December 2015 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) David Harvey on capitalism, labour, consumption, organising and limits to anarchism
by Michel Bauwens 20 Dec '15

20 Dec '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 1:55 PM Subject: [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) David Harvey on capitalism, labour, consumption, organising and limits to anarchism To: "<networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org>" < networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org> Begin forwarded message: *From:* Patrick Bond <pbond(a)mail.ngo.za> *Date:* 20 Dec 2015 07:19:24 GMT+1 *To:* DEBATE <debate-list(a)fahamu.org>, progeconnetwork(a)googlegroups.com, " scorai(a)listserver.njit.edu" <scorai(a)listserver.njit.edu> *Subject:* *[Debate-List] (Fwd) David Harvey on capitalism, labour, consumption, organising and limits to anarchism* *Reply-To:* pbond(a)mail.ngo.za *Consolidating Power * David Harvey December 9, 2015 Roar Magazine https://roarmag.org/magazine/david-harvey-consolidating-power/ David Harvey, one of the leading Marxist thinkers of our times, sits down with the activist collective AK Malabocas to discuss the transformations in the mode of capital accumulation, the centrality of the urban terrain in contemporary class struggles, and the implications of all this for anti-capitalist organizing. *AK Malabocas: In the last forty years, the mode of capital accumulation has changed globally. What do these changes mean for the struggle against capitalism?* David Harvey: From a macro-perspective, any mode of production tends to generate a very distinctive kind of opposition, which is a curious mirrored image of itself. If you look back to the 1960s or 1970s, when capital was organized in big corporatist, hierarchical forms, you had oppositional structures that were corporatist, unionist kinds of political apparatuses. In other words, a Fordist system generated a Fordist kind of opposition. With the breakdown of this form of industrial organization, particularly in the advanced capitalist countries, you ended up with a much more decentralized configuration of capital: more fluid over space and time than previously thought. At the same time we saw the emergence of an opposition that is about networking and decentralization and that doesn’t like hierarchy and the previous Fordist forms of opposition. So, in a funny sort of way, the leftists reorganize themselves in the same way capital accumulation is reorganized. If we understand that the left is a mirror image of what we are criticizing, then maybe what we should do is to break the mirror and get out of this symbiotic relationship with what we are criticizing. *In the Fordist era, the factory was the main site of resistance. Where can we find it now that capital has moved away from the factory floor towards the urban terrain?* First of all, the factory-form has not disappeared—you still find factories in Bangladesh or in China. What is interesting is how the mode of production in the core cities changed. For example, the logistics sector has undergone a huge expansion: UPS, DHL and all of these delivery workers are producing enormous values nowadays. Why would we say that producing cars is more important than producing hamburgers? Unfortunately the left is not comfortable with the idea of organizing fast-food workers. In the last decades, a huge shift has occurred in the service sector as well: the biggest employers of labor in the 1970s in the US were General Motors, Ford and US Steel. The biggest employers of labor today are McDonalds, Kentucky Fried Chicken and Walmart. Back then, the factory was the center of the working class, but today we find the working class mainly in the service sector. And why would we say that producing cars is more important than producing hamburgers? Unfortunately the left is not comfortable with the idea of organizing fast-food workers. Its picture of the classical working class doesn’t fit with value production of the service workers, the delivery workers, the restaurant workers, the supermarket workers. The proletariat did not disappear, but there is a new proletariat which has very different characteristics from the traditional one the left used to identify as the vanguard of the working class. In this sense, the McDonalds workers became the steel workers of the twenty-first century. *If this is what the new proletariat is about, where are the places to organize resistance now?* It’s very difficult to organize in the workplaces. For example, delivery drivers are moving all over the place. So this population could maybe be better organized outside the working place, meaning in their neighborhood structures. There is already an interesting phrase in Gramsci’s work from 1919 saying that organizing in the workplace and having workplace councils is all well, but we should have neighborhood councils, too. And the neighborhood councils, he said, have a better understanding of what the conditions of the whole working class are compared to the sectoral understanding of workplace organizing. Workplace organizers used to know very well what a steelworker was, but they didn’t understand what the proletariat was about as a whole. The neighborhood organization would then include for example the street cleaners, the house workers, the delivery drivers. Gramsci never really took this up and said: ‘come on, the Communist Party should organize neighborhood assemblies!’ Nevertheless, there are a few exceptions in the European context where Communist Parties did in fact organize neighborhood councils—because they couldn’t organize in the workplace, like in Spain for example. In the 1960s this was a very powerful form of organizing. Therefore—as I have argued for a very long time—we should look at the organization of neighborhoods as a form of class organization. Gramsci only mentioned it once in his writings and he never pursued it further. We should look at the organization of neighborhoods as a form of class organization. In Britain in the 1980s, there were forms of organizing labor in city-wide platforms on the basis of trades councils, which were doing what Gramsci suggested. But within the union movement these trades councils were always regarded as inferior forms of organizing labor. They were never treated as being foundational to how the union movement should operate. In fact, it turned out that the trades councils were often much more radical than the conventional trade unions and that was because they were rooted in the conditions of the whole working class, not only the often privileged sectors of the working-class. So, to the extent that they had a much broader definition of the working class, the trades councils tended to have much more radical politics. But this was never valorized by the trade union movement in general—it was always regarded as a space where the radicals could play. The advantages of this form of organizing are obvious: it overcomes the split between sectoral organizing, it includes all kinds of “deterritorialized” labor, and it is very suitable to new forms of community and assembly-based organization, as Murray Bookchin was advocating, for example. *In the recent waves of protest—in Spain and Greece, for instance, or in the Occupy movement—you can find this idea of “localizing resistance.” It seems that these movements tend to organize around issues of everyday life, rather than the big ideological questions that the traditional left used to focus on.* Why would you say that organizing around everyday life is not one of the big questions? I think it is one of the big questions. More than half of the world’s population lives in cities, and everyday life in cities is what people are exposed to and have their difficulties in. These difficulties reside as much in the sphere of the realization of value as in the sphere of the production of value. This is one of my very important theoretical arguments: everybody reads Volume I of Capital and nobody reads Volume II. Volume I is about the production of value, Volume II is about the realization of value. Focusing on Volume II, you clearly see that the conditions of realization are just as important as the conditions of production. Class struggles over realization—over affordable housing, for example—are just as significant for the working class as struggles of wages and work conditions. What is the point of having a higher wage if it is immediately taken back in terms of higher housing costs? Marx often talks about the necessity of seeing capital as the contradictory unity between production and realization. Where value is produced and where it is realized are two different things. For example, a lot of value is produced in China and is actually realized by Apple or by Walmart in the United States. And, of course, the realization of value is about the realization of value by means of expensive working-class consumption. Capital might concede higher wages at the point of production, but then it recuperates it at the point of realization by the fact that working people have to pay much higher rents and housing costs, telephone costs, credit card costs and so on. So class struggles over realization—over affordable housing, for example—are just as significant for the working class as struggles of wages and work conditions. What is the point of having a higher wage if it is immediately taken back in terms of higher housing costs? In their relationship to the working class, capitalists long ago learned that they can make a lot of money out of taking back what they have given away. And, to the degree that—particularly in the 1960s and 1970s—workers became increasingly empowered in the sphere of consumption, capital starts to concentrate much more on pulling back value through consumption. So the struggles in the sphere of realization, which where not that strong in Marx’s times, and the fact that nobody reads the damn book (Volume II), is a problem for the conventional left. When you say to me: ‘what is the macro-problem here?’