July 2016 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: Program Summer-School: Exploring the Commons
by Michel Bauwens 09 Jul '16

09 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Roberto Merrill <nrbmerrill(a)gmail.com> Date: Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 4:16 AM Subject: Program Summer-School: Exploring the Commons To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004(a)gmail.com> Dear colleagues, the program of the Summer-School in "Political Philosophy & Public Policy": *Exploring the Commons* is now available on line, please have a look here: http://commonsexplore.weebly.com/program.html Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/events/1559141834384731/ The school will take place at the University of Minho, Braga, from July 18 to 20. For those interested in the political philosophy of the commons, hope to see you in charming Braga this summer :-) Cheers, Roberto -- Roberto Merrill Assistant Professor Department of Philosophy University of Minho E-mail: roberto.merrill(a)ilch.uminho.pt Tel: +351 253601623 Homepage: https://sites.google.com/site/nrbmerrill/ UMinho in transition: http://hortacomunitaria.tumblr.com/ -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: Your video-interview - Conference "Shaping the new world of work"
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

the following was taped (one minute) during my intervention at the European Trade Union Congress on 29/6 Dear Mr. Bauwens, We would like to thank you very much for making last week’s Conference "Shaping the new world of work" a success. You can find hereunder the link to your video-interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uIS9LkMWzk Kind regards, Denis Grégoire Communication Officer *HesaMag* editor dgregoire(a)etui.org Direct line: + 32 (0) 2 224 05 52 European Trade Union Institute Bd du Roi Albert II, 5 1210 Brussels Belgium [image: Description: logo-signature] -- 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/

2 2

Fwd: An Update from IFLAS at The University of Cumbria
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Suvituulia Huotari & Marcus Petz <ravenwyn(a)gmail.com> Date: Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 4:58 PM Subject: Fwd: An Update from IFLAS at The University of Cumbria To: John Rogers <john.rogers(a)valueforpeople.co.uk>, "Jeffery J. Smith" < jjs(a)geonomics.org>, Clive Lord <clive.lord(a)lineone.net>, "Spash, Clive L." < Clive.Spash(a)wu.ac.at>, Franz Nahrada <globalvillagesinfo(a)gmail.com>, Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com>, Michel Bauwens < michel(a)p2pfoundation.net>, Carina Christensen <carina.brit(a)gmail.com>, Anette Pekrul <anette.pekrul(a)hotmail.de> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Pyrah, Martin <martin.pyrah(a)cumbria.ac.uk> Date: Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:56 AM Subject: An Update from IFLAS at The University of Cumbria To: "ravenwyn(a)gmail.com" <ravenwyn(a)gmail.com> Greetings Mark The Institute for Leadership and Sustainability continues to promote meaningful learning on sustainable development, teaching around 300 senior executives from dozens of countries over the past 12 months. Yet as a fairly new organisation, we really welcome any support to help get the word out. Therefore, if you could forward the following information to anyone you know currently considering studies in either sustainability leadership or complementary currencies, it could help us increase our reach. The next intake for our course on sustainability leadership is September 9th and lasts 6 days. Currently the prospective student list includes environmental NGOs, entrepreneurs, management trainers and government officials. People who complete this course can then progress onto other qualifications, including our all new MA in Leadership Development. Further information on the September course is available from tony.randall(a)cumbria.ac.uk and info on the full Masters is here <http://iflas.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/enquire-now-for-new-ma-in-leadership.ht…>. In the past 18 months we have run a free online course on complementary currencies, reaching hundreds of people. It takes a month and the next offer starts August 21st. You can read more about it here <http://iflas.blogspot.co.id/2014/12/money-and-society-mooc.html>. We continue to expand our research in both these fields, in particular through our PhD students. Our latest is Jo Chaffer, who is studying the use of the wild outdoors for leadership development. This is becoming a theme for IFLAS, with both Jo and another of our students, Georgia Wingfield Hayes, each organising wilderness retreats for leadership development. Jo's is in Nepal <http://www.yetimountainhome.com/special-yeti/heart-mountain> and Georgia's will be in Costa Rica <http://www.leadingwild.com>. If you would like to do an interdisciplinary PhD on leadership development for social change, then please contact me at jem.bendell(a)cumbria.ac.uk The carbon footprint of our activities is something we must consider. Cumbria was particularly badly hit by floods that are becoming both more common and more extreme. The University has undertaken a range of initiatives to cut carbon. Flying is a major emitter when looked at individually. Should people who work on sustainability issues cut their emissions from flying as part of their leadership? Or could this distract from a focus on seeking significant change in global emissions by working ambitiously on root causes and collective action? This is a debate I invited with an article for OpenDemocracy, which I’d welcome your thoughts on via our Sustainable Leaders LinkedIn Group here <https://www.linkedin.com/groups/4778761/4778761-6148387608742461441> (log in required for LinkedIn). For our friends and colleagues based in or near Cumbria, we have launched an informal social network, in the form of an email group that you can join to discover or share what is happening in the region. We thank Ken Royall for volunteering to moderate the group. You can join here <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/leadingwellcumbria>. If you have a Linkedin or Facebook account, or relevant email network, and like what we do, we would really welcome it if you could share something like the following with your colleagues and friends… *…An innovative institute in the English Lake District is offering a Certificate of Achievement in Sustainable Leadership, over 6 days, starting this September 9th. The cohort includes management trainers and sustainability specialists. The course is the first step for some participants in their new MA in Leadership Development. See * *http://iflas.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/enquire-now-for-new-ma-in-leadership.html* <http://iflas.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/enquire-now-for-new-ma-in-leadership.ht…> *They also offer a free online course on currency innovation for sustainable development. The next starts August 21st. See: * *http://ho.io/mooc* <http://ho.io/mooc> Thanks, Jem Bendell Professor of Sustainability Leadership, University of Cumbria www.iflas.info [This email is sent to you on behalf of Prof Bendell by Martin Pyrah as we have corresponded with you in the past] University of Cumbria is a Company Limited by Guarantee, Registered in England & Wales No. 06033238. Registered Office: University of Cumbria, Fusehill Street, Carlisle, CA1 2HH. Telephone 01228 616234. Confidentiality: This email and its attachments are intended for the above named only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please reply to this email and highlight the error. Security Warning: Please note that this email has been created in the knowledge that Internet email is not a 100% secure communications medium. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of security when emailing us. Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. -- 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

Re: [P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] questions re funding of p2p value conference
by Orsan Senalp 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

Dear Pat, Silke, Michel, Kevin, Elisabetta, Stacco, James, and all, Thanks all for your open and sincere answers. At least out of irritation and frustration some details of some processes came under day light, in this way. I agree that there has been many assumptions behind my accusationd; but they are at least as many as they are supported with information and serious critics. About governance-democracy-opennes-prefigurative aciton i think we have Remix The Commons model; that could have been taken as a model in this sense; not only in words but putting in to inter-networking or bridging practice. As in WSF practice; open space building between closed NgOs has been repeated; also by AlterSummit for instance; by many of the events mentioned, in relation to commons movement 'rising' or commonning. Berlin ECC event, open coop, or others i cited too, as well as Peer Value events desings are similar. This has been one of the fallacies of the alter/anti globalisation (or global solidarity and Justice) movements, and especially in their Euro-West centric relationship with the 'partners' from Global South (from West to East). Where selected people from local movements got invited (there by creating conflict in local groups -gate keepers or elitism problems) and this has created sort of funders hierarchy, and supportive one becoming teachers.. Next to that tacit knowledge from local, grassroots movements taken and provided to elite forces in a systematical way; via funded Researchers, experts and reports they prepared. These all had repeated as happened after 68 movement; and seattle and Social forums. At the end class differences reproduced but more importantly renewal of capitalism after its large crisis is supported by supposedly critical alternatives.. My worry and irritations based on the fact that it looks and feels like we have been either repeating this same pattern, or not doing enough not to repeat it. In either case there has been a concrete and informed ground to see and criticize these. If I am, as someone close to these names and groups can not be sure and has to assume many things and can not avoid think of conspires; what could we expect from those watching from far? In any case I thank again to all your open an sincere emails; that were at least giving a bit more clarity to the processes and projects you were involved. I really hope to be able to join more to these work and contribute on the ground; in Amsterdam, Montreal, localities and see things closer; or from your side more efficient measures taken towards genuinely open-governance practices. (Again as a model Remix the Commons Charter Constitute a great base). Best, Örsan > On 07 Jul 2016, at 17:14, Pat Conaty <pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Orsan > > You raise some key issues. Thanks for doing so. However as I see it the problem is that the Commons movement as it is emerging more broadly and internationally has to take the time > out to work this through. As I see it, the matter you are flagging up is one of social and ecological economic democracy and how to secure this together. > > This is really complex question and I think as committed people to the commons vision we are going through an early phase of development and now this tension > that irritates you and understandably so, needs thinking about collectively and creatively. > > As the old analogy goes, Coming together and forming democratic and accountable structures typically involves the Storming, Forming, Norming and Performing stages of evolution. > We are near the front end still and perhaps moving now from Storming to Forming. But what would be the appropriate form and structure? You seem to be asking this question > loud and clear and it is vitally important. > > But hitherto as Michel and others have said, the set of relationships have operated rather loosely and with good will and thankfully with resource support for meeting and deliberating in different ways via the generous support of Heinrich Boell Foundation and other funders you have mentioned. This Storming around work has generated through Deep Dives and the books of David and Silke and the work of more local and country based commons networks a growing literature that is becoming more cohesive and coherent. > > However as you say how we decide on what to pursue in relation to topics and on what questions needs a modus operandi that can be commonly agreed I would hope. > > The tensions are growth pains I reckon. But to manage these tensions and difference of opinion I feel we should seek to avoid falling out with each other because so many people are working with sincere good will towards a vitally important vision we share and we need to try to remain United. But without clearer governance this will continue to be problematic. You are right about this. > > The Open Co-operativism report gives some insights I think into what a multi-stakeholder democratic governance system could look and feel like. You rightly criticise NGO governance systems and this is a crucial criticism and I agree with you about this. I trust others on this list feel the same. But how concretely do we come up with a democratic architecture to enable us to manage in solidarity this growing and exciting range of work and efforts. Co-operatives and particularly the new generation of solidarity co-operatives whether worker or multi-stakeholder are a good place to start I believe in any exploration of an appropriate and Open governance model that is participative and democratic. > > I hope these comments may be helpful. I really value your work and insights Orsan and all the fabulous work with Network Labour that you have been co-ordinating and animating. I have really appreciated your personal help to me since we met in 2013 at the Economics of the Commons conference in Berlin. > > Let’s try to find a sound solution and stick together by working through these tensions constructively. > > In Solidarity > > Pat > >> On 6 Jul 2016, at 09:58, Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Silke, looking forward to your response, thanks! >> >> >>>> On 5 jul. 2016, at 19:06, Silke Helfrich <silke.helfrich(a)gmx.