieve what seems impossible.
In this sense, the ‘Social Commons’ is a transformative project for a new and _ better social order with power ultimately resting with civil society. Only through the concerted actions of members of civil society, people linked by their experience of shared conditions, values and goals can the ‘Social Commons’ emerge as an ethical/activist project, occupying the space between state and market. Engaged citizens, participating in the decision-making processes affecting their present and future life situations present the triumph of the ‘Social Commons’ in a way Garrett Hardin never expected.5
The Social Commons’ agenda already exists through the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights which was drafted by citizens – not politicians – from all parts of the world. With its emphasis on the provision of living standards adequate for the health and wellbeing of all individuals and their families, the Declaration of Human Rights sets out the conditions for the wellbeing of all people.
Marvyn’s work and thinking are not forgotten. The Marvyn Novick Legacy Group, all former colleagues, is committed to continue working with and expanding his ideas, particularly on the Social Commons, in our own writings and on our website. With the development of five foundational pillars, reflecting our understanding of the Social Commons, we have sought to confirm the relevance of Marvyn’s thinking for socio-economic and political action today.
Visit us at socialcommons.ca
Brigitte Kitchen PhD is a close friend and colleague of Marvyn.
Notes:
1 Brian Davey (2012:107) “The Abundance of the Commons” in The Wealth of the Commons, a world beyond market and state, edited by David Bollier and Silke Helfrich.
2 Karl Polanyi (1957), Trade and Market in the Early Empires, The Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois
3 Francine Mestrum (July 1, 2013), Promoting the Social Commons, transform-network.net
4 James B. Quilligan (2012:81) “Why Distinguish Common Goods from Public Good? in the Wealth of the Commons. A World Beyond Market and State, edited by David Bollier and Silke Helfrich, Levelers Press, Amhurst, MA
5 Garrett Hardin, (December 13,1968) The Tragedy of the Commons, math.uchicago.ed