—well, this is a macro-problem! The conception of capital and the relation between production and realization. If you don’t see the contradictory unity between both then you will not get the whole picture. Class struggle is written all over it and I can’t understand why a lot of Marxists can’t get their head around how important this is. The problem is how we understand Marx in 2015. In Marx’s times, the extent of urbanization was relatively convenient and the consumerism of the working class was almost non-existent, so all Marx had to talk about was that the working class manages to survive on a meager wage and that they are very sophisticated in doing that. Capital left them to their own devices to do what they like. But nowadays we are in a world where consumerism is responsible for about 30 percent of the dynamic of the global economy—in the US it’s even 70 percent. So why are we sitting here and saying consumerism is kind of irrelevant, sticking to Volume I and talking about production and not about consumerism? What urbanization does is to force us into certain kinds of consumerism, for example: you have to have an automobile. So your lifestyle is dictated in lots of ways by the form urbanization takes. And again, in Marx’s days this wasn’t significant, but in our days this is crucial. We have to get around with forms of organizing that actually recognize this change in the dynamic of class struggle. *Given this shift, the left would definitely have to adjust its tactics and forms of organizing, as well as its conception of what to organize for.* The groups that stamped the recent movements with their character, coming from the anarchist and autonomist traditions, are much more embedded in the politics of everyday life, much more than the traditional Marxists. I am very sympathetic to the anarchists, they have a much better line on this, precisely in dealing with the politics of consumption and their critique of what consumerism is about. Part of their objective is to change and reorganize everyday life around new and different principles. So I think this is a crucial point to which a lot of political action has to be directed these days. But I disagree with you in saying that this is no “big question.” *So, looking at examples from southern Europe—solidarity networks in Greece, self-organization in Spain or Turkey—these seem to be very crucial for building social movements around everyday life and basic needs these days. Do you see this as a promising approach?* I think it is very promising, but there is a clear self-limitation in it, which is a problem for me. The self-limitation is the reluctance to take power at some point. Bookchin, in his last book, says that the problem with the anarchists is their denial of the significance of power and their inability to take it. Bookchin doesn’t go this far, but I think it is the refusal to see the state as a possible partner to radical transformation. There is a tendency to regard the state as being the enemy, the 100 percent enemy. And there are plenty of examples of repressive states out of public control where this is the case. No question: the capitalist state has to be fought, but without dominating state power and without taking it on you quickly get into the story of what happened for example in 1936 and 1937 in Barcelona and then all over Spain. By refusing to take the state at a moment where they had the power to do it, the revolutionaries in Spain allowed the state to fall back into the hands of the bourgeoisie and the Stalinist wing of the Communist movement—and the state got reorganized and smashed the resistance. *That might be true for the Spanish state in the 1930s, but if we look at the contemporary neoliberal state and the retreat of the welfare state, what is left of the state to be conquered, to be seized?* To begin with, the left is not very good at answering the question of how we build massive infrastructures. How will the left build the Brooklyn bridge, for example? Any society relies on big infrastructures, infrastructures for a whole city—like the water supply, electricity and so on. I think that there is a big reluctance among the left to recognize that therefore we need some different forms of organization. The left is not very good at answering the question of how we build massive infrastructures, for which we need some different forms of organization. There are wings of the state apparatus, even of the neoliberal state apparatus, which are therefore terribly important—the center of disease control, for example. How do we respond to global epidemics such as Ebola and the like? You can’t do it in the anarchist way of DIY-organization. There are many instances where you need some state-like forms of infrastructure. We can’t confront the problem of global warming through decentralized forms of confrontations and activities alone. One example that is often mentioned, despite its many problems, is the Montreal Protocol to phase out the use of chlorofluorocarbon in refrigerators to limit the depletion of the ozone layer. It was successfully enforced in the 1990s but it needed some kind of organization that is very different to the one coming out of assembly-based politics. *From an anarchist perspective, I would say that it is possible to replace even supra-national institutions like the WHO with confederal organizations which are built from the bottom up and which eventually arrive at worldwide decision-making.* Maybe to a certain degree, but we have to be aware that there will always be some kind of hierarchies and we will always face problems like accountability or the right of recourse. There will be complicated relationships between, for example, people dealing with the problem of global warming from the standpoint of the world as a whole and from the standpoint of a group that is on the ground, let’s say in Hanover or somewhere, and that wonders: ‘why should we listen to what they are saying?’ *So you believe this would require some form of authority?* No, there will be authority structures anyway—there will always be. I have never been in an anarchist meeting where there was no secret authority structure. There is always this fantasy of everything being horizontal, but I sit there and watch and think: ‘oh god, there is a whole hierarchical structure in here—but it’s covert.’ *Coming back to the recent protests around the Mediterranean: many movements have focused on local struggles. What is the next step to take towards social transformation?* At some point we have to create organizations which are able to assemble and enforce social change on a broader scale. For example, will Podemos in Spain be able to do that? In a chaotic situation like the economic crisis of the last years, it is important for the left to act. If the left doesn’t make it, then the right-wing is the next option. I think—and I hate to say this—but I think the left has to be more pragmatic in relation to the dynamics going on right now. *More pragmatic in what sense?* Well, why did I support SYRIZA even though it is not a revolutionary party? Because it opened a space in which something different could happen and therefore it was a progressive move for me. It is a bit like Marx saying: the first step to freedom is the limitation of the length of the working day. Very narrow demands open up space for much more revolutionary outcomes, and even when there isn’t any possibility for any revolutionary outcomes, we have to look for compromise solutions which nevertheless roll back the neoliberal austerity nonsense and open the space where new forms of organizing can take place. Narrow demands open up space for more revolutionary outcomes. For example, it would be interesting if Podemos looked towards organizing forms of democratic confederalism—because in some ways Podemos originated with lots of assembly-type meetings taking place all over Spain, so they are very experienced with the assembly structure. The question is how they connect the assembly-form to some permanent forms of organization concerning their upcoming position as a strong party in Parliament. This also goes back to the question of consolidating power: you have to find ways to do so, because without it the bourgeoisie and corporate capitalism are going to find ways to reassert it and take the power back. *What do you think about the dilemma of solidarity networks filling the void after the retreat of the welfare state and indirectly becoming a partner of neoliberalism in this way?* There are two ways of organizing. One is a vast growth of the NGO sector, but a lot of that is externally funded, not grassroots, and doesn’t tackle the question of the big donors who set the agenda—which won’t be a radical agenda. Here we touch upon the privatization of the welfare state. This seems to me to be very different politically from grassroots organizations where people are on their own, saying: ‘OK, the state doesn’t take care of anything, so we are going to have to take care of it by ourselves.’ That seems to me to be leading to forms of grassroots organization with a very different political status. *But how to avoid filling that gap by helping, for example, unemployed people not to get squeezed out by neoliberal state?* Well there has to be an anti-capitalist agenda, so that when the group works with people everybody knows that it is not only about helping them to cope but that there is an organized intent to politically change the system in its entirety. This means having a very clear political project, which is problematic with decentralized, non-homogenous types of movements where somebody works one way, others work differently and there is no collective or common project. This connects to the very first question you raised: there is no coordination of what the political objectives are. And the danger is that you just help people cope and there will be no politics coming out of it. For example, Occupy Sandy helped people get back to their houses and they did terrific work, but in the end they did what the Red Cross and federal emergency services should have done. *The end of history seems to have passed already. Looking at the actual conditions and concrete examples of anti-capitalist struggle, do you think “winning” is still an option?* Definitely, and moreover, you have occupied factories in Greece, solidarity economies across production chains being forged, radical democratic institutions in Spain and many beautiful things happening in many other places. There is a healthy growth of recognition that we need to be much broader concerning politics among all these initiatives. The Marxist left tends to be a little bit dismissive of some of this stuff and I think they are wrong. But at the same time I don’t think that any of this is big enough on its own to actually deal with the fundamental structures of power that need to be challenged. Here we talk about nothing less than a state. So the left will have to rethink its theoretical and tactical apparatus. David Harvey is the Distinguished Professor of Anthropology and Geography at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). His most recent book is Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism (Profile, 2014). -- 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 https://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/. _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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: [Enspiral] Announcing a new Enspiral Venture: Human Methods Lab!
by Michel Bauwens 18 Dec '15

