ECOLOGY OF EVERYDAY LIFE
152
as well as men to be exploited by capitalist production. What is more, while it
is necessary to eliminate specific forms of hierarchy such as capitalism and
women’s oppression, this elimination is not only insufficient for creating a new
world, it is even compatible with the survival of many other forms of hierarchy.
The compatibility between non-hierarchy and hierarchy can be quite
insidious. If we were to eliminate racism, if we were to create the social
conditions in which people of all ethnicities were treated equally, capitalists
and the State could still refine other criteria such as age, sex, or class, by which
to justify social exploitation. In this way, hierarchical systems such as capitalism
and the State are compatible with the non-hierarchical conditions of ethnic
equality. Or in the event of a non-sexist society, there could conceivably
coexist a capitalist and statist society that bases privilege primarily on class and
race, rather than on sex, A society organized around egalitarian sexual relations
is potentially compatible with a racist, classist, and statist society. What is more,
we could conceivably eliminate the idea of dominating nature, establishing a
social ‘reverence’ for the natural world such as expressed by ancient Egyptians,
Mayans (or Nazis, for that matter), while still maintaining immiserating social
hierarchies. Finally, we could even imagine dismantling the hierarchy of the
State only to find that hierarchical corporations take over the management of
social and political life completely.
Hierarchy is much like a cancer which, if not rooted out completely, is
able to find ever new configurations of domination and submission in which to
grow and thrive. Hence, if we eliminate specific forms of hierarchy without
eliminating hierarchy in general, we may find that new hierarchies merely
replace the ones abolished, while old hierarchies dig their heels in deeper.
However, the general idea of non-hierarchy, while sufficient in its scope,
remains insufficient in its differentiation and focus. The call to abolish
‘hierarchy in general’ must in turn be developed into a specific interpretation of
social
and
ecological
transformation. As
it stands alone,
the, idea
of
non-hierarchy or cooperation remains too broad and ambiguous to have
specific meaning. We are left wondering: What forms of non-hierarchy or
cooperation are required? Unless we bring the idea of non-hierarchy into its
specific fullness, we will be unable to translate it into a tangible social vision or
practice. In the same way, without bringing the idea of boiling water into its
specific fullness, we are left with an incoherent pile of necessary factors such
as pots, water, and heating coils. We are left with little understanding of the
relationship between the pot of water, the heating coil, and the synchronicity
of time and place.
There exists a potentially complementary relationship, then, between that
which is necessary and that which is sufficient if and only if all necessary
conditions are consciously coordinated and integrated. Often, when people are