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> Am 05.07.2016 um 17:21 schrieb Orsan: >>>> >>>> , again it is not about individuals like you or me, but about >>>> culture we are supposed to support and nurture. >>> >>> you nailed it, Orsan. >>> that's what I thought, when I read your e-mail. >>> >>> More later, via the list >>> in a hurry >>> Greetings to all >>> Silke >>> >>> >>> In any case, I hear >>>> first time that you are not employed by P2P-F and your activities >>>> towards Wsf is not on behalf of the foundation, then to clarify; who are >>>> you doing it for, who is paying for your time and labour, and expenses. >>>> Do you reflect your preferences, philosophy and politics or the any >>>> organization, then p2p-f? Would appreciate if you clarify this to those >>>> following your and p2p-f's work. Again lack of my participation is not >>>> the issue, but division of labour, and differences in cultural >>>> reproduction is at stake here. Hope you and Michel, and others could >>>> understand and respond to this dimension rather then giving political >>>> answers. >>>> >>>> Best. >>>> Orsan >>>> >>>> On 5 jul. 2016, at 15:38, Kevin Flanagan <kev.flanagan(a)gmail.com >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> LI don't have time at the moment for a full detailed response but I >>>>> want to make a few things clear. >>>>> >>>>> 1) I am no longer employed by the P2P Foundation and the P2PF is not >>>>> providing any financial support or payment for my participation in the >>>>> FSM. >>>>> 2) Elisabetta Cangelosi and I initiated a discussion about the >>>>> presence of Commons at the FSM last year as an independent initiative. >>>>> Meaning the only connection with P2PF is that the mailing list was >>>>> hosted by P2PF. >>>>> 3) We created mailing list and invited you Orsan several times to >>>>> participate in the process. We value constructive input but your >>>>> participation or lack of is up to you. >>>>> >>>>> Kevin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 5 July 2016 at 15:00, Örsan Şenalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Michel, in response to your reply I also like to direct this email to >>>>> the attention of Silke, David, Pat, James, Chico.. and other >>>>> self-claimed strategists, organisers, leaders, of global justice and >>>>> solidarity, and now commons movements.. >>>>> >>>>> First issue, is the one you avoid to respond; lack of prefiguration >>>>> hence moral - cultural leadership, neede for the hegemony you are >>>>> willing to build over first other movements, then against the ruling >>>>> classes. This is a general issue, and is a critique of all NGO sector; >>>>> 'progressive' or 'supportive' NGO cadre, degenerate 'solidairty and >>>>> justice' culture, by getting stuck and generate 'capitalist' >>>>> competitive culture. That is why, in a Gramscian sense, it would never >>>>> be possible to get real moral and intellectual leadership over the >>>>> progressive movements, like commons movement, that you are trying to >>>>> 'build' or mould out of real people's real struggles. >>>>> >>>>> In 2013, and 2014, together with others from most recent movements, >>>>> from Occupy, 15M, Arab spring, and including Carminda McLorin -from >>>>> Occupy Montreal and Classe, an initiative formed and called itself >>>>> 'Global Square'. We have designed and tried to open up an occupied >>>>> Commons Space, within the WSF in Tunis 2013 and 2014: >>>>> http://www.global-square.net/about/ >>>>> Carminda was had participated all calls and meetings of Global Square >>>>> actively and she become the face of the WSF Montreal local >>>>> coordination team (with Chico Whiteaker being on her side). Based on >>>>> unique experience we developed, in a really p2p and commoning way, >>>>> during 2011-2014 period, at Agora99, Frienze 10+10, WSF Tunis under >>>>> the Banner of Global Square (with combined methodologies) in 2014 I >>>>> tried out to scratch the below designs on the way to Montreal. I >>>>> shared it with you, and it has been picked up by you, and others; then >>>>> it was modified into un-P2P and un-common ways and translated in to >>>>> NGO format with carefully controlled access (over the funding >>>>> opportunities and competitiveness reasons I assume).. and we have a >>>>> modified Commons Space. Here is the Hackpad where Kevin, of the P2P >>>>> Foundation has been the main organiser from the beginning, with >>>>> Elisabetta of Transform: >>>>> https://commonsspace.hackpad.com/Commons-Space-k6rOCvUgyhC >>>>> >>>>> As response to your question what is the easy way to go to WSF and >>>>> finding support for that: I think your is a political answer, since it >>>>> is your choice not to go to WSF personally, you expressed it before; >>>>> so you are sending Kevin to do the ground work for the Foundation to >>>>> build an event I foresee and suggested to you last year -on the >>>>> Commons. Meanwhile, James of the P2P foundation, is responsible from >>>>> the Global Commons Conference, in Amsterdam where I live. You say you >>>>> would recommend me, to people, but about the idea I desingned and >>>>> shared with you, James, your secretariat is recommended. >>>>> >>>>> You are expected to be invited to WSF and paid for some other >>>>> organisations, while Kevin's participation and ground work labour is >>>>> paid by P2P Foundation. You personally are not able to go WSF, but P2P >>>>> Foundation is taking the responsibility to organise a major Commons >>>>> event at the WSF in August, and James organise another global event in >>>>> Amsterdam for the EU project of which P2P Foundation is a partner. >>>>> Which was originally my suggestion.. >>>>> >>>>> Here is the genuinely p2p and commons way design for WSF Commons Space >>>>> event, I designed in 2014: >>>>> Peer to Peer Transnational Networking for a Commons Humanity >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vRRHhASr9wfWolPJzq0Ec7gsomug2T-jeTFmqfz… >>>>> >>>>> The below design I made it in 2013 to ensure a broader alliance >>>>> between variety of forces; in an open and peer to peer solider way.. >>>>> based on ideas re the development of open spaces, towards and during >>>>> the WSF as well as other events. It was taken, modified and adopted to >>>>> NGO style. Below is how it was translated to NGO language by >>>>> Stacco,who was an occupy activist and ex-worker owned coop >>>>> practitioner, now professional expert hired by P2P Foundation: >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wud-VMjA89aE14GNWDE_YkUMNqIYsK-oLVLo4bV… >>>>> >>>>> And during 2014, there was an email discussion about avoiding >>>>> cooptation and developing a pool resource for commoners, using the >>>>> funding recuperated by commons NGOs type organisations; supposed to be >>>>> supportive of commons. Discussion taken place mid 2014, before or >>>>> after Degrowth conference, and then Michel, you suggested the below >>>>> idea, which has not been implemented, yet. Open Coop development >>>>> agency idea: >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/188Y7COujNwhU60pMiNypXHaRHgLrjKywVlfN6Ay… >>>>> >>>>> Although I find EDGE Founders, under the leadership of commons >>>>> friendly Nicolas Krauzs of P2P Foundations funder FHP (Charles Leopold >>>>> Mayer Foundation), it is clearly an human-washorganisation with Soros' >>>>> open society and US' large corporate funders behind, they might have >>>>> been imposing their own agenda over the commons; about which you guys >>>>> have no idea. I will provide a deeper analysis of this, with proves. >>>>> But for the moment I just like to share the nice and sincere-open >>>>> reports of the events, documented by Pat Conaty and David Boiler, and >>>>> am guessing are the selective events organised and you have been able >>>>> to join: >>>>> This is the event on Open Cooperativism: >>>>> http://bollier.org/open-co-operativism-report >>>>> >>>>> And this is the top-down vision of alliance building: >>>>> Part >>>>> I:http://commonstransition.org/a-new-alignment-of-movements-part-i-the-gene… >>>>> Part >>>>> II:http://commonstransition.org/a-new-alignment-of-movements-part-ii-strate… >>>>> >>>>> I like to reader to pay attention of funders, participants' >>>>> composition, and the content. The total picture is clearly top-down >>>>> movement building, beyond the closed doors. These are not supportive >>>>> nice, exchange wise productive events. >>>>> >>>>> To finish, I like to make one constructive suggestion. If you guys, >>>>> really really sincere, please consider use the some part of the >>>>> fundings getting collected -i take it recuperated from the public >>>>> resources stolen by state elite- and give it back to commoners, by for >>>>> instance creating totally autonomous spaces for them; so by time for >>>>> them; inviting commoners from the Global South, paying their >>>>> registration fees, arrange them a permentant space in the Montreal >>>>> WSF; in where they can have time and energy to exchange and build >>>>> their own agenda in their own ways and means. >>>>> >>>>> In solidarity, >>>>> Orsan >>>>> >>>>> PS: as promised below is the documentation of the "driver seat" >>>>> phenomenon... >>>>> >>>>> -- the date was beginning of 2015, not mid 2014, did confuse the >>>>> years. I pasted entire email exchange to give the contex: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> John <restakis(a)gmail.com <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>> >>>>> 07/01/2015 >>>>> to Pat, Michel, me, Brian, Michel, networkedlabour, e-mail, David, >>>>> Michael, margie >>>>> I like the four wheels. And us in the drivers seat! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 15-01-07 6:17 PM, Pat Conaty wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Michel >>>>> >>>>> Touche and very good but some in this list our ends and others means. >>>>> So a bit more work involved, but getting there. >>>>> >>>>> As Polanyi argued, Commons solutions for land, money and people to >>>>> take them out of market are a sine qua non so money becomes servant >>>>> not master. With this focus we can get onto the right livelihoods >>>>> roadway of the Tools for Convivality arguments of Illich. >>>>> >>>>> The social-public partnership is crucial of course. The Guild >>>>> socialists understood this in the 1920s as did much of the left in >>>>> Europe before they were slaughtered by fascism. >>>>> >>>>> Pat >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7 Jan 2015, at 15:03, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> to take your wheel metaphor, >>>>> >>>>> if one wheel is the commons, the second wheel cooperatives , the third >>>>> weel sustainability, and the fourth wheel the partner state (necessary >>>>> civic infrastructures including things like the basic income) .. are >>>>> we missing a lot ? (I see social justice as part of that fourth wheel) >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:11 PM, Pat >>>>> Conaty<pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Orsan and Brian >>>>>> >>>>>> Great comments yet again. We are on to something here in this >>>>> exchange. So important for all of Europe as the Greek election >>>>> approaches. A bit like the Allende election it feels. >>>>>> The whole world this time is watching with instant news globally. >>>>>> >>>>>> When I talk about the solutions being as old as the industrial >>>>> hills, I mean that at each Long K-wave, offers a chance and this >>>>> time for a Great Transition in the way Kenneth Boulding >>>>> expressed this in the 1960s is at hand. Michel’s argument for a >>>>> Commons Transition is crucial as the unless the biosphere is >>>>> saved, we are heading for a 6 degree rise in global temperatures >>>>> as Naomi Klein’s latest book both highlights and points to a >>>>> common cause to unite social movements. She makes the parallel to >>>>> the movement to abolish slavery, but here the campaign and focus >>>>> should be on ending wage slavery. I think Gar Alperovitz offers us >>>>> far more than meets the eye. As a young researcher, he cut his >>>>> teeth in the 1960s working for Dr. Martin Luther King. In his >>>>> latest book he points out that if the US annual income was >>>>> equitably shared, each family could be provided a Basic Income of >>>>> $200,000 or $100,000 for a 20 hour week. Abundance is at hand if >>>>> co-operative economic root and branch solutions could be harnessed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me explain…... >>>>>> >>>>>> Boulding was an evolutionary economist following more closely >>>>> the path of Veblen then Schumpeter. He was also a pioneer of >>>>> systems theory and complexity analysis. He saw the Great >>>>> Transition along the lines of what Schumacher, Illich and others >>>>> were hoping might happen after the Opec oil crisis. They wanted to >>>>> jump from the information age to the social knowledge age. >>>>> Intermediate technology was a way to solve the gap between North >>>>> and South and to secure a convergence between green and red >>>>> thinking or social economics and ecological economics. >>>>>> >>>>>> Few among the New Left saw what they were forecasting and >>>>> understood the practical and positive hope they were offering. >>>>> Exceptions though were Erich Fromm and Andre Gorz who embraced the >>>>> ideas of Illich for Tools for Convivality. Fromm also in the 1950s >>>>> made these arguments and stood up on national US TV interviews to >>>>> the bogeyman of McCarthy. