November 2014 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

new article on netarchical state
by Michel Bauwens 11 Nov '14

11 Nov '14

here's a copy of my latest article: http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/choosing-between-3-strategies-against-netarch… Choosing between 3 strategies against netarchical capital and its state form <http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/choosing-between-3-strategies-against-netarch…> [image: photo of Michel Bauwens] Michel Bauwens 11th November 2014 The internet and technology are often essentialized which then results in versions of technological gnosticism, where technology is either seen as a false god that inevitably plays an evil role in human society, or the different forms of cyber-utopianism. In its most recent iterations, the dark vision takes root in the revelations of Edgar Snowden about NSA and other surveillance, to argue that the internet has become a tool of control and oppression; while for example the bitcoin enthusiasts often see the mis-identified ‘peer to peer’ currency as the tool that will bring down governments and large banks to usher in a anarcho-capitalist utopia. To avoid these simplifying debates, it helps to see technology and the internet specifically, as socially constructed and reflecting various social interests and biases, who are engaged in an ongoing battle. In order to do this, it helps to make some crucial distinctions. The first is the polarity between centralized and distributed control, which can also be interpreted in the context of scope or geographical orientation, distinguishing the global vs local polarity. The second polarity is economic, which allows us to distinguish for-profit orientations, i.e. maximizing shareholder value, from ‘for-benefit’ orientations, where the economic logic is subsumed to the achievement of social goals. This allows us to look at at least four possible scenarios that can serve both as analytical tools for the critique and identification of current technological models, but also to envisage them as ‘societal scenarios’, i.e. socio-technological structures that are dominated by either one of the four models. The first model we can identify is the ‘netarchical’ model, which combines centralized control of the technological infrastructure with a for-profit orientation. In this model, exemplified by the internet giants such as Amazon, eBay, Google or Facebook, while the front-end allows a certain, and even large measure, of peer to peer driven interactions, the technology itself is nevertheless owned and controlled by shareholders. These forces are the new ‘intermediaries’ of the internet, positioning themselves as facilitators of social cooperation and peer to peer interaction, but connecting these sharing platforms and spaces, dominated by the logic of use value, to the logic of exchange value. Users have very limited ways to create livelihoods, pay heavy transaction taxes to the platform owners, have no input into the design or social protocols which govern their own behaviour and interaction. Netarchical capital ‘enables and empowers’ peer to peer interactions, while also exploiting it. In fact, we can consider this as a form of hyper-exploitation, since in many cases, nearly 100% of the extracted exchange value goes to the owners, while the creators of the use value, without which the platform could not exist nor extract exchange value, remain unrewarded. Could we argue that to this emerging new sector of capital, corresponds a new state model ? We would say yes, and the Snowden revelations point towards the emergence of netarchical state forms, in which peer to peer interactions are allowed, but also monitored and controlled. It is no secret that there is a close cooperation between both the commercial netarchical operators, and the national governments that support them. The dream of the netarchical state is behavioural control and modification by directly connecting our online behaviours, to neurological prompts. There is a second for-profit model, which is ideologically distinct, though pragmatically leads to very similar results. This second model opts for distributed infrastructures, but with a underlying for-profit orientation. Bitcoin is of course the exemplar of this approach. The ‘peer to peer’ aspect of bitcoin however, is limited to consider computers as peers, obviously not seeing any issue with the existence of super-peers which own thousands if not more computers, vs. the poorest three billion of the population, who may not have access to computers at all. With its deflationary design, its highly unequal property structure which exceeds the GINI coefficient of countries with sovereign currencies, it favours the ‘hacker class’ of early believers and investors and quickly leads to domination by a new class of ‘mining’ intermediaries. Because anarcho-capitalism sees no qualms in inequality, it ignores power law dynamics (concentration of resources in the hands of the few), and rather quickly moves to netarchical monopoly. We also put in this category the emerging sharing economy, which similarly aims to “liberate” p2p commercial interactions for idle goods. While we could say that netarchical capital capitalizes directly on non-commercial social cooperation, and creates market dynamics around it, distributed capitalism aims to commodify every social interaction directly. Things that could have been shared (excess space through non-monetary couchsurfing), are monetized and commodified, turning every citizen in a owner of distributed capital. At least in the sharing economy, though perhaps less in the bitcoin economy, all interactions are also transparent to the platform owners and the same techniques of social and behavioural control, can be perfected over time. While anarcho-capitalist ideology may be theoretically opposed to concentration of resources, they quickly lead to highly unequal social structures. However, there are alternatives, for-benefit alternatives, which we believe hold a better deal for the majority of citizens and technology users. The third model, and our first alternative model, combines a local orientation with a focus on community benefits. We have seen over the last few years an exponential growth of open food networks, of local complementary currencies and time banks, of Transition Towns and their multiple localization initiatives, where networked technology is used to increase local resilience. Countless fablabs, hackerspaces, and co-working spaces have also been created to stimulate local cooperation. While the orientation is local, the cooperation is often global, such as for example the co-learning through a formal pattern language, undertaken by the Transition Towns the world over. Nevertheless, we believe this approach is still insufficient in terms of the creation of global counter-power. Thus, we would argue for the fourth model, which combines for-benefit practices with a global commons orientation. In this model, the internet and networked technology is not seen as a means of communication, but as a ‘means of production’. Global open design (and knowledge, software) communities create global technical, scientific commons that allow for local distributed manufacturing, using these open designs for local benefit. At the same time, the local producers see