18 Dec '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Theodore Taptiklis (Loomio) <notifications(a)loomio.org> Date: Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 11:01 AM Subject: [Enspiral] Announcing a new Enspiral Venture: Human Methods Lab! To: michel(a)p2pfoundation.net Theodore Taptiklis started a discussion in Enspiral: *Announcing a new Enspiral Venture: Human Methods Lab! <https://www.loomio.org/d/xMjTSHks/announcing-a-new-enspiral-venture-human-m…>* Richard Bartlett, Marianne Elliott and I have just launched a new website ( www.humanmethodslab.org) to attract participants, funders and sponsors to a research enterprise that is intended to underpin the platform development work of Enspiral that we have begun with Loomio. The resilience domain is an early target and we are looking for cornerstone partnerships here with Lloyds Register Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation. Foundations are however notoriously elusive and we’ll have to discover whether our ambitions here are the right ones. We’re also making connections with other research interests, both academic and commercial. If you’d like to check out our research prospectus and our first research product - a podcast exploring What Loomio Does in the voices of long-term users - we’d be grateful for any thoughts or feedback. — Reply to this email directly or view it on www.loomio.org <https://www.loomio.org/d/xMjTSHks/announcing-a-new-enspiral-venture-human-m…>. Turn on emails for this discussion <https://www.loomio.org/email_actions/follow_discussion/128967/rrFzFVx2JMf92…> to receive further activity. Change your email preferences <https://www.loomio.org/email_preferences?unsubscribe_token=rrFzFVx2JMf92XWW…> to unsubscribe from these emails. -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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