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gorz set this out in a series of books starting with his >>>>> Critique of Economic Rationality and early arguments for a Basic >>>>> Income. Also in the UK in the early 1980s the work of the Greater >>>>> London Council and the technology networks that Robin Murray and >>>>> Hilary Wainwright were moving forward on linked up with this >>>>> thinking and that of Mike Cooley in the work on the Lucas Plan and >>>>> the case for a radically new trade unionism. >>>>>> >>>>>> Co-operative solutions if only seen in relation to corporate >>>>> ownership are one dimension only of systems change. Only one wheel >>>>> when we need at least three or four. What you find though >>>>> historically is at or near to the K-wave turning points, say >>>>> 1880s, 1920s and indeed the 1970s you get a wider take that is >>>>> three or four dimensional in relation to co-operative economic >>>>> transition. This is the concept of ‘co-operative commonwealth’ >>>>> that is lost sight of again and again by younger generations >>>>> because of the say 50 year K-waves. >>>>>> >>>>>> Like Camus showed, we end up having to rebel without cause from >>>>> generation to generation and only and slowly slowly recover the >>>>> vernacular wisdom of our grandparents. >>>>>> >>>>>> Crucially here activists and thinkers alike when they rediscover >>>>> the full set of co-operative wheels at last, they then begin to >>>>> address the fundamental foundations of capitalism, namely the >>>>> taboo questions of land and money. Solving these two is the key to >>>>> ending wage labour slavery. >>>>>> >>>>>> You might find of interest this paper I presented at the >>>>> international Karl Polanyi conference in Montreal two months ago. >>>>> Earlier at the conference, Michael Hudson gave a superb speech >>>>> about financialisation and the casinos economy crisis. The vote in >>>>> Greece on 25 January may trigger a Lehman II crisis. Michael and I >>>>> talked and he fully agreed with this analysis and proposals. I >>>>> found out this second time I met Michael that in the late 1960s >>>>> and early 1970s he was working for Citibank as a collector of >>>>> Latin American sovereign debt. He then had his Pauline conversion, >>>>> quit Wall Street and moved to the New School for Social Research. >>>>>> >>>>>> My paper offers some practical solutions as to how to >>>>> de-commodify money and land. Michel has just posted it in recent >>>>> weeks a three part series on the P2P website. >>>>>> >>>>>> Without addressing these taboo questions positively, >>>>> transparently and practically, wars will loom larger. Greece, >>>>> Ireland, Spain and indeed the UK need a prisoners dilemma roadmap >>>>> out of expanding debt as the fiscal deficits are ballooning and >>>>> there is no Jubilee release in sight. >>>>>> >>>>>> All the best >>>>>> >>>>>> Pat >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7 Jan 2015, at 11:28, Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks Michel, this came very timely indeed, site looks great >>>>> and the content just answers in my opinion perfectly half of the >>>>> question Brian asks below, he also asked before and you have >>>>> given a perfect answer indicating what a site and platform as >>>>> you launch corresponds in reality. >>>>>> I think this work focusing and addressing state or political >>>>> society level/dimension of what needs to be done together, and >>>>> doing it extremely good. Plus the closer relationship emerged in >>>>> recent years between P2P-F, with Guerrilla Translation, CIC, and >>>>> Fair.coop closely, I think Michel and friends of P2P, with >>>>> open-commons-cooperative approach has moved much closer to the >>>>> recently converging grassroots activism to a position that can >>>>> greatly contribute to a bridge building activity, with normal >>>>> people the actual field of political movements and struggles. >>>>>> >>>>>> I continue in lines below: >>>>>> >>>>>> let me very appropriately I think, after enjoying the insights >>>>> of all, just briefly mention thathttp://commonstransition.orghas >>>>> been launched today, precisely meant as a global platform for >>>>> p2p/commons based policy making by global and local commoners, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Brian >>>>> Holmes<bhcontinentaldrift(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Orsan, your ideas are tremendously interesting. Thank you. I >>>>> would appreciate it even more if you take some time to draw more >>>>> strategic conlcusions. What to do in the present situation? What >>>>> to do with the kinds of energies and cetworks and collaborations >>>>> in which we ourselves can participate? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To me, the process packaged as Globalization, was the most >>>>>>>> peaceful possible form of the institutionalization project >>>>> aiming to >>>>>>>> rebuild the world as a small village connected by information >>>>>>>> highway of Bill Gates'. As Cox describes in the below >>>>> video, and I >>>>>>>> share the way he describes it, Asian crisis can be seen as a >>>>>>>> breaking point. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I could not agree more. For years I ran an intermittent seminar >>>>> called "Continental Drift" whose main these was exactly the above. >>>>> The question was: Why is it that exactly when the world comes >>>>> together (globalization) it begins to fall apart (continental blocs)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Slowly it became apparent to me that the US, which had been >>>>> well and truly hegemonic after WWII, could only solve the crisis >>>>> of the Keynesian-Fordist paradigm by internationalizing key power >>>>> functions. They believed this extension of hegemony could be >>>>> restricted to the two Northern core states which, not >>>>> coincidentally, had been destroyed in WWII and rebuilt under >>>>> American auspices: namely Germany/EU and Japan. So you would have >>>>> a Trilateral hegemony, or "Triad Power," as Kenichi Ohmae called >>>>> it (yen-euro-dollar: YE$). After '89 and First Gulf War, Clinton >>>>> believed that the colonization of the unified world market could >>>>> be managed, peacefully, by this troika, which had solved the >>>>> monetary crisis of the 70s and had also assembled the largest >>>>> military coalition in history in 1991. In fact, the world market >>>>> was unified by the new productive processes of Neoliberal >>>>> Informationalism. But the bid to retain hegemony by sharing it >>>>> proved illusory, especially because of the rise of Asia, and >>>>> especially China, after the Asian crisis of '98. Control >>>>> threatened to slip away into every semi-autonomous node of the >>>>> world market, and the US turned to preemptive warfare and >>>>> institutionalized counter-terrorism in a desperate and failing bid >>>>> to contain the genie that it had let out of the bottle. That genie >>>>> is nothing more or less than the deliriously productive forces of >>>>> fifth-wave industrial capitalism. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is why Neoliberal Informationalism is so hard to govern. >>>>> The old power is crumbling (very slowly though), the new one is >>>>> not yet ready to take command, and we are faced with the global >>>>> organic crisis of hegemony, which as Gramsci would say, is full of >>>>> morbid symptoms. In my view, however, this is a far better >>>>> situation than if China were ready to simply replace the US as >>>>> capitalist hegemon. Because it is not, we have the chance, in this >>>>> generation, to complete the task of building a critical and >>>>> constructive global civil society, able to face both climate >>>>> change and the constant threat of inter-regional war between the >>>>> fragmented blocs. The thing is, the Trilateral period spawned not >>>>> just TNCs, but also TNCS - transnational civil society, or what I >>>>> also call transnational culture sharing. For me, that is the deep >>>>> meaning of p2p. It's the other genie that got out of the bottle, >>>>> and this one is not industrial or capitalist. It is a practical, >>>>> constructive, dialogical way to build cooperation across the >>>>> scales - from local and urban to national, continental and global >>>>> - in order to tame, restrain and redirect (but also sometimes >>>>> topple) the rapacious elites who are now anarchically deploying >>>>> the powers of informationalism. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> totally agree here, again with reference to Gramsci, the organic >>>>> crisis emerging at point organic intellectuals can not function >>>>> and facilitate coherence and consensus amongst the ruling classes, >>>>> as in smoothing informal network spaces like Davos, Council of >>>>> Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg meetings, but >>>>> also at local level with Rotary-Lions, or Masonic Clubs, >>>>> especially at the time of miss-match between the sub-structure and >>>>> super-structure occurs. However you are right, focusing to knowing >>>>> enemy more then yourself is not an health way, and agree we need >>>>> to look for answers to, also in my opinion, most crucial point. >>>>> How we, as everyone else then elite, and ruling class members, and >>>>> their broader circles, will move forward, mobilizing and >>>>> organizing ourselves to act to protect our own, and others >>>>> dignity, lives and the cosmos, in practice. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> p2p = the possiblity of global government from below. This is >>>>> what progressive global grassroots networks have been >>>>> experimenting with since the mid-1990s, around the time that >>>>> Zapatismo emerged. And this is what Michel was calling "the >>>>> business model of Occupy" in a memorable article a couple years back. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I see in the link Michel shared a growing interaction and mutual >>>>> learning that might also feed in more moral, creative, and >>>>> genuinely collaborative politics to emerge amongst new and old >>>>> left between Autonomists, European left, democratic socialist >>>>> groups. Such convergence would develop opening ups for >>>>> collaborative politics including greens and mainstream unions, >>>>> with positive and creative input might come most hopefully from >>>>> Podemos kind of experiments. Thinking for instance Rojava and the >>>>> role it can play here, if the Cantons in theory and practice are >>>>> linked to social houses, squatter and transition town networks, as >>>>> well as to urban cooperatives and peer producers. I believe the >>>>> professional politics is the last part to expect anything good at >>>>> the moment, or it needs to be thought as a last resort to hope >>>>> from but something to encourage to go for the real change by >>>>> showing. Since a possible convergence is indeed needed, as Anna >>>>> said earlier, if we want to reverse the worsening general situation. >>>>>> >>>>>> For a long time I have been busy thinking of and searching in, >>>>> on, behind, around, progressive political and societal >>>>> institutions, unions, NGOs, activist and political collectives, as >>>>> well as streets, actions, assemblies so on -being close and far >>>>> enough to the worlds of unionism, party politics, developmental >>>>> and progressive NGOism, and issue based social justice movements- >>>>> studying divisions, ideas and practices of alliances, tried to see >>>>> possibilities to realize sincere collaboration based on mutual >>>>> recognition between groups. What I have come to think most >>>>> recently is, a bit different than what Michel suggested by >>>>> prioritizing one of the many among who suffers the conditions of >>>>> today the peer producers as main protagonist to be protected and >>>>> flourished, actually probably he also meant it this way that, >>>>> creation of distributed p2p platforms and infrastructures that >>>>> allow people to liberate from capital and to get empowered to >>>>> become peer producers for themselves and for others. More in line >>>>> with what Peter Waterman cites often in my opinion, 'the network >>>>> is the vanguard'; to open up p2p, egalitarian self-organiased >>>>> networks of world working classes -for itself- is the vanguard, >>>>> not one of the enlightened or segments of them, or any entity that >>>>> claims to be acting on be half of masses, building on a position >>>>> of chosen class or class segment because of the historical and >>>>> strategic position it has occupy in the global >>>>> production-commodity networks. Which brings me to the point below. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I will cut it here but before like to saying one last >>>>> thing about >>>>>>>> the similarity I do see between the netarhicalness of Walmart, >>>>>>>> Apple, and even Nike and Amazon on the one hand, and the >>>>> forms like >>>>>>>> Google, Facebook, Airbnb, and others who accumulate wealth by >>>>>>>> producing and selling meta-data to other businesses, on >>>>> the other. I >>>>>>>> see here similarity between these forms not in terms of >>>>> how they >>>>>>>> extract, capture and accumulate the value, but the way >>>>> they organise >>>>>>>> their production line in order to capture the value created. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I will go back to the analysis I promised above in the next >>>>> email. Now I like to continue answering your question in relation >>>>> how we ourselves would be engaging in such (un)vanguard people's >>>>> political-economy networking; which I have been woking on a design >>>>> draft called 'FreeKonomia'. It is as a networked infrastructure >>>>> for totally free exchange of very high quality goods and services, >>>>> produced by love and care, which is to be supported by integrated >>>>> floss platforms. One aspect is for free transportation of people, >>>>> work force, and light material goods, as well as some portable >>>>> services. It is possible to be re-design a version of BlaBlaCar-Go >>>>> with Open-map embed showing the points to get on and get off, >>>>> handy if these are social centers, people's houses, as routes >>>>> between them to organize the car-go function. For building larger >>>>> projects and physical infrastructures we need to combine >>>>> scientific expertise, like those brought together in co-working >>>>> spaces such as OMNI in Oakland, and large Occupy camps, where >>>>> people could go camp, have fun and rest while working. What is >>>>> needed of course to be embedded also is an application that help >>>>> to match needs and offers of any kind is Sensorica kind, or NPR, >>>>> Bob and Lynn has been developing, including kind of admin and >>>>> tracking application, where everyone can see and show who needs >>>>> what, where, when, what amount. It is very key to manage this all >>>>> for Free as in Free Beer, and based on positive and encouraging >>>>> repetitional system, as the driving feed back loop mechanism. So >>>>> the more you share for free and high quality with others, both >>>>> system and participants gain value and trust. then freeness and >>>>> personality would become the anti-money so to speak, replacing and >>>>> killing the unconditional love and trust we used to give to stupid >>>>> and dirty papers and metals :) I think mass solidarity actions >>>>> towards Greek and Spanish social houses, Rojava and Ukrain, for >>>>> both peace and humanity, can be designed to build up such routes >>>>> and maps, and this can be linked to Sharing cities mapping-jam >>>>> organized by Shareable. These processes needs to be in tandem also >>>>> balancing the Podemos kind of projects, or Partner State >>>>> emergence. Then in the mid term if we can harmonize these with >>>>> first organizing the Exodus from Capital, and then a creative and >>>>> constructive-but also blokaida form of Golden Strike at the >>>>> weakest points of the system, we might make a good chance to win. >>>>>> >>>>>> Orsan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens;http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>> >>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 4 July 2016 at 19:22, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> hi Orsan, >>>>>> >>>>>> this is my response only, I am not speaking for James or anyone >>>>> else, >>>>>> >>>>>> quick online reactions >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I will try to give a considered respond to your answer, which I am >>>>>>> guessing is the public reply James mentioned. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think the realities of organizing events is underestimated. >>>>> They are >>>>>>>> two choices, one is the grassroots barcamp type events, in >>>>> which everyone is >>>>>>>> welcome, and everyone has to fund his own trip; these events >>>>> are great, and >>>>>>>> important, but have advantages as well as disadvantages One >>>>> disadvantage is >>>>>>>> that it excludes those who can't self-fund their trips. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I assume it is more than me underestimate the realities of >>>>> organizing >>>>>>> event then organizers undervalue the practices of peer to peer and >>>>>>> commoners. In response to Boiler's book title 'Think like a >>>>> commoner', it >>>>>>> could be more then possible to 'Act like a commoner'. So it is >>>>> more of a >>>>>>> choices, philosophy and politics, more then 'realities' or >>>>> 'practices' of, >>>>>>> those who like to 'think' and 'research' about the real practices; >>>>>>> coincidentally this makes you star, solve income problems, and >>>>> moreover >>>>>>> allow one to deliver politics, and gain influence and power. I >>>>> think this is >>>>>>> not only underestimated, but totally absence in your response >>>>> Michel. Of >>>>>>> course there is not only two options, there are plenty of >>>>> alternatives. >>>>>>> Other wise realities of 'organizing' or 'organization', could >>>>> be only 'the >>>>>>> state' / 'corporation' or 'anarchy and there would be no commons, >>>>>>> commonning, peer to peer alternatives. Are they exist or not? >>>>> Are they >>>>>>> reliable or not? Are they believable or not.. Or only theorizing or >>>>>>> researching about them is important? I know you really believe >>>>> in p2p and >>>>>>> commons, but it is hardly possible to see any prefigurative >>>>> action and >>>>>>> practice Michel. This is a public and open critique, meaning >>>>> very sincere >>>>>>> and friendly way, you need to really think about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not organizing any of those two events Orsan. I have lightly >>>>>> co-organized barcamps, enough to know how they work; I like them >>>>> but they >>>>>> can only go so far, it's not the only legitimate formula. >>>>>> >>>>>> The events I have co-organized more intensely were not on the >>>>> lines of such >>>>>> open access events, but selective events, like the ones you >>>>> organized for >>>>>> networked labour. What are the p2p/commons aspects about them ? >>>>> 1)They aimed >>>>>> at creating a diverse and balanced participation 2) they aimed >>>>> to balance >>>>>> self-organisation and prior organisation 3) they aimed to >>>>> balance inclusion >>>>>> and expertise 4) they aimed at being no-cost for the participants >>>>>> >>>>>> But like in your event, they were characterized by a careful >>>>> selection. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The other choice is to go for paid conferences. This involves >>>>> other >>>>>>>> disadvantages, such as the rules imposed by funders (very >>>>> stringent demands >>>>>>>> for transparency for example with EU funding). But it has >>>>> some advantages >>>>>>>> ... one is the choice of speakers, which can be more focused >>>>> on past >>>>>>>> expertise; the other is that speakers' trip can be paid, as >>>>> well as small, >>>>>>>> or sometimes bigger stipends; the paid entries can help fund >>>>> those without >>>>>>>> the means of self-funding. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Actually, and to be honest, I really wonder if you really ever >>>>> organized >>>>>>> something what you call barcamp type, self-organized, do it >>>>> yourself, peer >>>>>>> to peer event. Since I never saw any disadvantage then not >>>>> being able to >>>>>>> have star speakers, who would occupy all the space; and the >>>>> rest of the >>>>>>> participants who pay for the cost of starts, would only listen >>>>> and leave the >>>>>>> space with lots of frustration. May be only one disadvantage is >>>>> not being >>>>>>> able to make a show and attract media attention. The rest is >>>>> negligible in >>>>>>> my opinion. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a different experience, I very much enjoy listening to >>>>> speakers with >>>>>> more experience than myself, I don't find that frustating. The >>>>> conferences I >>>>>> enjoy the most are 'mixed', i.e. they mix the opportunity to >>>>> listen to more >>>>>> experienced people, inclusionary sessions with panels, and the >>>>> opportunity >>>>>> for deep conversations in circle type events, i.e. they include >>>>> peer to peer >>>>>> dynamics, but not exclusively. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, in the case of the Synergia conference, this is an >>>>> entirely unfunded >>>>>>>> conference. The price was set taken into account the travel >>>>> costs and very >>>>>>>> small per diems for the teachers/speakers; and full lodging >>>>> of participants. >>>>>>>> In this context, the fee amounts to 900 EURO per week, full >>>>> pension, which >>>>>>>> is, in the context of the prices of Tuscany, actually very >>>>> cheap, though of >>>>>>>> course, will also exclude those with financial difficulties. >>>>> For this, you >>>>>>>> get access to a quite extraordinary roster of >>>>> teachers/speakers and intense >>>>>>>> dialogue with other participants. For people with jobs in the >>>>> cooperative >>>>>>>> economy, for which this conference is intended, the cost is not >>>>>>>> un-realistic. For those without income, the price is >>>>> prohibitive, but >>>>>>>> bursaries are available. According to John Restakis, the >>>>> program requires 15 >>>>>>>> paid students to achieve break-even; after that, bursaries >>>>> can be funded. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, Synergia conference... You say this 900 per week, several >>>>> thousands >>>>>>> euro per all course is, or should be okay for cooperative >>>>> workers, worker >>>>>>> owned cooperatives.. while you can not effort only your trip to >>>>>>> self-organized, barcamp events. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I for example, would not be able to attend neither Tuscany >>>>> nor the P2P >>>>>>>> Value events on my own, in either format, but I can attend >>>>> both because my >>>>>>>> travel and basic costs are provided for. This is not a gift, >>>>> but a small >>>>>>>> reciprocal payment for my contribution to the event. In >>>>> contrast, the >>>>>>>> self-organized barcamp absolutely preclude me from making a >>>>> living from my >>>>>>>> contributions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would if you can not effort, how do you think workers, >>>>> cooperative owners, >>>>>>> peer producers could so. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that's what I said, it requires effort and investment on the >>>>> part of the >>>>>> students, or of those institutions that fund them; it is mostly only >>>>>> realistic for those with links to institutions; I'm fully aware >>>>> of this; >>>>>> bursaries are a solution to attenuate this >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The second issue is that of 'democracy'. The P2P Value event >>>>> has been >>>>>>>> organized and decided by all those involved in the research >>>>> project, i.e. a >>>>>>>> consortium of 8 organizations, and James was responsible for >>>>> organizing the >>>>>>>> event as part of the contract; in the Synergie case, this is >>>>> also a >>>>>>>> collaborative effort of many dozen people, involved in the >>>>> Synergia >>>>>>>> consortium, a voluntary association of cooperativists the >>>>> world over. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Second issue is not only democracy, transparency, nor >>>>> participation. Not >>>>>>> about politics, but it is about generation of culture. It is >>>>> prefigurative >>>>>>> act. In case of its lack, or while main evangelists or preachers of >>>>>>> communism, would not see any problem in ruling people's soviets >>>>> from the >>>>>>> winter palace of the old-rulers, then that revolution is over >>>>> before it >>>>>>> started. P2P Revolution is going down before it starts, not >>>>> because it is >>>>>>> un-democratic, or as you argue against democracy that is it is >>>>> meritocratic. >>>>>>> I think including you, Silke, David, as well as all other >>>>> commoners, and >>>>>>> theory leaders do lack practical aspect that generates no >>>>> culture at the >>>>>>> 'strategist' level. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> About Restakis.. My remark was a reference to his email, >>>>> accidentally sent >>>>>>> to the list, in his response to you, Jason Nardi, Pat Conaty >>>>> and some others >>>>>>> about the four wheels of the 'radical change car'.. He was >>>>> making a joke of >>>>>>> 'you' as the strategists of commons transition, open >>>>> cooperativism, peer - >>>>>>> license, what ever.. Being on the 'driver seat'. Then there was >>>>> a cold >>>>>>> silence, no one replied or asked or commented on his joke. But >>>>> history >>>>>>> registered. I can find and redistribute that exchange if you like. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> please do redistribute, I haven't seen it >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> They take their decisions in good faith, given the funding >>>>> and other >>>>>>>> realities they contend with. Yes, it means not everyone can >>>>> attend, but >>>>>>>> within the parameters they work with, they strive for the >>>>> maximum inclusion >>>>>>>> of motivated participants, and find individual solutions when >>>>> possible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Division is not between 'not every body' and 'everybody'. But >>>>> 'organizers' >>>>>>> and 'organized'; 'agenda setters' and those agendas are set, >>>>> strategists and >>>>>>> strategised; so sort of masters and puppets. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now the alternative of barcamps of the massively >>>>> self-organized WSF ... >>>>>>>> well, I can't afford to go those either, they exclude all >>>>> those that are not >>>>>>>> able to self-fund. So no system is perfect, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Come on Michel, some one like you can easily receive support to >>>>> go there, >>>>>>> of any kind. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> the fact Orsan is that I haven't; nobody ever offered to finance my >>>>>> participation to the WSF; and until 2014, I was extremely >>>>> precarious and the >>>>>> P2P-F itself has zero funds; so if you know of easy forms of >>>>> support, please >>>>>> do forward >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and both are easy to critique from the outside, by people who are >>>>>>>> unwilling to dive into the real difficulties and constraints >>>>> of organizing >>>>>>>> these events,As far as I can recall, Orsan, you organized >>>>> exclusive events >>>>>>>> with TNI, and you did that very well. Far from critiquing you >>>>> for these >>>>>>>> exclusionary events, I would commend you for it, for bringing >>>>> important >>>>>>>> players together, and for funding our trips and >>>>> participation. I feel the >>>>>>>> same about John Restakis and James Burke, and given their >>>>> efforts and >>>>>>>> responsibilities, I can find sympathy for their irritation >>>>> when they are >>>>>>>> critiqued by outsiders who are not contributing to the >>>>> organization of these >>>>>>>> events, and unaware of the constraints they are operating with. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My critique of TNI, and end of my relationships with it is >>>>> declared by me >>>>>>> on several occasions. Now same critique, of NGO world in >>>>> general, is >>>>>>> covering to commons NGOs, which present same mistakes, same >>>>> fault lines, and >>>>>>> these are not a complain of some one humpy dumpy, it is >>>>> documented and >>>>>>> agreed wide spread critique. Of course people, individually >>>>> doing their >>>>>>> best, to survive and combine income and passion and idealism >>>>> would get >>>>>>> irritated. But what irritate us, ordinary people, is them >>>>> finding this not >>>>>>> enough and when that also like to tell us what to do, what to >>>>> say, what to >>>>>>> chose, what to like and dislike.. So when they feel power of >>>>> ideas, and wish >>>>>>> to define the course, on the driving seat of the 'radical' >>>>> change car. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> you are no more ordinary than anyone else; I dont think most >>>>> ordinary people >>>>>> would be irritated by open debate and exchange of opinions : I will >>>>>> certainly restrict my own rights of free speech on the basis of >>>>> other's >>>>>> irritations >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, without managing to combine applying self-labour, mental and >>>>>>> manually, apologies but this is not going to happen. Because, now, >>>>>>> irritation of being rule, is so high, and those who are wanted >>>>> to be managed >>>>>>> posses high skills, like political analysis. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks for this exchange, end of my comments >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In solidarity, >>>>>>> Orsan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>> http://commonstransition.org >>>>>> >>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>> >>>>>> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; >>>>> http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>> >>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> https://twitter.com/flgnk >>>>> Skype: kev.flanagan >>>>> Phone: +353 87 743 5660 >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Silke Helfrich >>> www.commonsblog.de >

1 0

Fwd: The New Nationalism is a Media Environment
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <douglas(a)rushkoff.com> Date: Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:15 PM Subject: The New Nationalism is a Media Environment To: rushkoff(a)simplelists.com Sorry, again, for the radio silence. It's been a busy few months, and while I should have been sending more messages during this productive season rather than fewer, it never quite works out that way. In any case, I'm wrapping up all the speaking and media related exclusively to economy, and beginning to talk more like a pure media theorist again. The piece below (to be published this morning on Fast Company) has been percolating for a couple of years now; I'm not sure if it's what I'm going to be thinking and writing about next, but it likely points in that direction. *The New Nationalism Of Brexit And Trump Is A Product Of The Digital Age* *TV may have been about global unity, but the Internet inspires the opposite.* http://www.fastcoexist.com/3061574/the-new-nationalism-of-brexit-and-trump-… Most of us thought digital technology would connect the whole world in new ways. The Internet was supposed to break down those last boundaries between what are essentially synthetic nation states and herald a new, global community of peers. National governments were considered extinct. Internet evangelist (and Grateful Dead lyricist) John Barlow dismissed them in his Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace 20 years ago: "I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us." But the Internet age has actually heralded the opposite result. We are not advancing toward some new global society, but instead retreating back to nationalism. Instead of moving toward a colors of Benetton racial intermingling, we find many yearning for a fictional past when people like to think our races were distinct, and all was well. Welcome to the digital media environment. It is not a continuation of television environment that preceded it, but an entirely distinct landscape for human society, which engenders very different attitudes and behaviors. A media environment is really just the kind of culture engendered by a particular medium. The invention of text encouraged written history, contracts, the Bible, and monotheism. The clock tower in medieval Europe led to hourly wages and the time-is-money ethos of the industrial age. Different media environments encourage us to play different roles and to see, think, or act in particular ways. The television era was about globalism, international cooperation, and the open society. TV let people see for the first time what was happening in other places, often live, as it happened. We watched the Olympics, together, by satellite. Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. Even 9-11 was a simultaneously experienced, global event. Television connected us all and broke down national boundaries. Whether it was the British Beatles playing on The Ed Sullivan Show in New York or the California beach bodies of Baywatch broadcast in Pakistan, television images penetrated national divisions. I interviewed Nelson Mandela in 1994, and he told me that MTV and CNN had more to do with ending the divisions of apartheid than any other force. But today's digital media environment is different. At the height of his media era, a telegenic Ronald Reagan could broadcast a speech in front of the Brandenberg Gate in Berlin and demand that Gorbachev "tear down this wall." Today’s ultimate digi-genic candidate Donald Trump demands that we build a wall to protect us from Mexicans. This is because the primary bias of the digital media environment is for distinction. Analog media such as radio and television were continuous, like the sound on a vinyl record. Digital media, by contrast, are made up of many discrete samples. Likewise, digital networks break up our messages into tiny packets, and reassemble them on the other end. Computer programs all boil down to a series of 1’s and 0’s, on or off. This logic trickles up to the platforms and apps we use. Everything is a choice—from font size to the place on a "snap-to" grid. It’s either 12 point or 13 point, positioned here or there. Did you send the email or not? There are no in-betweens. So it’s no wonder that a society functioning on these platforms would tend toward similarly discrete formulations. Like or unlike? Black or white? Rich or poor? Agree or disagree? In a self-reinforcing feedback loop, each choice we make is noticed and acted upon by the algorithms personalizing our news feeds, further isolating each one of us in our own ideological filter bubble. Not one of the thousands of people who show up in my own Twitter feed support Brexit or Trump. For those supporters, I am sure the reverse is true. The Internet helps us take sides. This is very different from the television environment, which engendered a "big blue marble" melting pot, hands-across-the-world, International Space Station, cooperative internationalism—well-funded by globalist foundations from Rockefeller and Ford to Soros and Clinton (who are both still espousing the transnational values of a television world). We are flummoxed by today’s nationalist, regressively anti-global sentiments only because we are interpreting politics through that now-obsolete television screen. The first protests of the digital media landscape, such as those against the World Trade Organization in Seattle made no sense to the network news. They seemed to be an incoherent amalgamation of disparate causes: environmentalists, labor activists, and even anti-Zionists. What unified them, however—more than their ability to organize collectively on the Intenet—was their shared anti-globalism. The WTO represented the peak of global cohesion, at least as orchestrated by the world’s biggest corporations. The protestors had come to believe that the only entities capable of acting on the global level were ones too big for human beings to control. Those protests were followed by Arab Spring, often misinterpreted as a global movement, when it was really more of a series of nationalist revivals. These were not young people demanding to be part of a world community of revolutionaries. These were local revolutions, with clearly defined boundaries. The breakdown of European cohesion can be understood the same way. The European Union is a product of the television environment: open trade, one currency, free flow of people across boundaries, and the reduction of national identities to mere soccer teams. (That goes a long way to explaining the rise of hooliganism over the past few decades.) The transition to a digital media environment is making people a whole lot less tolerant of this dissolution of boundaries. Am I Croatian or Serbian? Kurd or Sunni? Greek or European? American or Mexican? But if that newfound need for discrete identity were the entirety of the dynamic, things shouldn’t have gotten quite as jingoistic or xenophobic. No. There’s something else fueling Trump’s backward-looking "Make America Great Again," and the Brexiters’ "Take Back Control." It’s the other main bias of digital media: memory. Memory is what computers were invented for in the first place. In 1945 when Vannevar Bush imagined the "Memex" on which computers were based, he described it as a digital filing cabinet. And even though they can now accomplish much more than data retrieval, everything computers do—all of their functions—simply involve moving things from one part of their memory to another. RAM and ROM are just kinds of memory. Meanwhile, as Wikileaks, Google, Ed Snowden, and the NSA continually remind us, everything we do online is stored in memory. Whatever you said or did on Facebook, Instagram, Gmail, or Twitter is in an archive, timeline, or server somewhere, waiting to be retrieved by someone. So when we combine these two biases—boundaries and memories—we get Brexiters justifying isolation as a confirmation of distinctly British values and the return to a nationalist era, when foreigners and other non-whites knew their place. Trump’s followers, likewise, recall a clearly redlined past when being white and American meant enjoying a safe neighborhood, a sense of superiority, and guaranteed place in the middle class. Immigrants were fellow Irish and Italians—not foreigners, refugees, or terrorists leaking illegally across permeable national boundaries. To be sure, globalism has had some genuinely devastating effects on many of those who are now pushing back. Wealth disparity is at an all-time high, as the mitigating effects of local and national economic activity is dwarfed by that of global trade and transnational banks. But the way people are responding to this pressure, so far anyway, is strictly digital in spirit. In some sense, those of us who want to preserve the one-world vision of the TV media environment are the ones who must stop looking back. If we’re going to promote connection, tolerance, and progressive internationalism, we’ll have to do it in a way that’s more consonant with the digital media environment in which we are actually living. ---- This is RushkoffList, a monthlyish update and advance look at work in progress. Feel free to forward to your friends as long as you include this footer. To subscribe, use this link: http://www.simplelists.com/subscribe/rushkoff To unsubscribe: http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=grdK4Lvi7veNxafT2DxZrw1oAyoTFsEc -- 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

Re: [P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] questions re funding of p2p value conference (?rsan ?enalp)
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