themselves as nodes of a global cooperative value-creation and on-demand manufacturing network, that can create global ‘phyles’, i.e. global community-oriented, commons co-producing alliances that have the potential to become peer to peer transnational organisations creating global solidarity mechanisms. In time, these organisations will also produce social and political power that can challenge the domination of the shareholder multinationals. We have argued elsewhere for the adoption of new cooperative governance mechanisms, on the basis of commons-based reciprocity licenses. So what are we to do. We see three main options ? The first option is the hacker option, which entails the reconstruction of a wholly new true p2p internet. This is necessary and vital work but it should be undertaken without illusions. Thus, it may already be too late to wean average consumers from the netarchical platforms, which are highly funded, easy to use and already have obtained insurmountable network effects. We would argue that such hacker alternatives should be above all used internally by the global peer producing communities, as real tools of production, that could be increasingly inter-networked. The second approach is to directly challenge the governance, ownership and extractive practices of the netarchical platforms. Rather than leave them and isolate the most conscious activists amongst themselves, this approach calls for organizing user groups, and create political pressure to regulate these platforms for public benefit. Eventually, depending on social strength and the balance of forces, the private ownership or at least exclusive hierarchical governance, of such public utilities can be challenged. This strategy is pretty much akin to the strategies of the labour movement and how it tackled privately owned factories. If we have no real choice but to use them, then we need to challenge them and change them. But the third approach is to concentrate on the actual reconstruction of a different counter-economy at the heart of value creation. To create vibrant, self-governed, cooperatively owned peer production communities, as we have indicated above. And from this practice, reconstruct political and social movements. Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: Commonsfest2015
by Michel Bauwens 09 Nov '14

09 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: George Papanikolaou <georgepapani(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 7:19 PM Subject: Commonsfest2015 To: Kevin Flanagan <kev.flanagan(a)gmail.com>, Michel Bauwens < michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> FYI http://commonsfest.info/en/2014/anikto-kalesma-gia-tin-diorganosi-tou-festi… -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: Q&A for Shareable about multi-stakeholder coops
by Michel Bauwens 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Cat Johnson <thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 3:38 AM Subject: Re: Q&A for Shareable about multi-stakeholder coops To: Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> Hi Michel Here's the link to the Q&A: http://www.shareable.net/blog/michel-bauwens-on-the-rise-of-multi-stakehold… Thanks again! Please keep me in the loop of interesting and exciting things you're working on as I'm always on the lookout for great story ideas. Cheers, Cat On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: > ok, i'm adding material > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Cat Johnson <thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Michel >> >> Could you please clarify the following: >> >> In your response to the first question, you mention two other suggestions >> you have for multi-stakeholder coops but then only share one, that they >> must co-produce commons. What is the second suggestion? Here's the text: >> >> "The two extra requirements we suggest are that 3) the new coops must >>> co-produce commons, whether immaterial or material. The Catalan Integral >>> Cooperative is an example of a new type of coop that only produces shared >>> knowledge in common pool resources but it is not yet global in orientation, >>> as the name suggests. However, it's project to create a global coalition of >>> open coops through fair.coop is a step in that direction. The Alliance >>> Solidaria housing coop in Quito is an example of a coop producing physical >>> commons, as it reclaims the polluted ravines in South Quito, giving it back >>> to the community. >> >> > The final requirement I propose is a global approach, to create > counter-power for a global ethical economy consisting of cooperative > alliances. An example of that is the approach of > > >> Las Indias, ie. their coop is oriented towards the global, and they >>> have the interesting concept of phylia, i.e. a global ecosystem that >>> sustains a community and its commons. The pieces of the puzzle are >>> beginning to get in place, but they have as yet to find their integration >>> in one clear example." >> >> >> Cheers, >> Cat >> >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Michel Bauwens < >> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >> >>> looking forward to see it, >>> >>> you're writing formidable things yourself! >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Cat Johnson <thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you, Michel >>>> >>>> This is such valuable and insightful information. I appreciate you >>>> taking the time to share. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Cat >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Michel Bauwens < >>>> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> inline >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Cat Johnson <thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> HI Michel >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm so sorry you got ill. That's never fun. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for staying with this! Here are the last two questions: >>>>>> >>>>>> [?] What is the big picture vision for this movement? What would you >>>>>> most like to see? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The big picture is a move away from extractive forms of capital, to >>>>> generative forms of captal, as defined by Majorie Kelly in her book on the >>>>> Emerging Ownership Revolution. The problem is that even worker's coop, like >>>>> Mondragon, may end up behaving in capitalist ways on the capitalist market, >>>>> without solving the grave problems that the world is facing. With the >>>>> emergence of peer production, we potentially have the hyper-exploittion of >>>>> human cooperation, and generalized precarity, because the value creators, >>>>> which are now often the users as well, are not getting any reward for their >>>>> contributions. Worker and consumer coops, to the degree they only work for >>>>> their own members, are in my view insufficient models to integrate the new >>>>> social and environmental externalities. Thus we need new models like the >>>>> open coops I call for, which includes multi-stakeholdership and the >>>>> co-production of the value chain by everyone affected by a provisioning >>>>> service. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [?] Is there anything you’d like to add? What else should we know >>>>>> about the multi-stakeholder cooperative movement? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The key question is: are we creating positive externalities and taking >>>>> responsibility for our negative externalities. Are we not harming the >>>>> common, but rather adding value to it. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Cat >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Michel Bauwens < >>>>>> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> you can send me the next two , >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Michel >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Michel Bauwens < >>>>>>> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> oops, sorry for answering later than expected, got ill with the flu >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Cat Johnson < >>>>>>>> thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hello Michel >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just checking in to make sure you received my question from >>>>>>>>> earlier this week: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops require an advanced level of >>>>>>>>> organization and communication? But committing to this process could prove >>>>>>>>> to be revolutionary in creating vital, thriving organizations. What are the >>>>>>>>> biggest challenges to creating a multi-stakeholder coop and what’s the >>>>>>>>> benefit of working through these challenges? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The key issue for me is the balance between efficiency and >>>>>>>> participation; what is to be avoided is the weakness of time-consuming >>>>>>>> deliberations that end up exhausting the membership. So there need to be >>>>>>>> trust between the various stakeholders, but once agreement is reached on >>>>>>>> the right direction, autonomy for those who have to implement it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and give you another question: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops are about more than people making >>>>>>>>> money—they’re rooted in democratic process and require a shared vision by >>>>>>>>> all involved. What, would you say, is the higher purpose of these >>>>>>>>> organizations? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the old system, we have competing entities and within these >>>>>>>> entities there is cooperation. In the new system it is the >>>>>>>> opposite,everyone cooperates around shared commons, but within this >>>>>>>> cooperation, there is room for competition between various entities that >>>>>>>> build service and product models around these shared resources. In the old >>>>>>>> model, only self-interest is recognized, externalities are expelled from >>>>>>>> consideration, and 'what is legal is ethical'. In the new model, a >>>>>>>> plurarity of motivations is recognized, including room for self-interest if >>>>>>>> it aligns with the common goal; and externalities are integrated in the >>>>>>>> market model. In the old model, exchange value is created for profit, and >>>>>>>> the new model, use value is generated and any profit is used to achieve >>>>>>>> that social goal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> Cat >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Cat Johnson < >>>>>>>>> thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello Michel >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Here's the next question. Thanks! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops require an advanced level of >>>>>>>>>> organization and communication? But committing to this process could prove >>>>>>>>>> to be revolutionary in creating vital, thriving organizations. What are the >>>>>>>>>> biggest challenges to creating a multi-stakeholder coop and what’s the >>>>>>>>>> benefit of working through these challenges? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cat. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Michel Bauwens < >>>>>>>>>> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> the next one .. if you confirm each time that gets me going for >>>>>>>>>>> the next, thanks for your flexibility >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Cat Johnson < >>>>>>>>>>> thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, Michel, for such thorough, insightful responses. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Considering your timeline and the thoroughness of your >>>>>>>>>>>> responses, I'm going to condense the questions. Here are four more that you >>>>>>>>>>>> can answer over the next few days, then we can publish next week as >>>>>>>>>>>> planned. Thanks! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [?] What kind of transformational potential do >>>>>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder coops hold, on a personal level as well as on a community >>>>>>>>>>>> level? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The problem with the capitalist market and enterprise is that it >>>>>>>>>>> excludes negative externalities, social and environmental, from its field >>>>>>>>>>> of vision. Worker or consumer-owned cooperatives, who operate in the >>>>>>>>>>> competitive marketplace, solve work democracy issues but not the issues of >>>>>>>>>>> exernalities. Following the competitive logic and the interests of their >>>>>>>>>>> own members only, they eventually start behaving in very similar ways. One >>>>>>>>>>> of the ways to integrate externalities is to integrate all affected parties >>>>>>>>>>> in a multi-stakeholder structure, including bold moves like perhaps >>>>>>>>>>> inviting in 'representatives of nature', which makes sure ecological >>>>>>>>>>> concers are heard. If we would add to this mix the requirement to co-create >>>>>>>>>>> commons, then not only would such a structure avoid negative externalities, >>>>>>>>>>> but it would produce positive externalities beyond the interests of its own >>>>>>>>>>> membership. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops require an advanced level of >>>>>>>>>>>> organization and communication? But committing to this process could prove >>>>>>>>>>>> to be revolutionary in creating vital, thriving organizations. What are the >>>>>>>>>>>> biggest challenges to creating a multi-stakeholder coop and what’s the >>>>>>>>>>>> benefit of working through these challenges? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops are about more than people making >>>>>>>>>>>> money—they’re rooted in democratic process and require a shared vision by >>>>>>>>>>>> all involved. What, would you say, is the higher purpose of these >>>>>>>>>>>> organizations? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [?] What is the big picture vision for this movement? What >>>>>>>>>>>> would you most like to see? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything you’d like to add? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>> Cat >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 1:50 AM, Michel Bauwens < >>>>>>>>>>>> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> dear Cat, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I can only do 1-2 a day until the 27th, then I can up the ante >>>>>>>>>>>>> as I will be without public engagement for a few days, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> so I answer the first ones, and when you resend I do the rest, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Michel >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Cat Johnson < >>>>>>>>>>>>> thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Michel >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here are the questions. Thank you for taking the time to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this—I'm excited to share the multi-stakeholder coop model with Shareable >>>>>>>>>>>>>> readers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If possible, please get your responses back to me by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thursday. If this is not possible, please let me know so we can adjust our >>>>>>>>>>>>>> publication schedule. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cat >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops are like super coops, where >>>>>>>>>>>>>> producers, consumers and more are all working together. Why is this model >>>>>>>>>>>>>> important? What’s the most interesting or exciting aspect of it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Many traditional coops are for-profits that work for their >>>>>>>>>>>>> members, and end up accepting the competitive logic of the neoliberal >>>>>>>>>>>>> marketplace. An example that comes to mind is that Mondragon hires Polish >>>>>>>>>>>>> workers at low wages to preserve its own corporate interest. So , the >>>>>>>>>>>>> democratic aspects of one person, one share, one vote are certainly >>>>>>>>>>>>> important, but no longer sufficient. But for us. multi-stakeholdership is >>>>>>>>>>>>> part of a four-fold proposal for open cooperatives, which would involve >>>>>>>>>>>>> four simultanous changes. First, open coops should be oriented towards the >>>>>>>>>>>>> common good, in their own statutes, i.e. not for profit, but profit being >>>>>>>>>>>>> used to achieve the particular social goal; second, all people affected by >>>>>>>>>>>>> the activity should have a say, this is the specific multi-stakeholder >>>>>>>>>>>>> aspect. These two characteristics already exist in the solidarity coop >>>>>>>>>>>>> movement, especially in the delivery of social care in northern Italy >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Emilia-Romagna) and Quebec, as reported by John Restakis in his excellent >>>>>>>>>>>>> book, Humanizing the Economy. The two extra requirements we suggest are >>>>>>>>>>>>> that 3) the new coops must co-produce commons, whether immaterial or >>>>>>>>>>>>> material. The Catalan Integral Cooperative is an example of a new type of >>>>>>>>>>>>> coop that only produces shared knowledge in common pool resources but it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not yet global in orientation, as the name suggests. However, it's project >>>>>>>>>>>>> to create a global coalition of open coops through fair.coop >>>>>>>>>>>>> is a step in that direction. The Alliance Solidaria housing coop in Quito >>>>>>>>>>>>> is an example of a coop producing physical commons, as it reclaims the >>>>>>>>>>>>> polluted ravines in South Quito, giving it back to the community. The >>>>>>>>>>>>> approach of Las Indias is global, and they have the interesting concept of >>>>>>>>>>>>> phylia, i.e. a global ecosystem that sustains a community and its commons. >>>>>>>>>>>>> The pieces of the puzzle are beginning to get in place, but they have as >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet to find their integration in one clear example. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Where are you seeing multi-stakeholder coops take off? Is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there any place in particular where they are really thriving? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As I mentioned above, the field of social care in Quebec is >>>>>>>>>>>>> exemplary, and Margie Mendell tells us 98% of the new coops are solidartiy >>>>>>>>>>>>> coops. John Restakis has described the situation around Bologna. Key here >>>>>>>>>>>>> is that the care services are funded as a public service by the state, >>>>>>>>>>>>> guaranteeing universal access, but that the crafting of the process is a >>>>>>>>>>>>> co-production of all stakeholders, including the patient communities and >>>>>>>>>>>>> their families. Patients have a quite different vision of what they need >>>>>>>>>>>>> than process oriented industrial hospitals, resulting in soaring >>>>>>>>>>>>> satisfaction rates. In the commons transition plan that was crafted for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> government in Ecuador, the place giving to such cooperatives was primordial >>>>>>>>>>>>> and we introduced two radical new concepts: one are public - commons >>>>>>>>>>>>> partnerships, which should replace extractive forms of public-private >>>>>>>>>>>>> partnerships which exclude the particiption of civil society; and the other >>>>>>>>>>>>> is the commonification of public services, as was done for public water in >>>>>>>>>>>>> Napoli, which is now called 'Aqua Beni Communi', with a Commissioner for >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Commons in place within the City of Naples. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Why are multi-stakeholder coops viable in some places and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not others? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] You’ve said that multi-stakeholder coops are where the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> action is now. Why is that? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] What kind of transformational potential do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder coops hold, on a personal level as well as on a community >>>>>>>>>>>>>> level? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops require an advanced level of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> organization and communication? But committing to this process could prove >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be revolutionary in creating vital, thriving organizations. What are the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> biggest challenges to creating a multi-stakeholder coop and what’s the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> benefit of working through these challenges? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Multi-stakeholder coops are about more than people making >>>>>>>>>>>>>> money—they’re rooted in democratic process and require a shared vision by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all involved. What, would you say, is the higher purpose of these >>>>>>>>>>>>>> organizations? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] The word “solidarity” is used a lot in conjunction with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder coops. How do you see the solidarity movement and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder coop movement intertwining or working together? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] What kind of growth are we seeing with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder coop movement? What does it need to gain more traction? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] What is the big picture vision for this movement? What >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would you most like to see? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [?] Anything you’d like to add? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Michel Bauwens < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes, please do, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Cat Johnson < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Michel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just checking in to see if you're available to answer some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> email questions about multi-stakeholder coops. Let me know and I'll send >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some questions your way. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Cat Johnson < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thehouseofcat(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Michel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hope all is well with you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you available to answer some email questions about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-stakeholder coops for a Shareable Q&A? If so, I can get some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions sent off this week. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>>>>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>>>>>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>>>>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: >>>>>>>>>>> http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>>>> >>>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>>>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Cat Johnson >>>>>> Freelance Writer >>>>>> >>>>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>> >>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>> >>>>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>> >>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Cat Johnson >>>> Freelance Writer >>>> >>>> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >>>> Twitter.com/catjohnson >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>> >>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>> >>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: >>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>> >>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Cat Johnson >> Freelance Writer >> >> CatJohnson.wordpress.com >> Twitter.com/catjohnson >> >> > > > -- > Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: > http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan > > P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net > > <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: > http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens > > #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ > -- Cat Johnson Freelance Writer CatJohnson.wordpress.com Twitter.com/catjohnson -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Washington's class-apartheid internet proposal leaked: 'slow lanes' + censorship
by Michel Bauwens 06 Nov '14

06 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: peter waterman <peterwaterman1936(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:31 PM Subject: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Washington's class-apartheid internet proposal leaked: 'slow lanes' + censorship To: networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Patrick Bond <pbond(a)mail.ngo.za> Date: Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 2:00 AM Subject: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Washington's class-apartheid internet proposal leaked: 'slow lanes' + censorship To: DEBATE <debate-list(a)fahamu.org>, r2k_working_groups(a)googlegroups.com The FCC’s Net Neutrality proposal just leaked, and it’s terrible. Four million people spoke out against “slow lanes” and cable company censorship, and the FCC’s rules explicitly open the door for that kind of abuse. From what we’re hearing, they’re finalizing the rules right now. We can still stop this, but we have to act swiftly and show a strong response right away. We need an emergency protest in Washington, DC. Sign up and spread the word! <http://act.demandprogress.org/go/1383?t=1&akid=2753.1627305.1k6WZ9> Here’s the plan: we need to send a strong message to President Obama and the FCC right now that the Internet using public won’t just roll over and let them take our rights away. So, taking some inspiration from mass protests in Hungary that just defeated an unfair Internet Tax there, we’ll gather after dark at the White House and government buildings nationwide and hold up our glowing cell phones, laptops, tablets, to shine light on the corruption unfolding in Washington, DC that threatens our most basic freedoms. Will you join us on Thursday at the White House in Washington, DC? If you can’t make it, can you spread the word? Yes, I'll share or go to the action in Washington, DC on Thursday! <http://act.demandprogress.org/go/1383?t=2&akid=2753.1627305.1k6WZ9> The battle for the net is coming to head. Everything you can do right now matters more than you know. Here are the details for the event, please spread the word: *What: Vigil in front of the White House for the open Internet* *When: November 6th, 6pm EST* *Where : Gather in Lafayette Park, Washington DC (North Front of the White House)* *Bring: your cell phone, laptop, tablet, flashlight or candle to hold aloft in protest!* See you there, Demand Progress -- To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current email and log in using gmail to access the archives. https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups " debate-list(a)fahamu.org" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to debate-list+unsubscribe(a)fahamu.org. To post to this group, send email to debate-list(a)fahamu.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/ . -- 1. *Free EBook, November 5, 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. * * http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emanci… <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emanci…> * 2. *EBook, November 2012: Recovering Internationalism <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download formats]* 3. *EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum: Critical Explorations http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/>* 4. *Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: For the Global Emancipation of Labour <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* 5. *Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman. <http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.>* 6. *Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor) Social Movement Internationalisms. See Call for Papers <http://www.interfacejournal.net/>, (Deadline: May 1, 2014).* 7. *Needed: a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!) <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interf…>* 8. *Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements Confront a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) Almost 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980 <1980>'s-90's.* _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: ZNet Commentary: Alex Doherty: Climate and the Pentagon
by Michel Bauwens 05 Nov '14