Dynamics of Virtual Work: Book series launch
by Christian Fuchs 17 Dec '15

17 Dec '15

Dynamics of Virtual Work Book Series Launch University of Westminster 309 Regent Street, W1B 2HW, London January 21, 2016, 18:00-20:00 http://www.westminster.ac.uk/camri/events/dynamics-of-virtual-work Registration: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/dynamics-of-virtual-work-tickets-19751489236 Sponsored by the University of Westminster’s Communications and Media Research Institute (CAMRI), the University of Hertfordshire and Palgrave MacMillan, this event will launch an important new book series. The Dynamics of Virtual Work series, is edited by Ursula Huws, Professor of Labour and Globalization at the University of Hertfordshire and Rosalind Gill, Professor of Cultural and Social Analysis at City University, this series was developed under the auspices of COST Action IS 1202. Technological change has transformed where people work, when, how and with whom. Digitisation of information has altered labour processes out of all recognition whilst telecommunications have enabled jobs to be relocated globally. ICTs have also enabled the creation of entirely new types of 'digital' or 'virtual' labour, both paid and unpaid, shifting the borderline between 'play' and 'work' and creating new types of unpaid labour connected with the consumption and co-creation of goods and services. Aspects of these changes have been studied separately by many different academic experts however up till now a cohesive overarching analytical framework has been lacking. Drawing on a major, high-profile COST Action (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Dynamics of Virtual Work, this series will bring together leading international experts from a wide range of disciplines including political economy, labour sociology, economic geography, communications studies, technology, gender studies, social psychology, organisation studies, industrial relations and development studies to explore the transformation of work and labour in the Internet Age. The series will allow researchers to speak across disciplinary boundaries, national borders, theoretical and political vocabularies, and different languages to understand and make sense of contemporary transformations in work and social life more broadly. The first two volumes in the series are already published, with more in the pipeline. Already Published Digital Labour and Prosumer Capitalism – edited by Olivier Frayssé and Mathieu O'Neil Reconsidering Value and Labour in the Digital Age – edited by Eran Fisher and Christian Fuchs The published books will be on sale at the event at a 50% discount and the bookseller will accept cash in British pounds only.*

