On the road to a moneyfree future?

Mark Boyle's project sounds fascinating. A few days ago he left his hometown Bristol to embark on a journey of 9000 miles, a pilgrimage to the birth place of Mahatma Gandhi in India. Boyle, 28, is expecting to walk for 2 and half years until he reaches his destination. What really stands out: Boyle plans to walk without any money, credit cards or exchangeable material values. He is planning to offer his skills to the people he meets in exchange for food. Money - he believes -destroys community. In his blog he explains:

From this point on I endeavour to never touch money again. A strong claim I know and one that seems unrealistic at best. And one I am sure I'll be lambasted for if I fail. And probably even get criticised for if I succeed. But why strive for anything other than your ideals in life, why aim for something less than that you believe in. I have compromised too much in my life so far, spending my time fighting against the symptoms of greed, insecurity and fear. From now on I will live my life the way in which I believe life becomes more beautiful. No more compromises. No more battling against symptoms. Now is the time for social homoeopathy.

Boyle used to be an entrepreneur with a dot.com business, but for a few years already he has been advocating for an economy without money. The Freeconomy community is about sharing skills and knowledge.

Freeconomy allows people to make the transition from a money based communityless society to more of a community based moneyless society, and to share the land they don't need or can't use to facilitate a local food community. In essence, freeconomy is about making dinner for a friend who was yesterday a stranger (...)

Freeconomy has over 3000 members in 56 countries offering skills, land and knowledge to other members.
Boyle's journey will be documented by the people he meets on the way. He will equip them with the password for this blog and thereby allow them to update it. He is also planning to regularly report from his trek.
I find this project truly amazing, because of its determination, its idealism and its gentleness, however I would like to raise two things I find worth reflecting here:
For one, he might get along without money, but he surely took a passport with him. As it seems unlikely that he is managing to charm the guardians of the diverse nation states he will have to cross into letting him through without identification. And if he tried? What kind of message would that be? Millions of people have to struggle with national borders in their pursuit of happiness; hundreds die every year, because they have to bypass the control of national borders. Surely nation states are as troublesome in our world as the existence of money.
Then, secondly, what do we know about money? Can we really blame the poor state of the world on the existence of abstract forms of exchange? Freeconomy puts it like this:

Birds don't have money, trees don't use money and as far as I know earthworms have never heard of such a ridiculous concept. Money, in any human language today, gets translated to mean security. It's insurance against the universe, nature and the rest of humanity letting us down and not providing for us. No money = No security.

His arguement is that the false security of money makes us strive for profit and credit, while real security comes from community, from living with people, sharing and loving each other.
This argument is based on a very modern fallacy. The picture of an ideal community in which people live together authentically is posited against the mediocre alienated state of the affairs we live in. This ideal community is likened to nature, to birds and earthworms, where a perfect harmonic balance exists. This balance of course is the cruel reality of natural live, in which the very human capacity of morality doesn't exist.
The critiques of capitalism often overlook, that - as Max Weber has pointed out - capitalism is not ruthless and without morals, but quite the contrary. Capitalism was founded on moralist arguments against ruthless profit-making and luxury. Moreover it is this quality that made it so successful. Capitalism is based on humans’ wishes to make the world a better place.

It is good to walk out and spread the word of human love and understanding. Boyle's pilgrimage will surely teach him and others a lot. Hopefully however it will also make him reconsider his basic argument: Money is not the issue: The most radical changes in the last 500 years, including the development of the global money based economy were caused by people with good intentions.

The world is smaller than you think!