05 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ZCommunications <michael.albert(a)zmag.org> Date: Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:03 AM Subject: ZNet Commentary: Alex Doherty: Climate and the Pentagon To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>. Alex Doherty: Climate and the PentagonZ Communications Daily Commentary In spite of the scientific consensus, the question of human responsibility for global climate change remains a topic of debate <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> within American political culture. Nonetheless, the United States Department of Defence (DoD), not needing to concern itself with manufactured controversies <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> of this nature, is pushing forward with its plans for adapting to climate change. Earlier this month the department released its ‘Climate Change Roadmap <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>‘ which details the various challenges the US military will face as climate change continues, and its effects intensify. Describing climate change as a “threat multiplier” the document is unambiguous about the seriousness of the threat posed: “Climate change will affect the Department of Defense’s ability to defend the Nation and poses immediate risks to U.S. national security.” The roadmap is part of a broader trend of military forces across the globe devoting greater attention, and resources, to the problems posed by climate change. According to the Global Security Defense Index <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> 70% of the world’s nations have now declared that climate change is a national security concern. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom is integrating <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> climate change thinking into its strategic planning and at its recent summit in Wales, NATO <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> devoted more time to the issue than it has hitherto. Amongst the threats diagnosed by the authors of the road map are increased frequency and severity of major climatic events, rising sea levels and attendant erosion, heat waves, changing patterns in precipitation, and growing conflict abroad. The US military is already having to devote significant resources to coping with the effects of major weather events. During the summer, USNORTHCOM battled wildfires <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> across much of the western United States – carrying out air drops that dropped tens of thousands of gallons of fire retardant onto more than thirty wildfires. Heat waves are projected to increase <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> in the American South West, leading to more fires and increasing budgetary pressure on the DoD. Whilst climate change will cause the US military to be busier within the United States the Pentagon also expects to increase its operations abroad in response to climate fuelled conflict. A recent study <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> by the National Bureau of Economic Research on the relationship between climate and conflict suggests that the DoD is quite correct in this expectation. Analysts found that a one-degree increase in global temperature might lead to a 14% change in intergroup conflict. The world is, of course, on track for far higher temperature increases – the already frightening projections of the IPCC are likely to be considerable underestimates <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> . The road map pays special attention to the Arctic where climate change is opening up access to new hydrocarbon resources and sea routes. If there are to be any winners from climate change, Canada and Russia are the most likely beneficiaries as they gain access to new resources, and their northern territories become open for agricultural production. It is no coincidence that both states are at the forefront <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> of climate change denial. Hoping to benefit from a warming Arctic both Canada and Russia are working to enhance their Naval capabilities in the region – with particular emphasis on icebreakers. The US is playing catch up in this regard, but the Navy and the US Coast Guard are moving rapidly to improve <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> their own Arctic capabilities. A primary concern for the DoD is the impact of climate change on US military bases and other installations. As the global hegemon American concern is, of course, not restricted to military installations in the United States but extends to the archipelago of more than 700 US bases <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> and other facilities across the globe. Climate change poses a genuine threat to these installations and the ability of the United States to continue to project power globally: “DoD installations are in essence “power projection platforms” from which the Department employs Forces across the full spectrum of military operations. As such, adapting to changing climate conditions is critical to the ability of the Department to address current and future threats, and sustain its mission.” The dangers posed to US facilities at home and abroad are neither theoretical nor confined to the future. The report notes that American base commanders are already responding to the impact of climate change. The US Army Corps of Engineers for their part recently announced <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> that one in three US military coastal projects are vulnerable to climate change – with one in four at extreme risk. Other threats the road map details are the effects of climate change upon US weapons platforms and the dangers climate change will pose to military supply chains. The manufacture of American military hardware depends upon the import of resources from outside the United States by private defence contractors. The military may find it is necessary to increase operations abroad to ensure the “stability” (meaning continued friendly disposition towards the United States) of producer states. Climate change will further threaten the effectiveness and combat readiness of US forces. The road map’s authors note that deterioration of the DoD’s ‘natural infrastructure’ may impair the ability of US forces to train in environments that are analogous to the terrain in which they are deployed overseas. The road map makes it clear that the DoD does not see climate change as an opportunity to rethink the role of the United States military. As the authors note the US military plays a very significant role in responding to climate change crises both at home and abroad (the US has unmatched capabilities for rapid respond around the world). And the Navy Fleet Numerical Meteorological and Oceanographic Center <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> and the Air Force Weather Agency <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> provide valuable data on the changing climate. The United States could divert funds from expensive and unnecessary weapons programs <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> towards these capacities and further improve its emergency response capabilities. Unsurprisingly the Department of Defense shows little interest in this kind of repurposing of the American military. Instead, the