Yes most full theme camps are planned and run by a few people, but they're generally inclined to only give tickets to those who are actively helping with the camp (and its the public sale people who tend to come in and contribute less). Having camp dues alone is a pretty solid indication that its enabling commoditization.
I think the split between "contributing" and "not contributing" is veiling a less glamorous, but possibly more pragmatic battle: new vs. old.
If they can ensure that more tickets are going to well-established camps that have been around for a long time, you'll be more likely to give tickets to people in the "right" social circles.
And that's probably an effective thing to do to maintain the social fabric. I don't think the community is getting angry about a camp's tent getting setup by 5 out of its 40 members; that's always been the norm.
I think that's a bit cynical, and the fact that certain established camps are getting kicked out for misbehaviour (as per the article), and some of the bigger MV camps are getting reduced in size seems to indicate that just being "grandfathered in" is not enough. Overall this is a very hard problem with no easy solutions. I personally think the changes described in the article are likely to help with some of the issues the community has been growing concerned with.
(and, as you say, if one of the side effects is that the camps that have have been part of the culture for a long time remain able to exist and contribute, that is a good thing for the social fabric).
Camp dues cover the costs of the camp. Such as water and food, transporting said water and food, shelter, etc... You share those costs because you share the resources and also there is the benefit of economy of scale and less redundant effort per person. Honestly not sure how that demonstrates commoditization.
It's because the principles of Burning Man are inherently in contention with each other and equally unachievable. People who harp on the principles generally grossly violate them to some degree. It's a big party in the desert alongside the largest installation art festival in the world. If you think it's more than that, lay off the acid.
Thats an incredibly reductive way to think about it that comes from a really cynical position - I feel bad for you that thats how you think about it. Its opened a lot of different worlds of thought to me.
I'm really glad you enjoy acid and other psychedelics. I'm glad that you have the privilege to do that at Burning Man. I also enjoy both of those things.
If you've done any real volunteering with the org, you'd understand that it is a purely capitalistic endeavor that preys on people who think it's more than what it is. Realizing this has given me lots of opportunity to do great things with great people.
All ideals are contradictory and unachievable, but the tension they create motivates action, which can lead to interesting forms of change.
There are as many stories as there are participants. Yours is one kind of story that some people have. There are other people, who have been participating in Burning Man for years, for whom the party and the art are nothing more than useful motivating excuses for going to Black Rock City. Some of them might say that the event is a laboratory for experiments in forms of social organization and activity which contrast with those most commonly seen in the "default world". All of these stories are true at once.
If there was no party and no art, there would be no Black Rock City. If there wasn't a faceless capitalist organization running the party, there would be no Black Rock City. I don't disagree that your story happens, it happens to me, but let's get real: It's for rich white people, just like all psychedelic movements of modern civilization. Acceptance of my privilege has enabled me to grow in ways that you couldn't imagine, although I do feel complex emotions for people who think it's more than what it is, but at the end of the day I don't think they have much to offer to the world or the burning man experience, and their zealous attitude that they are [insert your greater power]'s gift to earth is juvenile.
Agreed. Shared Resources covered by the cost of dues are directly related to the principles of Communal Effort (cooperation and collaboration on efficiently allocating and deploying resources as a collective effort) and Civic Responsibility through more environmental and public friendly use of resources.
The point is definitely to share costs and resources, but my thinking is converging your camp experience behind a paywall is a bit of a commoditization thing. Its one way to ensure equal financing of the costs, but in the places I've camped its been a lot more "we want you here, please provide what you can". Unless of course, everyone is on equal economic footing in which case... mayybe a less homogenous group would be of a benefit?