1 0

Fwd: CoR opinion on the Sharing Economy adopted
by Michel Bauwens 17 Dec '15

17 Dec '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Brunelet Nils <Nils.Brunelet(a)cor.europa.eu> Date: Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:21 AM Subject: CoR opinion on the Sharing Economy adopted To: "michel(a)p2pfoundation.net" <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> Dear Mr Bawens, At its Plenary Session of 3-4 December 2015, the European Committee of the Regions adopted its opinion on the local and regional dimension of the sharing economy. The rapporteur for this opinion was Benedetta Brighenti (IT/PES), Deputy mayor of the municipality of Castelnuovo Rangone, province of Modena. The final, adopted opinion is available here in English <https://webapi.cor.europa.eu/documentsanonymous/COR-2015-02698-00-00-AC-TRA…> and in Italian <https://webapi.cor.europa.eu/documentsanonymous/COR-2015-02698-00-00-AC-TRA…>. Additional information on the opinion is available on the Opinion Factsheet <http://cor.europa.eu/en/activities/opinions/pages/opinion-factsheet.aspx?Op…> page on the CoR website, which also gives access to the opinion in other language versions as they become available. The CoR trusts that you will duly consider the recommendations presented in this opinion, including the following key messages: · The Committee of the Regions (CoR) first of all notes that the European Commission uses the term of "collaborative economy" rather than "sharing economy" and that it has made a first effort in its recent Communication on "Upgrading the Single Market" to define the concept. In the CoR's view, however, the proposed definition focuses on the commercial and consumer aspects of the sharing economy while leaving aside the non-commercial and commons-based approaches. The Committee therefore calls on the European Commission to further analyse and later define the different forms of the sharing economy. · On the topic of regulation, the CoR believes that EU sectoral regulation is necessary for the commercial aspects of the sharing economy to ensure legal certainty and fair competition for operators, especially with respect to taxation. Hard regulatory initiatives should keep a sectoral approach and take into account the scale of the sharing economy initiative as a criterion to draw regulatory lines. EU institutions and legislation should provide a sound framework, institutional and legal guidance and ongoing access to expertise and other assistance appropriate for implementation. · Furthermore, the Committee calls on all EU institutions dealing with the sharing or collaborative economy to adopt a holistic approach, addressing the sharing economy as an economic, political and social phenomenon and to coordinate their efforts, in view of the widespread changes that it could cause to current economic systems, through a sharing economy public policy agenda built collaboratively. · Lastly, the CoR considers in its opinion that many of the sectors touched by the sharing economy have a, sometimes disruptive, impact at the local and regional level and that it should therefore be possible for them to be governed or regulated as necessary by local and regional authorities (LRAs), in compliance with the principle of local autonomy, in order to allow LRAs to adapt sharing economy initiatives and ventures to local conditions. For further information regarding this opinion, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, [image: CoR-EN] *Nils Brunelet* Administrator Commission for Economic Policy (ECON) *[image: colour strip]* *Tel: +32 (0)* 282 25 65 Web: www.cor.europa.eu Les informations contenues dans ce message et/ou ses annexes sont réservées à l'attention et à l'utilisation de leur destinataire et peuvent être confidentielles. Si vous n'êtes pas destinataire de ce message, vous êtes informé que vous l'avez reçu par erreur et que toute utilisation en est interdite. Dans ce cas, vous êtes prié de le détruire et d'en informer l'émetteur. The information in this message and/or attachments is intended solely for the attention and use of the intended recipient and may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that you have received it in error and that any use of it is prohibited. In such a case, please delete this message and kindly notify the sender accordingly. -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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

