A POSTCAPITALIST PARADIGM: THE COMMON GOOD OF ...

when you arrive at someone’s house it is normal to say, almost spontaneously,
“wasiyuk, minkachiway” – literally, “owner of the house, take
care of me, look after me”; clearly, the responsibility of the host goes
beyond receiving them in their home. The praxis of minka has evolved
and assumed different forms throughout the Andes. Although minka is
usually distinguished from other forms of reciprocity 152 , it can be affirmed
that conceptually it is the general framework within which other
forms are defined and acquire meaning. 153 This general conceptual
framework is apparent if we consider the minka- in relation to the reciprocal
–naku-: minkanakuy: «to care for one another». The concept of
minkanakuy thus designates a normative act of social responsibility that
is not discharged in the voluntarism of a momentary gesture of solidarity.
Quite the contrary, it is the conceptual and philosophical foundation that
sustains all forms of solidarity between people, between individuals and
the community, and between political communities – human and more
broadly non-human. It is clear that the multiple human relations that derive
from the practice of minkanakuy are fundamental in collective life
in the Andes, relations that cannot be understood outside of the territory
or inhabitation of a place, a pacha. We can say that the practice of min -
kanakuy, «looking after one another», does not refer only to collective
work, but to the weave of relations that make up the collective; the
sense, texture and durability of society. It is in this weave of relationships
that work, exchange (ranti ranti), political matters, ritual and the manner
in which a place is inhabited acquire meaning. Minka as a generalised
practice, etched in the collective imagination, constitutes the cultivation
of relationships as something worthwhile, even beyond the possession
of goods. Still at odds with the market mediated by monetary transactions,
the spirit of minka resists in parallel; and when negotiating transactions
and interactions, outside of money. From this perspective it can
be understood, for example, why the conception of poverty in the Andean
world does not refer to the lack of goods but rather fundamentally
152 For a more detailed analysis of the forms of reciprocity and exchange in the Peruvian
Andes, see the work of Enrique Mayer and Giorgio Alberti, eds. Reciprocidad
e intercambio en los Andes peruanos (Lima: IEP, 1974).
153 There are forms of reciprocity such as ayni, rantipak, maki-mañachi, etc.
304