to be honest, I was thinking the last few days why I spent my time like this, my ordinary days are filled with movement and project construction with individuals who love cooperating with each other and advancing in prefigurative practices, it's not that this is always conflict-free, but people who are co-constructing commons are bound by a common love and enthusiasm which more easily transcends what is happening here is quite different, I see the people I love admire and so so much to build the movement, like Silke and David, or like Kevin and Elisabetta, accused unjustly .. I have seen the openness of the process only marginally, but enough to see that it was conducted in a totally open manner, over mailng lists and common pads and the like, so I'm just at a loss to understand how this can be translated in a NGO-based conspiracy ; call for participation in this preparation have gone out far and wide, including on this mailing list; if anyone wanted to co-construct the program, it was entirely up to that individual to participate and contribute so unlike Pat, and therefore less diplomatically, I don't think this is a serious and genuine conversation at all, it is one thing to make informed analysis of NGO-influence or the role of capitalist cooptation, but it is another to bring charges against individuals that have no basis in fact, and are just projections, people who make personal accusations, certainly on a list like this, should be extra careful to make sure it is based on factual events, so I hope this can be a list that discusses and supports, with carefully thought out critiques if necessary, what laborers and commoners are doing to make our world a better and more inclusive place Michel On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:39 PM, peter waterman <peterwaterman1936(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I am not going to get involved in this exchange because, from a casual > view of the original and of Michel's response, my feeling is that this is > one that could better take place between concerned individuals and not for > even a concerned public. > > I do feel that public exchanges between people concerned with emancipatory > projects need to be carefully expressed, bearing in mind both the > expertise, the experience and the capacities of those involved in such. > > I have complained before, Orsan, of the distance between exchanges on this > list and anything to do with actually-existing workers, of > actually-existing labour movements and even with those activists themselves > involved in emancipatory online networking, commons-creating, activity. > > I am sure you do not want to get into that kind of accusatory, > nit-picking, self-righteous mode so typical of the 20th century vanguardist > left. > > I already myself feel I am a marginal follower of/contributor to this > list. I do not want to leave it. But I am more centrally involved in > exchanges of a more productive nature, in which differences (also about NGO > or state-funding, for example) can be discussed AS differences and not in > terms of either sleeping with the enemy or preserving some self-defined > revolutionary purity. > > Best as always, > > Peter > > > > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > >> my replies are after the << inline >> >> Michel, in response to your reply I also like to direct this email to >> the attention of Silke, David, Pat, James, Chico.. and other >> self-claimed strategists, organisers, leaders, of global justice and >> solidarity, and now commons movements.. >> >> << you are one of them Orsan, there is no us and them there >> >> First issue, is the one you avoid to respond; lack of prefiguration >> hence moral - cultural leadership, neede for the hegemony you are >> willing to build over first other movements, then against the ruling >> classes. This is a general issue, and is a critique of all NGO sector; >> 'progressive' or 'supportive' NGO cadre, degenerate 'solidairty and >> justice' culture, by getting stuck and generate 'capitalist' >> competitive culture. That is why, in a Gramscian sense, it would never >> be possible to get real moral and intellectual leadership over the >> progressive movements, like commons movement, that you are trying to >> 'build' or mould out of real people's real struggles. >> >> I absolute do not refuse to respond; I can't talk for the others, but >> for myself, walking the talk and being prefigurative is essential ; as for >> strategy, my own strategy is entirely invitational, i.e. I never lobby and >> never ask for any invitation nor leadership position ; however, I do >> generally respond positively to any request for assistance ; I do ask for >> my costs to be re-imbursed, and to be paid for lectures when I have no >> other income (for example, here in the US, I get paid for a project, so I >> don't ask for any lecture fees while here); the p2p-f and CSG apply commons >> and p2p governance principles ; no one in these organizations command >> others ; that is even normally the case when funding is possible ; for >> example, Kevin asked for exceptional funding to be able to go to the WSF, >> and there was zero interference from us in his work there >> >> you refer to occupy etc .. note that these had strong meritocratic and >> contributory principles, i.e. you had no voice if you did not participate >> >> >> >> >> In 2013, and 2014, together with others from most recent movements, >> from Occupy, 15M, Arab spring, and including Carminda McLorin -from >> Occupy Montreal and Classe, an initiative formed and called itself >> 'Global Square'. We have designed and tried to open up an occupied >> Commons Space, within the WSF in Tunis 2013 and 2014: >> http://www.global-square.net/about/ >> Carminda was had participated all calls and meetings of Global Square >> actively and she become the face of the WSF Montreal local >> coordination team (with Chico Whiteaker being on her side). Based on >> unique experience we developed, in a really p2p and commoning way, >> during 2011-2014 period, at Agora99, Frienze 10+10, WSF Tunis under >> the Banner of Global Square (with combined methodologies) in 2014 I >> tried out to scratch the below designs on the way to Montreal. I >> shared it with you, and it has been picked up by you, and others; then >> it was modified into un-P2P and un-common ways and translated in to >> NGO format with carefully controlled access (over the funding >> opportunities and competitiveness reasons I assume).. and we have a >> modified Commons Space. Here is the Hackpad where Kevin, of the P2P >> Foundation has been the main organiser from the beginning, with >> Elisabetta of Transform: >> https://commonsspace.hackpad.com/Commons-Space-k6rOCvUgyhC >> >> << so you are accusing Kevin and Elisabetta of creating an uncommons >> space and derailing your initiative ? Kevin already responded that he is >> not on the funding roll of any organization ; while I did not participate, >> I have seen the occasional emails pass by, and my impression is that it was >> an entirely open, contributory and collegial process, through the email >> list and the hackpad, seeking consensus ; personally, I think your >> accusations are unfair and fantastical, but they can speak for themselves >> >> >> >> >> As response to your question what is the easy way to go to WSF and >> finding support for that: I think your is a political answer, since it >> is your choice not to go to WSF personally, you expressed it before; >> >> << no, this is NOT the case, I would love to go the WSF and if dates are >> compatible, would accept such an invitation ; I have no political >> objections whatsoever about participating in the WSF, we just don't have >> the means to do so ; last time's participation by Kevin, funded by us, was >> very exceptional ; we've never done it before and may never do it after ; >> my colleagues work in the same spirit as myself I believe ; they go where >> there are invited and can be useful, and also do not have funds for this : >> kevin can reply about how he funded his present engagement >> >> >> so you are sending Kevin to do the ground work for the Foundation to >> build an event I foresee and suggested to you last year -on the >> Commons. Meanwhile, James of the P2P foundation, is responsible from >> the Global Commons Conference, in Amsterdam where I live. You say you >> would recommend me, to people, but about the idea I desingned and >> shared with you, James, your secretariat is recommended. >> >> << no, we did not send Kevin, he asked for our assistance ; and we >> thought of course that it was a good think to establish connections that we >> did not have previously ; but Kevin was not sent there with instructions ; >> Orsan, I would certainly recommend you for activities around labor, given >> your experience and interests ; I did not recommend you to James >> specifically because I'm not aware of your expertise in value practices ; >> however, had you asked me, even without that expertise, I would certainly >> have recommended you, but I'm not aware of such a query>> >> >> >> >> You are expected to be invited to WSF and paid for some other >> organisations, while Kevin's participation and ground work labour is >> paid by P2P Foundation. You personally are not able to go WSF, but P2P >> Foundation is taking the responsibility to organise a major Commons >> event at the WSF in August, and James organise another global event in >> Amsterdam for the EU project of which P2P Foundation is a partner. >> Which was originally my suggestion.. >> >> << I am not expecting any invitation from the WSF and nothing is due to >> me Orsan, but I am happy to go whenever people believe I can be useful ; I >> was just stating a fact there, and confirm, I have never been invited nor >> funded to attend WSF meetings and since I have prior experience with them, >> I have no idea how that works either ; but again, we are not an >> organization trying to push views and lobby for them, we are a pluralistic >> platform and we go where we are invited, because people themselves have >> decided that it could be useful for them ; you may want to read up on the >> concept of servant leadership it is entirely different from the kind of >> activities and politics you are assuming ; about the role of James ; so, >> there is a EU-funded research consortium with 8 organizations researching >> p2p value; the p2p-f was contracted to do communication and conference >> organizing for this event ; James and others have been funded to do that. >> along with others in the p2p-f network (for the record, I have received no >> penny from this project, ; as far as I know, I won't be paid for my >> participation in Amsterdam either) >> >> >> Here is the genuinely p2p and commons way design for WSF Commons Space >> event, I designed in 2014: >> Peer to Peer Transnational Networking for a Commons Humanity >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vRRHhASr9wfWolPJzq0Ec7gsomug2T-jeTFmqfz… >> >> The below design I made it in 2013 to ensure a broader alliance >> between variety of forces; in an open and peer to peer solider way.. >> based on ideas re the development of open spaces, towards and during >> the WSF as well as other events. It was taken, modified and adopted to >> NGO style. Below is how it was translated to NGO language by >> Stacco,who was an occupy activist and ex-worker owned coop >> practitioner, now professional expert hired by P2P Foundation: >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Wud-VMjA89aE14GNWDE_YkUMNqIYsK-oLVLo4bV… >> >> And during 2014, there was an email discussion about avoiding >> cooptation and developing a pool resource for commoners, using the >> funding recuperated by commons NGOs type organisations; supposed to be >> supportive of commons. Discussion taken place mid 2014, before or >> after Degrowth conference, and then Michel, you suggested the below >> idea, which has not been implemented, yet. Open Coop development >> agency idea: >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/188Y7COujNwhU60pMiNypXHaRHgLrjKywVlfN6Ay… >> >> Although I find EDGE Founders, under the leadership of commons >> friendly Nicolas Krauzs of P2P Foundations funder FHP (Charles Leopold >> Mayer Foundation), it is clearly an human-washorganisation with Soros' >> open society and US' large corporate funders behind, they might have >> been imposing their own agenda over the commons; about which you guys >> have no idea. >> >> << for the record, we are extremely happy with the support given by FPH , >> which has been very limited, but tremendously important in finally >> attenuating the precarity of the core group of contributors ; they're >> support is unconditional and structural, which is exactly what >> organizations like ours need, since it fully protects our freedom ; of >> course, it is entirely possible that they have a secret agenda, though from >> my end, I have seen no trace of it, they have been genuinely interested in >> promoting the commons as a new structural alternative, but in any case, >> since we operate in total freedom, I am not worried about this; we would >> refuse any conditional funding that would force us to do things that are >> not in line with our values and strategic priorities) >> >> >> >> I will provide a deeper analysis of this, with proves. >> But for the moment I just like to share the nice and sincere-open >> reports of the events, documented by Pat Conaty and David Boiler, and >> am guessing are the selective events organised and you have been able >> to join: >> This is the event on Open Cooperativism: >> http://bollier.org/open-co-operativism-report >> >> And this is the top-down vision of alliance building: >> Part I: >> http://commonstransition.org/a-new-alignment-of-movements-part-i-the-genera… >> Part II: >> http://commonstransition.org/a-new-alignment-of-movements-part-ii-strategie… >> >> I like to reader to pay attention of funders, participants' >> composition, and the content. The total picture is clearly top-down >> movement building, beyond the closed doors. These are not supportive >> nice, exchange wise productive events. >> >> << I was there Orsan, and I can tell you, there are amongst the nicest, >> most supportive and productive events that I have been lucky to attend. Let >> me explain how this works. These events are aiming at creating bridges >> between movements to attentuate gaps. So for example, our events aimed at: >> 1) building bridges between physical and digital commons (first big conf in >> berlin, 2010), 2) to build bridges between the three Polanyian fictitious >> commodities and see how they would function as commons i.e money , labour >> and land); 4) to create bridges between peer production communities and >> ethical finance 5) to create bridges between cooperativists and the >> solidarity economy, and commons/peer production actors, etc ... So how, >> does this work? Silke, David and I discuss what we believe are the urgents >> tasks of the commons movement; we consult with our networks about who the >> interesting players are in these different submovements ; all this is done >> with intensive consultation and consensus; we compile lists, discuss how to >> best create balanced groups, and then look at balances, i.e. age groups, >> gender, north-south. The meetings themselves are only minimally >> structured,i.e. very short framings at the beginning of the day ; the >> dialogue is entirely free flow. >> >> Of course, there is undoubtedly an elitist aspect to this ... the idea is >> to bring thoughtful activists together, so that they can learn from each >> other, and build more connections. Trips and lodging are paid, otherwise no >> fees are given. In conclusion, these events are a mix of selections and >> peer to peer dynamics. Attendees generally find them very useful, because >> there are simply very few occasions in life, including activist lives, in >> which people can take time to talk, and create bridges with movements they >> are not normally encountering. What comes out of it is always unexpected, >> usually rich, and leads to all kinds of new joint initiatives. Silke, David >> and I are happy to initiative these dialogues, but have otherwise no >> influence on what happens afterwards between the people who attended. >> >> Now, of course one could prefer other types of meetings, in which the >> self-selected activists who can afford it, come together, but that would >> exclude in other ways. I personally feel there should be diversity in >> forms, not just one. I feel the formula we work with has been very >> fruitful.