Beyond Colonialism, Development and Globalization**
by Michel Bauwens 17 Dec '15

17 Dec '15

CONTACT: Zed Books, The Foundry, 17 Oval Way, London SE11 5RR Tel: 020 3752 5833 Email: sales(a)zedbooks.net ****************** *Beyond Colonialism, Development and Globalization** */*Social Movements and Critical Perspectives*/ Edited by Dominique Caouette and Dip Kapoor Development studies is in a state of flux. A new generation of scholars has come to reject what was once regarded as accepted wisdom, and increasingly regard development and globalization as part of a continuum with colonialism, premised on the same reductionist assumption that progress and growth are objective facts that can be fostered, measured, assessed and controlled. Drawing on a variety of theoretical perspectives and approaches, this book explores the ways in which social movements in the Global South are rejecting Western-centric notions of development and modernization, as well as creating their own alternatives. By assessing development theories from the perspective of subaltern groups and movements, the contributors posit a new notion of development ‘from below’, one in which these movements provide new ways of imagining social transformation, and a way out of the ‘developmental dead end’ that has so far characterized post-development approaches. Beyond Colonialism, Development and Globalization therefore represents a radical break with the prevailing narrative of modernization, and points to a bold new direction for development studies. *Reviews* ‘A brilliant book that brings together fascinating studies on a range of key social movements. It will be extremely useful to academics and activists worldwide.’ ~ Saturino Borras, International Institute of Social Studies, The Hague ‘The poor, excluded, and outcast who are the supposed beneficiaries of development have rarely been afford the chance to have their voices heard, let alone valued, in shaping what development means. The anthology of experiences in this collection is a powerful corrective to this lacuna. A moving and inspiring book which demands to be read.’ ~ Jim Crowther, University of Edinburgh ‘Caouette and Kapoor have assembled a rich set of case studies of socio-cultural struggles in the global South. This book offers a significant new perspective on the generation of alternative knowledges in local encounters of global processes.’ ~ Philip McMichael, Cornell University ‘Centres Indigenous critiques to inject new urgency into debates over development and globalization, as resurgent social movements question modernity itself. Places the current day struggles of the South firmly in a decolonizing frame.’ ~ Clare Land, author of Decolonizing Solidarity ‘This excellent volume discusses and debunks dominant discourses of "development" from a southern, subaltern and decolonising perspective. This is a much needed book – emancipatory in conception, grassroots-oriented, inspiring and revealing!’ ~ Peter Mayo, author of Politics of Indignation *Table of Contents* 1. Beyond Colonialism, Development and Globalization: Social Movements and Critical Perspectives by Dominique Caouette & Dip Kapoor /*Part I: Indigenous and Peasant Movement Perspectives*/ 2. Subaltern Social Movement Post-Mortems of Development in India: Rural Dispossession, Trans-local Activism and Subaltern Re-visitations by Dip Kapoor 3. Democratic Hopes, Neoliberal Transnational Government(re)ality: Grounded Social Movements and the Defence of Communal Natural Resources in Ghana by Jonathan Langdon 4. Indigenous Movement Politics in Bolivia: Forging New Citizens of a Plurinational and Decolonized State by Stéphanie Rousseau /*Part II: Acting across Borders*/ 5. What are Peasants Saying about Development? La Vía Campesina and Food Sovereignty by Annette Aurélie Desmarais 6. Debunking the Productivist Myth: Food Sovereignty Movements by Eric G. Chaurette & Beatriz Oliver 7. Neoliberal Immigration and Temporary Foreign Worker Programs in a Time of Economic Crisis: Local/Global Struggles by Aziz Choudry 8. Working for a Day Off: Advocating for the Rights of Migrant Women in Southeast Asia by Michele Ford & Lenore Lyons 9. The Alter-globalization Movement: A New Humanism? The Case of the World Social Forum by Kléber Ghimire /*Part III: Reflections on Critical Knowledge, Culture and Pedagogy*/ 10. Liberating Development from the Rule of an Episteme by Dia da Costa 11. Neoliberal Globalization as the Settler Colonialism the Remix: Centring Indigenous Resistance and Resurgence by Sandy Grande & Naadli (Todd Ormiston) 12. Globalization, Culture and Development: Perspectives on Africa by Ali A. Abdi 13. Learning, Knowledge and Action in Social Movements by Brian K. Murphy 14. Conclusion by Dominique Caouette *********** Zed Books, The Foundry, 17 Oval Way, London SE11 5RR Tel: 020 3752 5833 Email: sales(a)zedbooks.net -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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

CfP 8 Jan dln: Mapping Alternative Routes out of Capitalism
by Michel Bauwens 17 Dec '15

17 Dec '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 5:40 PM Subject: [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: EISA CfP 8 Jan dln: Mapping Alternative Routes out of Capitalism To: "<networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org>" < networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org> *From:* Phoebe Moore <pvm.doc(a)GMAIL.COM> *Date:* 17 Dec 2015 11:19:10 GMT+1 *To:* CRITICAL-LABOUR-STUDIES(a)JISCMAIL.AC.UK *Subject:* *EISA CfP 8 Jan dln: Mapping Alternative Routes out of Capitalism* *Reply-To:* Phoebe Moore <pvm.doc(a)GMAIL.COM> *Reminder - Deadline for this call for papers is 8 January - * *Section title: Mapping Alternative Routes out of Capitalism *Different forms of struggle in contemporary capitalism - including anti-austerity movements, occupations, direct action, workplace organising, the continued role of trade unions, recent attempts to re-engage with electoral politics (Syriza, Podemos, Jeremy Corbyn) and alternatives to capitalism within the present - cooperatives, autonomous education projects, housing initiatives. ----- See below a call for panels and papers for a section in the European International Studies Association conference, Izmir, Turkey, 7-10 September 2016. The section seeks panels and papers on alternatives to capitalism, and how we might achieve them, both within the capitalist present and on the route to a post-capitalist society. The deadline for proposals is 8 January 2016 and must be done online through the EISA conference tool website - https://www.conftool.pro/paneuropean2016/ * Please feel free to contact us first to discuss informally ahead of submitting proposals: * *David Bailey (d.j.bailey(a)bham.ac.uk <d.j.bailey(a)bham.ac.uk>) and Phoebe Moore (p.moore(a)mdx.ac.uk <p.moore(a)mdx.ac.uk>)* *Section title: Mapping Alternative Routes out of Capitalism * Section abstract: The critical study of global capitalism and the hegemony of neoliberalism are both central to the study of international relations and international political economy. International studies has focused less, however, on questioning how (if at all) we might go beyond capitalism. This is despite global capitalism remaining dangerously unstable, not least because the global economic crisis that began in 2008 continues to linger without any obvious resolution to it. The aim of this section, therefore, is to bring together those with an interest in the rise of alternatives at varied positions along the ideological spectrum; mapping, studying, theorising, highlighting, judging and assessing practices which form contemporary alternatives to, and problems for, global capitalism. This includes pathways in local, regional and global contexts. In particular, we note two emerging types of response, each of which expose the ever-present possibility and presence of sometimes surprising and contradictory routes outside of capitalism, as well as raising the question of technology in contemporary social change. On the one hand, we see various modified projects seeking alternative routes to social justice and rights: futurist, anti-proprietary or gift culture movements, survivalism, cooperatives, DIY culture, permaculture, experimentation with cybernetics and post-humanist ideals, as well as revived institutional interests in wellbeing. On the other hand, we see the explicit contestation of capitalism through varyingly autonomous forms of struggle: Occupy, the indignados, the Greek grassroots projects, Rojava, and, then, the electoral manifestation of some of these trends within Syriza, Podemos, Barcelona en Comú, and Jeremy Corbyn. Section convenors: David Bailey (d.j.bailey(a)bham.ac.uk) and Phoebe Moore ( p.moore(a)mdx.ac.uk) Submissions to be made here: https://www.conftool.pro/paneuropean2016/ Deadline for submissions: 8 January 2016 Conference website and more details: www.paneuropeanconference.org/2016 _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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