message from the DoD is loud and clear – business as usual, routine interference in the affairs of other states, and the maintenance of American military superiority – but all of this in the context of a severely deteriorating environment. Whilst the Pentagon’s commitment to the status quo is depressing, there is at least some hope to be gleaned from the seriousness with which the department takes the threat of climate change. The United States is a country where the military enjoys enormous <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>, if unwarranted, prestige. We can only hope that the American public start paying closer attention to what the US military is saying and doing regarding global climate change. *Alex Doherty is a co-founder** of **New Left Project* <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>* and a graduate student in the War Studies department of King’s College London. He has written for **Z Magazine* <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> * and **Open Democracy* <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>* amongst other publications. You can follow him on twitter **@alexdoherty7 <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>* ZCommunications, 18 Millfield St., Woods Hole, MA, USA, 02543 Unsubscribe <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> | Manage Subscription <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> If you'd like to unsubscribe and stop receiving these emails click here <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/unsubscribe?upn=V-2FUUiW5KvBPNV-2FItFYsbuIFOqr58Na…> . -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: ZNet Commentary: Esther Vivas: Class Struggle & Food
by Michel Bauwens 05 Nov '14

05 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ZCommunications <michael.albert(a)zmag.org> Date: Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:13 PM Subject: ZNet Commentary: Esther Vivas: Class Struggle & Food To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…>. Esther Vivas: Class Struggle & FoodZ Communications Daily Commentary Do the rich and poor eat the same? Do our incomes determine our diet? Today, who is overweight? Although often, and from certain quarters, the call for healthy and wholesome food is viewed with disdain, as “a fad” “posh”, “hippy” or “flower power” the reality is rather different than these short-sighted comments imply. To defend ecological, local, peasant food is most “revolutionary”. If we look closely we see how today’s agricultural model is determined by the interests of capital, by the interests of large companies (the agroindustrial sector and supermarkets), which seek to profit from something as essential as food. The capitalist system, in its race to transform needs into commodities, rights into privileges, making food, and especially food products of quality, into a luxury. Just as it has made housing only accessible to those who can afford it, and the same fate awaits our health and education systems. Although it is not only the logic of capital that impacts on food, the invisible hand of patriarchy also pulling the strings of this system. If not how is it that those who produce the most food, women, are the most hungry? Do not forget that between 60% and 80% of food production in the South, according to the FAO, is in the hands of women, however you are, paradoxically, it is women who suffer most from hunger, 60% globally. Women work the land, but do not have access to land ownership, means of production or agricultural credit. This not about being ideological, but to make it clear to all who consider the idea of “eating well” is, as they say in France, a thing of the “bobos, the “bohemian bourgeois”, that nothing could be further from the reality. If we answer the initial questions, the data confirms this. Do the rich and poor eat the same? No. Does our income determines our diet? Indeed. A study of Spain’s Platform of People Affected by Mortgages has put this in black and white: 45% of those who have been evicted have difficulty buying enough food to eat. Income puts limits on what we buy: it decreases consumption of beef and fish and in relation to the pre-crisis period, the consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables. In contrast, there’s been an increase in the purchase of less nutritious products, highly processed and high in calories, such as packaged sweets: cookies, chocolates, pastries and cakes. Our social class, education and purchasing power determines what we eat. So, today, who is overweight? In general, those who have less eat worse. Looking at the map of the Spanish peninsula it is clear: the regions with the highest poverty rates, such as Andalucía, Canarias, Castilla-La Mancha and Extremadura, have the highest population that is overweight. In the US, people with higher obesity problems are African American and Latino communities. The crisis only accentuates the difference between food for the rich and food for the poor. Questioning the dominant agricultural model and fighting for an alternative that places at its core people’s needs and respect for the land, is to get to the heart of the class struggle. The Agricultural Workers’ Union (Sindicato de Obreros del Campo, SOC) in Andalusia, led by Cañamero Diego and Juan Manuel Sánchez Gordillo, neither easily classifiable as “petty bourgeois”, are clear about it. Their work is to defend of a living countryside, land to the tiller, in favour of organic farming, for another model of consumption. This is a “fight” in defense of “nobodies”, the oppressed. To fight for food that is local, healthy and campesino is the most subversive battle there is. ZCommunications, 18 Millfield St., Woods Hole, MA, USA, 02543 Unsubscribe <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> | Manage Subscription <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/click?upn=CfxvrCXFYELtZdskNZLHR0dIc259CbJPYYp2kQLF…> If you'd like to unsubscribe and stop receiving these emails click here <http://send.zcomm.org/wf/unsubscribe?upn=V-2FUUiW5KvBPNV-2FItFYsbuIFOqr58Na…> . -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [Networkedlabour] 1 million climate jobs report now available online
by Michel Bauwens 04 Nov '14

04 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Anna Harris <anna(a)shsh.co.uk> Date: Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 8:44 PM Subject: [Networkedlabour] 1 million climate jobs report now available online To: "networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org" <networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org > One Million Climate Jobs report, revised and expanded, is now available online. This is the third edition of the ‘One Million Climate Jobs’ report, written with the support of trade unions and environmental groups. It has been completely revised, expanded and updated. 'To halt climate change we need drastic cuts in the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases we put into the air.''This booklet calculates and explains how we can allow for a just energy transition for workers, society and the planet.' http://www.campaigncc.org/greenjobs Please circulate to your lists. _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: Structural FSE and Feder Funds : over 60 Billion Euros a year for EU funded Regional Development Grants ?