>> >> >> To finish, I like to make one constructive suggestion. If you guys, >> really really sincere, please consider use the some part of the >> fundings getting collected -i take it recuperated from the public >> resources stolen by state elite- and give it back to commoners, by for >> instance creating totally autonomous spaces for them; so by time for >> them; inviting commoners from the Global South, paying their >> registration fees, arrange them a permentant space in the Montreal >> WSF; in where they can have time and energy to exchange and build >> their own agenda in their own ways and means. >> >> <<so far, our support has come from HBF (taxation funds) and FPH (private >> endowment in Switzerland from many decades ago, dedicated to advancing >> global governance). The WSF is hugely funded by NGO's and other funders >> already, and is able to attract tens of thousands of participants. I'm >> pretty sure HBF and FPH are already doing what your suggest, i.e. >> supporting various people who can't afford it, to go and participate in the >> WSF, and specifically the commons activities in Montreal. So your wish has >> already been granted.>> >> >> >> >> In solidarity, >> Orsan >> -- >> 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/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetworkedLabour mailing list >> NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org >> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour >> >> > > > -- > *Click here for Peter's recent writings* > <https://www.dropbox.com/s/o8s52g2y905rq6w/WatermanGmailSignaturePanel%20%20…> > > -- 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: Dialogue, social change, Brexit and beyond
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sophie Docker <sophiedocker(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 10:27 PM Subject: Dialogue, social change, Brexit and beyond To: community(a)peacefulsolutions.org.uk Dear Friends, Maria Arpa, founder of The Centre for Peaceful Solutions, is speaking in Bristol on Tuesday 12th at Redland Park United Reformed Church, I am sending you this as I think you might be interested in coming along. Maria has an enormous social change vision and specialises in community engagement, change processes, restorative work and transforming conflict in schools, education, relationships, workplaces and the community. This work is so important as we move beyond the labels and identities that divide us to create something better. There will be a talk followed by a discussion and sharing of experience and ideas. <http://goo.gl/forms/UwUqhUEO4HfLoCHI3> Register here. <http://goo.gl/forms/UwUqhUEO4HfLoCHI3> Please forward to anyone who might be interested. Hope to see you there! For more info on Maria's work see below or visit www.centreforpeacefulsolutions.org [image: https://www.centreforpeacefulsolutions.org/talks/] <https://www.centreforpeacefulsolutions.org/talks/> facebook event <https://www.facebook.com/events/1068304476585805/> The event is organised with Financial Co-responsibility. There is no fixed charge, we will ask for donations to our charity. Thanks -- 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: Against Ecocide (GTN Discussion)
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Great Transition Network <gtnetwork(a)greattransition.org> Date: Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:25 AM Subject: Against Ecocide (GTN Discussion) To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com >From Allen White <awhite(a)tellus.org> ------------------------------------------------------- International law in the form of agreements, accords, and pacts has played a central, if imperfect, role in managing transnational relations in the post-WWII era. Such instruments cover a broad spectrum of global issues ranging from trade and nuclear weapons to territorial waters and crimes against peace. In the environmental domain alone, some 100 instruments are in place. While these have brought a modicum of order to international relations, the persistence of geopolitical, ethnic, human rights, and ecological crises attest to the limitations of law in dealing with perils of an interdependent world. International law is a necessary but certainly not sufficient condition to ensuring a thriving planetary future. Femke Wijdekop’s description of the movement to amend the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to include ecocide as a fifth crime against peace reveals the complexity of international law as a mechanism for advancing justice in the 21st century. Over more than four decades, roughly in parallel with modern environmental movement, the ecocide movement has shifted from a loosely defined aspiration to a concrete, actionable proposal. This trajectory mirrors the ongoing debates surrounding the efficacy and interplay “soft” and “hard” law. A growing ecological consciousness beginning in the 1960s spurred enactment of foundational national environmental laws and regulations in the developed nations. These, in turn, catalyzed similar actions in many developing nations. New laws have strengthened the capacity and of civil society and citizen pressure to confront intensifying transnational ecological crises. Environmentalism has gradually shifted from a concern of a few to recognition among the multitudes that ecological stewardship is not a luxury but a matter of human survival. With increasing urgency, this evolving ecological ethos paved the way for dozens of agreements to address transboundary ecological threats, including ozone depletion, export of hazardous materials, and climate disruption. These, in turn, strengthened the resolve of the UN and other multinational entities to design advance global solutions to such threats. The landmark 1987 Brundtland Report, the 1992 Rio Declaration, and the 2000 Earth Charter are examples of emergent norms- and principles-based soft law that influence, and are influenced by, rules- and enforcement–based hard law. The Great Transition (GT) framework may be viewed through lens of soft law. Rooted in the concept of wholeness expressed as individual well-being, societal solidarity, and planetary ecological resilience, GT’s normative framework like its predecessors seeks to inform how scholars, policymakers, and citizens perceive the possibilities for a better world. At any moment, the relationship between hard and soft law may be complementary or antagonistic. The lesson of the last few decades is that the soft-hard distinction is a false dichotomy. In fact, the two fall along a dynamic spectrum, differentiated more by the degree of obligation, precision, and delegation to independent third-party adjudicators than by intention or aspiration. In the real world, hard law at times hardens soft law, and vice versa. Wijdekop’s observation regarding genocide, one of the four crimes embodied in the Rome Statute, is telling in this context. Even in the face of uneven ICC enforcement, the codification of genocide as an international crime against peace has sharpened awareness of the issues in both the public consciousness and mass media. In Wijdekop’s analysis, we see ecocide aligned with this playbook. As the relentless destruction of the biosphere continues apace, the urgency of global action intensifies. It is not a case of soft versus hard law—both have a critical role to play. The task ahead is to strengthen both approaches simultaneously such that the timing, robustness, and enforceability of future actions rise to the level of the global threat. Knotty questions remain. Should ecocide be judged on the basis of intent to damage (e.g., defoliation or water poisoning by a warring party) or a byproduct (e.g., the irreversible loss of biodiversity occasioned by corporate clear-cutting of rainforests for palm oil and soybean production)? As a witness to the tragedy of ecological destruction, we can say with certainty that Earth is agnostic on the question of intentionality or byproduct. Destruction is destruction. Absent a truly global governance mechanism, can nation-state–driven multilateral accords, replete with self-interest and power imbalances, rise to the challenge of convergent threats that leave little time for concerted action? And how effective can the law be in the face of powerful economic interests driven by extraction, accumulation, and limitless growth? Is the “complementary principle” Wijdekop references—whereby the International Criminal Court would intervene in ecocide cases on when states fail to do so—a recipe for decades of delay at a time when global ecological transgressions demand immediate and forceful attention? The flaws, promise, and ultimate indispensability of a global action in the face of ecocide and other crimes against peace was recently brought to my doorstop via the personal experience of a close friend. During the Balkan conflict from 1991–1995, she served as volunteer in a humanitarian effort to protect children from the ravages of a vicious conflict. During her service, she personally experienced the horrors of the war, including crimes orchestrated by Serb leader Radovan Karadzic. An initial indictment of Karadzic in 1995 was followed by his arrest in 2008 based on indictments on five counts of crimes against humanity (e.g., extermination, murder, and deportations) and four counts of violations of the laws or customs of war (e.g., murder, terror, and unlawful attacks on civilians). A trial that began in October 2009 involved 499 trial days, 337 prosecution witnesses 337, 6671 prosecution exhibits, and 248 defense witnesses. A guilty verdict in March 2016 included genocide, extermination, and murder, and a 40 year imprisonment was reduced to 28 years after taking into account Karadzic’s prior accumulated time in detention. Was justice served? For my friend, who has experienced 20 years of trauma since her service, the answer I suspect is “no—and never can be.” The havoc wrought by Karadzic is indelibly etched in her psyche and those of thousands of others subjected to the atrocities of Balkan conflict. What does the duration, complexity, outcome of this case imply for the ecocide movement? Even in the case of the most egregious violations of the Rome Statute, a decade elapsed between indictment and verdict. If ecocide were to become a new crime against peace, its capacity to deter acts of ecocide and to hold accountable those who commit them would be severely curtailed if years of litigation and immense financial resources were required to adjudicate each case. But, based on the historical record, formalizing ecocide as a crime against peace would, as in the case of genocide, help infuse the concept in continuing public discourse surrounding a new global ethos essential to achieving a livable world. Justice in a planetary civilization is, and will remain, a work in progress. Ecocide is poised to play a vital role in amplifying the voice of future generations who will live with consequences of near-term actions—and inactions—of government, business, civil society, and citizens. On that basis alone, legal protection of Earth merits the hard work that lie ahead to both enact and enforce the ecocide amendment to the Rome Statute. Allen White ----- Original Message ----- Transition Network [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 11:17 AM White Ecocide (GTN Discussion) >From Paul Raskin ----- Dear GTN: Our JULY discussion will approach GTI’s overarching theme – shaping a civilized planetary future – from a fresh angle: the legal effort now gaining traction to criminalize the wanton destruction of nature. Femke Wijdekop takes this on in a new Viewpoint, “Against Ecocide: Legal Protection for Earth.” Femke introduces the idea of the “rights of nature” and the history of the concept of “ecocide.” However, her primary focus is on action, specifically, the movement to add ecocide as a crime against peace under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. Expanding the juridical architecture for protecting rights will surely be a vital prong in the systemic movement we so urgently need. But to what degree can it succeed in isolation? And what is the larger role of law and legal activism in a Great Transition? Please read Femke’s short piece at www.greattransition.org/publication/against-ecocide and weigh in with your thoughts. It will be published in August, along with selected comments drawn from the forthcoming discussion Comments are welcome through JULY 31. Looking forward, Paul Raskin GTI Director ----- Hit reply to post a message Or see thread and reply online at www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/176-against-ecocide/1637 Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org ------------------------------------------------------- Hit reply to post a message Or see thread and reply online at http://www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/176-against-ecocide/16… Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: Free copy of my new book- America's Walking Renaissance
by Michel Bauwens 08 Jul '16