crucial article on the new ways of organizing solidarity amongst precarious labor
by Michel Bauwens 17 Dec '15

17 Dec '15

this is a great french overview report: http://www.saw-b.be/spip/IMG/pdf/a1515_mutuelles_de_travail.pdf -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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

Call for proposals for the Global Social Economy Forum-GSEF 2016 is now open!
by Kevin Flanagan 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

Be there! Montreal, November 7-9, 2016 *3 days / over 30 workshops / site visits and hundreds of meeting opportunities* to: - *Share your best practices* and learn about others in the social and solidarity economy taking place around the planet in collaboration with local governments. - *Identify opportunities and issues regarding coordinated action* between your *local governments* and *SSE stakeholders* - *Promote coordinated international actions* to foster the development of the SSE in your area. - *Share your best practices *for the development of cities supported by local governments and learn about others in place elsewhere in the world. - *Identify opportunities and challenges for collaborations *between your *local governments* and *SSE actors.* Detail <http://www.gsef2016.org/program/who-why/?lang=en> What is the GSEF Association? The *Global Social Economy Forum (GSEF)* is an international association that brings together local governments and civil society stakeholders committed to supporting the development of the social and solidarity economy (SSE). Its mission is to promote cooperation among social and solidarity economy organizations and local governments to stimulate the creation of quality jobs, equitable growth, and the advancement of participatory democracy and sustainable development. Call for proposals: *PRESENT YOUR PROPOSAL!* <http://www.gsef2016.org/program/call-for-proposals/?lang=en> Have you developed an innovative initiative in collaboration with actors of the social and solidarity economy and/or public agencies, for the development of cities? If so, present it at GSEF2016 and share your experience with the over 2000 participants expected to attend. *Detail* <http://www.gsef2016.org/program/call-for-proposals/?lang=en> Call for Proposals closing date: *January 3, 2016* To know more: www.gsef2016.org <http://www.gsef2016.org%20> -- https://twitter.com/flgnk Skype: kev.flanagan Phone: +353 87 743 5660

3 3

Re: [P2P-F] Fwd: My new story on TC: Your Algorithmic Self Meets Super-Intelligent AI
by Eric Hunting 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

This was a nice article. It's refreshing to see something on this subject that doesn't wallow in the dystopian and can offer a more positive outlook. This notion of an Algorithmic Self relates to what I've come to call Social-Semantic Networking and the concept of the Digital Tao. What the author describes as that personal software associated with the Algorithmic Self I envision as the personal portion of a social information web as part of a local semantic desktop platform like Netention. And this serves as front-end interacting with a larger social-semantic web platform. The basic point of a semantic web is to automate the associations between information and in a social-semantic network this is used to auto-associate the cumulative 'stories' of people's lives and personal information (a personal 'spime', if you will) in order to seek mutually constructive connections across a community and within a networked infrastructure without having to publicly share private information. (because it's making associations based on metadata rather than direct information which only needs to be shared within the limited contexts of exchanges) Through analysis of association within the personal semantic web models of personal need and intent can be created and related to the intents of others, thus allowing the larger social semantic web to create a basis of what I call a cybernetic pronoia conspiracy--the Internet as a silent conspiracy that's out to help you and everyone else because the network actually understands you as a person. This also creates the basis of social capital in the form of reputation and an alignment between the modeled intent of an individual and the intent of the larger society as a measure of personal merit. (this being used to mediate the access to resources above a common baseline--the Integral Basic Income coded into general production demand priorities) The idea of the Digital Tao is a notion of total socio-economic automation through the integration of a social-semantic web with an environmental sensor web, a Smart Habitat web as part of the infrastructure of the built habitat, and an open reciprocal production web deriving from the progressive dispersal, localization, and infrastructure integration of production and distribution systems. The Digital Tao relates a model of societal intent and individual social capital to a deep quantitative analysis of supply and demand so as to use predictive demand projection to drive production instead of flows of currency. (assuming, of course, we've achieved a shift in culture wto here we stop needing money to live by virtue of UBI and stop chasing wealth to buy love or the consumer crap to futilely substitute for it...) So the 'tao' in this sense is the current of societal needs and intent reflected in a 'weight' of resource flows and production priorities coded into the stigmergic organization of the production web. This determines the baseline for the integral basic income--the baseline of goods on-demand needed to keep people generally comfortable--and the less routine flows to meet exceptional personal and group resource demands (for personal and group projects) based on individual and pooled social capital. The future production web is like a colony of ants or termites whose behavior is managed by set of dynamically weighted priorities determined by the intent modeled in the social-semantic network and which 'smells' geographical concentrations or pools of demand and social capital to direct resource flows to meet that demand. On 12/15/15 9:01 AM, p2p-foundation-request(a)lists.ourproject.org wrote: > Subject: > [P2P-F] Fwd: My new story on TC: Your Algorithmic Self Meets > Super-Intelligent AI > From: > Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > Date: > 12/15/15, 8:55 AM > > To: > p2p-foundation <p2p-foundation(a)lists.ourproject.org> > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Jarno Mikael Koponen* <jarno.koponen(a)gmail.com > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:42 PM > Subject: My new story on TC: Your Algorithmic Self Meets > Super-Intelligent AI > To: Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > Hi Michel, > > Hope you're well. Continuing on personal algorithms, data ethics, UX > and super-intelligent AI: > http://techcrunch.com/2015/12/14/your-algorithmic-self-meets-super-intellig… > > Always curious hearing what you think, thanks! -Jarno M. > https://twitter.com/ilparone > > Jarno Mikael Koponen > jarno.koponen(a)gmail.com <mailto:[email protected]> > -- Eric Hunting erichunting(a)gmail.com