Social networking sites and the web 2.0 are growing massively. Several projects, from Facebook to MySpace are drawing more and more people in. I just recently signed up for facebook myself, to become a member of a network that was set up in there as an organzing tool for a real life network at Uni. But will we really use it, I am not sure. Despite their popularity no one really seem to be quite sure yet, whether facebook and myspace will transform social organization or honestly are just a huge waste of time.
This is totally different, from my perspective, in a specific set of servises, in which the rationale for networking is to allow the members to benefit from mutual hospitality across a web-based global community. It is highly intresting to assess Web 2.0 relevance to travel.
Signing up in Couch-Surfing or Hospitality Club, the two main providers in this field will avail you with 1000s of open invitations to stay as people’s guests, free of charge, on a couch or sofa, in a guest room or at least camp in the garden. I became acquainted with the systems last year and used it extensively recently on a trip through California. I have to say, I am a fan!
I met very friendly people in San Franzisko, Santa Barbara and in LA, they not only took me in but also showed me around, offering their insights into the local restaurant szene and bars as much as their lives.
Looking at it with a bit more perspective it quickly becomes obvious how intresting the issues is for travel and tourism studies. Hospitality Club (HC) is the older version, dating back to 2000 and has by now over 300.000 members in all continenets. Couch-Surfing (CS) started bit later, but quickly grew to over 250.000 today. These numbers don’t seem significant when compared to general tourism statistics. Yet there groth rates are amazing and there is not an end in sight. How does it function?
I entered HC first, last summer and then tried in on a short trip to Bratislava. I contacted a few people as offered in the list and got feedback from one member. She said her housemate wouldn't want to allow her to have people stay this time, but she was willing to show me around in Bratislava. Happily I accepted and we met and she showed me around, giving me insights into the town and her take on the cities situation that I would have missed without HC.

What makes the voluntary exchange intresting to tourism studies is the challenge is poses to the hospitality industry. As one user puts it: “"Who wants to sit in a lonely hotel?" Staying in annoynous and expensive housing is not necessarily convinient. Moreover it seems that despite calls for "post-tourism" and its claim that all tourists today relate with some ironic distance to the world of travel, HC and CS show that people still invest heavily into the idea of authentic travel experience and are actively looking for alternatives to commodified tourist scapes.
Moreover the extensive community and networking functions that the web provided are themselves restructuring the social realities of travel. Communities from in these sites are not remaining virutal, but realized themselves in festivals and camping events, organized in several places and of different geographical scope. A CS member from Leeds recently invited me to a Leeds members meeting in Hydepark in my neighborhood. And so through the help of a global networking page I might end up making friends just blocks away from my house.

Research should be undertaken into these sites and their communities as they are actively transforming the way travel works. I will keep my eyes open and hope that I see you soon on HC and CS.

"'Voluntourism' becomes popular"

and more commerically exploited. Newpaper articles and online reports about voluntourism and voluntourists have surely increased in recent months.
A short query shows this. Publications like desertnews conclude in April this year conclude "that consumers are becoming more interested in vacations with a voluntarism aspect".
Also the LA Times observes that "Whatever the reason, more tourists — such as college students on spring break, jet-setting luxury travelers and retiring baby boomers — are using their vacations to volunteer". Whatever the reason....well, we want to know.
The recent surge in interest in voluntourism goes back to the Tsunami Catasrophy in Thailand in Winter 2004 that triggered the involvement of tourists into relief efforts. What initially was a spontaneaus reaction of travelers and tourists to help in a situation of need soon transformed into a new form of organized travel. The NGO Tsunami Volunteer Centre (TVC) in Thailand provides an example of this process.
Even before the hype that the theme of voluntourism experienced, academic research has approached voluntourism. After serveral empirical studies, Stephen Wearing wrote a book about the voluntourism in 2001 in which he assumed that voluntourists are developing their selves in their practise. A little later Sally Brown and Xinran Letho discussed that there we two different tendencies in the term Voluntourism, one sifginifing the fact that volunteer work often involved travel, the other that travel sometimes, and as they argued increasingly, involved a bit of volunteer work. (Brown and Letho 2005) This second tendency can also be described as a commericalization of the voluntourism. Brown and Letho are entirely optimistic about this new development. They imagine the implementation of elements of volunteering into mainstream tourism will "create authentic cultural experiences unlike any other in the industry" while "enabling every traveller to become an embassador of peace". But they open little room for the reflection of historical continuity of international charity practises in western culture. Methodologically their focus on the travellers involved in the practises ignores the reflection of the larger political economy in which tourism is taking and creating place. The commercialaztion of an individual desire to do good might provide a satisfying experience for both the traveller and the industry. Yet the local impact, the reaction of local participants in the exchange remains unreflected. Importantly than in the study of Voluntourism should focus on the bio-political production of subjectivities, the systems of assistance and dependence that evolve and how "meaningful" international travel exists in both a historical and contemporary international system of post- and neo-colonial powerstructures. A more critical approach to Voluntourism is indeed needed.