08 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jay Walljasper <jay(a)jaywalljasper.com> Date: Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:40 AM Subject: Free copy of my new book- America's Walking Renaissance To: Jay Office <jay(a)jaywalljasper.com> Dear Advocate of Vital Communities: I am pleased to offer you a free dowload of my new book, America's Walking Renaissance, created with America Walks and the Every Body Walk Collaborative. Please feel free to share, tweet, facebook, reprint, repost, announce or any other way circulate the book or the short summary of it below. All the text here is FREE FOR YOU TO USE. Here is the link: Download a Copy of the Book Here <https://www.dropbox.com/s/93bjioa4i1jg9p3/americas-walking-renaissance-3.pd…> Here is the text of a short article drawn from the book: AND I WELCOME THE CHANCE to discuss how I might be work with your organization. My website JayWalljasper.com <http://www.jaywalljasper.com/> offers more background on my work. Jay Walljasper *Walking Makes Strides in All Kinds of Communities* *From inner-city Birmingham to small town Iowa to racially diverse suburbs of LA* By Jay Walljasper Imagine living in one of America’s great walkable communities. Your day begins with a stroll—saying hi to neighbors, noticing blooming gardens and enticing shop windows, maybe stopping for a treat on your way to work. Weekends are even better. You step out your door and join the hum of activity on the sidewalk en route to a coffeeshop, park, shopping district, friend’s home, recreation center or house of worship. More time on your feet provides an opportunity to reflect on your life (you feel more energetic and creative now that you’re not driving all the time) and your community (it feels more alive now that everyone walks more). Even driving is more fun than it used to be with fewer cars clogging the streets. And the really good news is that you don’t need to move to another town or a more expensive neighborhood to enjoy these pleasures. Any community can become more walkable if people are willing to get off the couch to make a difference. That’s what my colleagues and I at the Every Body Walk! Collaborative <http://everybodywalk.org/> and America Walks <http://americawalks.org/> discovered researching our new book *America’s Walking Renaissance <http://americawalks.org/americas-walking-renaissance/>, *which can be downloaded here <http://americawalks.org/americas-walking-renaissance/> for free. *Feet on the Street, Coast-to-Coast* We found inspiring stories from places across the US where people got things started in communities not so different from where you live. •In Baldwin Park, a racially diverse suburb of LA, high levels of childhood obesity are dropping as the result of a community-wide effort to make walking more safe and comfortable. •In Batesville, Arkansas, and Albert Lea, Minnesota, improvements to boost walking around town are paying off in new residents, businesses and hope for the future. •In Birmingham, a growing network of walking trails helps address problems arising from decades of economic decline, racial inequity and declining public health. •In Arlington, Virginia, an innovative plan to transform neighborhoods into foot-friendly villages made it America’s Most Walkable Suburb. •In Phoenix, ambitious programs to encourage walking are part of a push to become America’s healthiest city. •In St. Paul, a multicultural community torn apart by freeway construction seeks revival and healing through better pedestrian connections. •In San Francisco and New York, neighbors are teaming up with public leaders to end all traffic deaths on city streets. •In Northeast Iowa, small town kids are growing excited about walking to and at school. •In Seattle, groundbreaking policies curb speeding motorists and prevent traffic crashes. •In African-American communities coast-to-coast, GirlTrek <http://www.girltrek.org/> encourages women to take charge of their health by walking regularly. •In California’s Central Valley, Latino parents are organizing campaigns to make streets hospitable for people on foot. •In Indianapolis, leaders from around the world study the Cultural Trail, a 21st century walk-and-bike corridor that has reinvigorated struggling business districts. •In Greater Philadelphia, a network of bike/walk trails link the entire region—300 miles so far with 450 more planned. •Even in Oklahoma City, once named America’s “Worst Walking City”, big plans are working to make walking easier, less dangerous and more fun. *Why is walking suddenly popular?* Improvements like these are popping up all over because Americans want to get back on their feet—for better health, stronger communities and happier, more relaxing lives. The Federal Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) found the number of people who regularly walk rose six percent <http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/walking/> between 2005 and 2010 (latest figures available), a jump which translates into 20 million Americans stepping up. But we still have a long ways to go. Only 48 percent of adults met the CDC’s minimum daily recommendation for walking <http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/walking/> or other physical activity: 30 minutes a day five days a week (60 minutes daily for kids). That’s the magic number that cuts your chances of suffering from depression, dementia, diabetes, colon cancer, heart disease, anxiety, high blood pressure and other serious diseases by 40 percent or more. The American Heart Association lauds walking as the exercise people stick with the most over time. It’s free, requires no special equipment and can be done anytime, usually right out your front door. Last year, US Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy singled out walking as a powerful health solution in his landmark Call to Action to Promote Walking and Walkable Communities <http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/calls/walking-and-walkable-communitie…>. “Walking is a simple, effective and affordable way to build physical activity into our lives,” Murthy declared. “The key is to get started because even a small first effort can make a big difference in improving the personal health of an individual and the public health of the nation.” The rise in walking for recreation, transportation and exercise is also being fueled by new research showing it’s good for us in many ways besides better health: •Going out for a walk is one of the best ways to meet people and strengthen community connections, which is fun but also boosts our mental and physical health <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3150158/>. •Kids who walk to school do better in their classes <http://www.californiaprojectlean.org/docuserfiles/AcademicAchievement_FactS…>, according to Mary Pat King, the National PTA’s Director of Programs and Partnerships. Walking improves students’ concentration, mood, cognitive performance and creativity, explains Dr. Richard Jackson, former Environmental Health Director of the US Centers for Disease Control. •Metropolitan regions with many walkable neighborhoods perform better economically than those with just a few, according to a new report from the George Washington University School of Business <http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/foot-traffic-ahead-2016/>. •Reduced anger, increased self-control and a greater sense of well-being are other documented benefits of walking , according to 100 Reasons to Walk <http://walkwithadoc.org/why-walk/>, issued by Walk with a Doc, an organization of physicians working in 29 states. *Signs of the Times* You don’t have to look far to see signs that Americans are rediscovering the joy of walking. •*Real Simple* magazine declared it “America’s untrendiest trend” in a cover story. •Soul Singer Pharrell Williams’ “Happy” video <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6Sxv-sUYtM>, which highlights the sheer pleasure of strolling down the street, has been watched 850 million times. •A recent national poll from the National Association of Realtors <http://www.realtor.org/news-releases/2015/07/millennials-favor-walkable-com…> finds that 79 percent of Americans believe it’s important to live “within an easy walk” of the places they want to go. •Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx has announced an all-out effort <https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/secretar…> to make walking safer in communities everywhere. “Bicycling and walking are as important as any other form of transportation,” he declared at a major transportation conference. •More than 10 percent of all trips in America are on foot, according to Paul Heberling, Policy Analyst at the US Department of Transportation—and 28 percent of all trips under a mile. *Everybody has a Right to Walk* “The health benefits of walking are so overwhelming that to deny access to that is a violation of fundamental human rights,” declared Dr. Robert D. Bullard, father of the environmental justice movement in a keynote speech at the National Walking Summit in Washington, D.C. “All communities should have a right to a safe, sustainable, healthy, just, walkable community.” Yet it is a stark fact that children, older Americans, the poor, people of color and people with disabilities are injured or killed more frequently while walking (or rolling, in the case of people using wheelchairs or motorized carts). • People walking in the poorest one-third of urban census tracts are twice as likely to be killed <http://www.governing.com/topics/public-justice-safety/gov-pedestrian-deaths…> by cars. • African Americans are 60 percent more likely to be killed by cars <http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/2014/05/20/dangerous-by-design-2014-highl…> while walking, and Latinos 43 percent. • The pedestrian fatality rate rises significantly for people 45 and over, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Many disadvantaged people now think twice before traveling on foot due to dangerous traffic, crumbling sidewalks, street crime, poor lighting, or the lack of stores and public places within walking distance. Poor conditions for walking among low-income households limit their access to jobs and education. One-third of all African Americans and one-quarter of all Latinos live without access to a car, according to a report by the Leadership Conference Education Fund, which means walking and public transit (which involves a walk) represent important pathways to opportunity. “A big thing we could do to help low-income families is to make it easier to live without a car. And it would help middle-class families to switch from two cars to one,” says Gil Penalosa, founder of 8 80 Cities <http://880cities.org/> and an immigrant from Colombia. He notes that the average cost of owning and operating one car is about $8,500 a year <http://newsroom.aaa.com/2015/04/annual-cost-operate-vehicle-falls-8698-find…>, even taking into account recent dips is gasoline prices. The good news is that the right to walk is becoming a major issue, as advocates for social justice, public health, neighborhood revitalization and other causes push for policies to make walking safer and easier in communities all across America. In fact, Secretary of Transportation Foxx, the former mayor of Charlotte, has made it one of his top priorities with the Safer People, Safer Streets <http://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/secretary…> initiative. *Adapted from the book America” Walking Renaissance, which can be downloaded for free <http://americawalks.org/americas-walking-renaissance/> .* *Jay Walljasper, author of the **Great Neighborhood Book, writes, speaks and consuslts about how to create healthier, happier communities. He lives in Minneapolis and his website is JayWalljasper.com <http://www.jaywalljasper.com/>. * J -- 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: Commons Space at the World Social Forum - Update
by Kevin Flanagan 07 Jul '16

07 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Nicole LEONARD <nicole.leonard(a)sciencespo.fr> Date: 7 July 2016 at 12:50 Subject: Commons Space at the World Social Forum - Update To: wsf2016(a)lists.p2pfoundation.net, commonswatch(a)lists.p2pfoundation.net, commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org, echanges(a)bienscommuns.org Hello to all, This summary is to give you an update on the preparation for Commons Space at the World Social Forum (WSF) in Montreal from August 9 -14. From now on we will be sending periodic emails so you can keep track of the activities that are being prepared. Commons Space will be based at ECTO co-working space in Montreal, located at 936 Avenue du Mont-Royal E. We will begin with a welcome event on Monday the 8th, the evening before the World Social Forum begins. Then there will be 2-3 time slots for smaller activities during the day for Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday. These activities will be staggered so as to complement other World Social Forum events. To get an idea of what is already being planned by the participants, here are examples of confirmed sessions for the Commons Space: · City as a Commons · Panel Discussion for the Commons · Wiki & Mapping Sprint · Cooperatives and Commons · Commons as a New Political Subject · Commons, the State and New Political Movements · Play Commonspoly! · Post-Capitalist Transition Convergence Assembly with other movements · Drafting a Global Commons Charter · Social Economy in Montreal · School of Data Commons Space is an official self-managed thematic committee of the WSF, and is intended to be a space for contributors to collectively build a program. To see what is in progress and participate in the planning please contribute to the hackpad: *https://commonsspace.hackpad.com/Commons-Space-k6rOCvUgyhC* <https://commonsspace.hackpad.com/Commons-Space-k6rOCvUgyhC>. Do not hesitate to reply with any questions. The general invitation is attached again for reference if needed. In solidarity, Nicole Leonard -- https://twitter.com/flgnk Skype: kev.flanagan Phone: +353 87 743 5660

1 0