by Michel Bauwens 02 Nov '14

02 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: 2014-11-02 7:34 GMT+07:00 Subject: Re: Structural FSE and Feder Funds : over 60 Billion Euros a year for EU funded Regional Development Grants ? To: "econowmix(a)googlegroups.com" <econowmix(a)googlegroups.com>, " op-n-m(a)googlegroups.com" <op-n-m(a)googlegroups.com> http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/thefunds/regional/index_fr.cfm Fonds européen de développement régional Le Fonds européen de développement régional (FEDER) a pour vocation de renforcer la cohésion économique et sociale dans l'Union européenne en corrigeant les déséquilibres entre ses régions. Les investissements du FEDER se concentrent sur plusieurs domaines prioritaires. Cette approche est appelée «concentration thématique»: - l’innovation et la recherche; - la stratégie numérique; - le soutien aux petites et moyennes entreprises (PME); - l’économie sobre en carbone. L’affectation des ressources du FEDER aux différentes priorités dépend de la catégorie à laquelle appartient la région. - dans les régions plus développées, au moins 80 % des fonds doivent être consacrés à au moins deux de ces priorités; - dans les régions en transition, ce pourcentage est de 60 %; - le pourcentage est de 50 % dans les régions moins développées. En outre, certaines ressources du FEDER doivent être investies spécifiquement dans des projets promouvant une économie sobre en carbone: - régions plus développées: 20 %; - régions en transition: 15 %; et - régions moins développées: 12 %. *La coopération territoriale européenne* Pour les programmes de coopération territoriale européenne <http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/cooperate/index_fr.cfm>, au moins 80 % des fonds seront concentrés sur les quatre domaines prioritaires susmentionnés. *Spécificités territoriales* Le FEDER accorde par ailleurs une attention particulière aux spécificités territoriales. Son action vise à pallier les problèmes économiques, environnementaux et sociaux dans les villes, en privilégiant le développement urbain durable. Les États membres devront réserver au moins 5 % des ressources du FEDER à ce domaine, par le biais d’«actions intégrées» gérées par les villes. Les zones présentant des handicaps géographiques naturels (régions insulaires, montagneuses ou peu peuplées) bénéficient d’un traitement privilégié. Enfin, les zones ultrapériphériques bénéficient aussi d’une aide spécifique du FEDER afin de compenser les désavantages dus à leur éloignement. *Pour en savoir plus:* - Règlement du Fonds Européen de Développement Régional <http://new.eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R1301> *Archives* Pour 2007-2013: - Règlement FEDER <http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/information/legislation/archives_2007_2…> - Règlement du Fonds Européen de Développement Régional <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32006R1080:FR:N…> Pour 2000-2006: - Le Fonds Européen de Développement Régional en période de programmation 2000-2006 <http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/funds/prord/prord_fr.htm> 2014-11-01 15:26 GMT+01:00 Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com>: > About 60 Billion Euros a year for EU funded Regional Development ? > http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/thefunds/funding/index_en.cfm > > > EU cohesion funding – key statistics > Available budget 2014-2020 > > Funding for regional and cohesion policy in 2014-2020 amounts to €351.8 bn. > Financial allocations 2014-2020 > > > > [image: Excel] Total allocations of Cohesion Policy 2014-2020* (million €) > <http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/what/future/xls/overall_table.xls> > /// > > > http://www.europe-en-france.gouv.fr/Configuration-Generale-Pages-secondaire… > FEDER > > *Le Fonds européen de développement régional (FEDER)* vise à renforcer la > cohésion économique et sociale au sein de l’Union européenne en corrigeant > les déséquilibres régionaux. > > [image: FEDER] > > En bref, le FEDER finance : > > - des aides directes aux investissements réalisés dans les entreprises > (en particulier les PME) afin de créer des emplois durables ; > > > - des infrastructures liées notamment à la recherche et l’innovation, > aux télécommunications, à l’environnement, à l’énergie et au transport ; > > > - des instruments financiers (fonds de capital-risque, fonds de > développement local, etc.) afin de soutenir le développement régional et > local et favoriser la coopération entre les villes et les régions ; > > > - des mesures d'assistance technique. > > > -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: Smart Manufacturing ? - Industry 4.0 ( Wikipedia )
by Michel Bauwens 01 Nov '14

01 Nov '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 8:17 PM Subject: Smart Manufacturing ? - Industry 4.0 ( Wikipedia ) To: "econowmix(a)googlegroups.com" <econowmix(a)googlegroups.com> Towards further automation ? ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_4.0 *Industry 4.0* is a project in the high-tech strategy of the German government <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_government>, which promotes the computerization <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Revolution> of the manufacturing industry.[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_4.0#cite_note-1> The goal is the intelligent factory <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory> (Smart Factory), which is characterized by adaptability, resource efficiency and ergonomics <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergonomics> as well as the integration of customers and business partners in business and value processes.[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_4.0#cite_note-2> [3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_4.0#cite_note-3> Technological basis are cyber-physical systems <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber-physical_system> and the Internet of Things <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_of_Things>.[4] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_4.0#cite_note-4> ... Some examples for Industry 4.0 are machines that predict failures and trigger maintenance processes autonomously or self-organized logistics that react to unexpected changes in the production. -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

2 1