1 0

Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] 2 PhD scholarships in digital labour analysis & digital ideology critique
by Michel Bauwens 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Christian Fuchs <christian.fuchs(a)uti.at> Date: Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 8:23 PM Subject: [NetworkedLabour] 2 PhD scholarships in digital labour analysis & digital ideology critique To: networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org 2 PhD scholarships in digital labour analysis & digital ideology critique University of Westminster: Westminster Institute for Advanced Studies & Comunication and Media Research Institute (CAMRI) Three years, full time £16,000 annual stipend plus fee waiver http://www.westminster.ac.uk/courses/research-degrees/research-areas/media-… http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AMQ147/westminster-institute-for-advanced-studies… The Westminster Institute for Advanced Studies and the Westminster School of Media, Arts & Design are pleased to offer two PhD Studentships, consisting of a fee waiver and annual stipend of £16,000 for three years. The Studentship will commence in September 2016, and is available to applicants with a Home (UK) or EU fee status. The Westminster Institute for Advanced Studies (WIAS) is a new institute at the University of Westminster. It is an academic space for independent critical thinking beyond borders. The WIAS’s aim is to foster and disseminate advanced studies that generate insights into the complex realities and possibilities of the contemporary world. The WIAS first research focus is critical social media research. Professor Christian Fuchs is the Institute’s director. We welcome proposals that fit into the WIAS’s research framework of critical social/digital media research and give particular focus to the theoretical and empirical analysis of particular questions having to do with a) the political economy of digital labour or b) the ideology critique of social media data and discourses. The Communication and Media Research Institute (CAMRI) is one of the leading research groups in media and communication. Its work has been rated by the UK Government’s 2014 Research Excellence Framework as 52% 4* (world leading), and 35% 3* (internationally excellent). We have over 20 research active staff and 70 PhD students. We have a wide and expanding range of research interests, centered on three main research groups in social media, media policy and industries and media history. We have established centres for the study of the media in China, India, the Arab world and Africa. In the broadest sense we are interested in the social, economic, political and cultural significance of the media, and welcome proposals from prospective students on these or any other topic related to media and communication. Eligible candidates will hold at least an upper second class honours degree and a Master’s degree. Candidates whose secondary level education has not been conducted in the medium of English should also demonstrate evidence of appropriate English language proficiency, normally defined as 6.5 in IELTS (with not less than 6.0 in any of the individual elements). Entry requirements: http://www.westminster.ac.uk/courses/research-degrees/entry-requirements The Studentship consists of a fee waiver and a stipend of £16,000 per annum. Successful candidates will be expected to undertake some teaching duties. Prospective candidates wishing to informally discuss an application should contact Professor Christian Fuchs, c.fuchs(a)westminster.ac.uk <mailto:[email protected]>, or Dr Anthony McNicholas, mcnichc(a)westminster.ac.uk <mailto:[email protected]>. The closing date for applications is 5pm, 21 January 2016 Application and Application Guidelines: http://www.westminster.ac.uk/courses/research-degrees/research-areas/media-… -- Prof. Christian Fuchs University of Westminster, Director of the Communication and Media Research Institute, http://www.westminster.ac.uk/camri, Director of the Westminster Institute for Advanced Studies @fuchschristian c.fuchs(a)westminster.ac.uk +44 (0) 20 7911 5000 ext 67380 _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org 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