P2P-Foundation

Download

[email protected]

July 2016

7 participants
62 discussions

Re: [P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] questions re funding of p2p value conference
by Orsan Senalp 06 Jul '16

06 Jul '16

Frederic, My request from Carminda (local wsf committee, Chico (and the IC), and you guys, to try to effort to create a Commons Space; during the Wsf, somewhere central and fixed, to gather day and evening assemblies, to exchange and strategize as commoners; not commons NGOs; a space produced and taken care of all participating equally and horizontally ... Something that is at least little bit similar to your Remix the Commons charter describes: " Charter What is Remix the Commons? Remix the Commons is an open intercultural space for sharing and co-creating multimedia documents about the commons. Remix the Commons supports production, animation and distribution projects on the commons. What are the shared resources of Remix the Commons? Remix the Commons offers a catalogue of documents in different forms about the commons, categorized by type of commons and by issue for the movement of the commons. What can Remix the Commons do for you? The website of Remix the Commons allows you to distribute and share your documents, to use and freely remix the documents that have been added by users who have authorized it. Remix the Commons also offers pedagogical, technical and operational assistance to people with production, animation and remixing projects. Who can use Remix the Commons? The resources shared by Remix the Commons are made available to everyone, including individuals and organizations. What are your responsibilities? To share and take part in Remix the Commons by adhering to its mission, its values and its rules of functioning. To pay special consideration to people, particularly to the authors and contributors, and take care of the tools and media of Remix the Commons. To contribute to the media catalogue, help with maintenance and the improvement of the pedagogical, logistic, conceptual, material and technical resources and participate in the governance of Remix the Commons. To contribute to the documentation of the project, the shared resources and the governance of Remix the Commons. How are the resources shared in Remix the Commons? The documents The media documents shared by Remix the Commons are the property of their authors and are put under the intellectual property license of their choice. The media files are put under a free license : CC BY, CC.BY.SA, Dom Pub, C0, and can be added to the Remix the Commons collection, as well as hosted and distributed on the Remix platform. Remix the Commons encourages the authors of the original media documents and remixed documents to put their work under an intellectual property license that permits the remixing and the reuse of the contents and insures the viral distribution of these documents. The catalogue The catalogue of media documents of Remix the Commons is a collective and collaborative work within which the contents are put under a Creative Commons BY SA license so that each contributor owns the rights to his or her contributions. The platform The tools, the developed processes and the documentation of Remix the Commons are based on software and technologies that are open source or under copyleft licenses. How is Remix the Commons governed? Remix the Commons is a common good. Its governance is collective and collaborative. By governance, we mean a process of reflection, decision making and evaluation based on open and enlightened partnerships between the different stakeholders of the project, at the local as well as global level and in an intercultural group dynamic. Remix the Commons’ governance is horizontal. Remix the Commons’ decisions are taken by the general assembly of users who wish to become a part of the collective. This collective meets regularly and the decisions are made by means of a discussion list of which the archives are made public. The decisions are adopted by consensus or on the principle that one person equals one voice. The authentically open governance of Remix the Commons respects the principles of communication and participation of the public. Remix the Commons ensures that genuinely accessible means are made available in terms of ergonomics, accessibility and limiting technical pre-requisites. Remix the Commons has the vocation to liberate itself from the heart of its founding collective. Who can contribute and finance Remix the Commons? Remix the Commons’ means are assembled through the pooling of resources from individual and organizations volunteers. They ensure not to report separately to the same donors and to keep public their financing and contributions to the project. What Remix the Commons is not? Remix the Commons is not a library or encyclopedia on the commons. Remix the Commons is not a multimedia production company. Remix the Commons is not a space which collects all media managed in the commons. It is not a substitute of Wiki Commons for example. … Version 0.2 – December 17th 2011 The Remix the Commons Charter is a tool in constant evolution that develops with the project’s contributors." Not only at WsF but along the way, towards a genuinely global commons movement. I say the main trajectory so far, has been exactly the same to old WsF and NGO sector structures and culture.. It shouldn't be hard to remix these.. Best, Orsan > On 06 Jul 2016, at 03:44, Frédéric Sultan <fredericsultan(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Orsan, > > No doubt that each of us can have his/her idea on the choices made by P2PF and Commons Strategies Group. But my personal experience is that it was always possible to discuss these positions with the people I know in these organizations and sometime people have change their ideas, sometime it was me that have changed mine. And sometime we just let the issue open. No need to be aggressive against person with a such "procès d'intention". You add some théorie du complot based arguments and denied the right to people to have political arguments for their strategical choices because "we are supposed to support and nurture ..." but actually who is the "we" when your "constructive suggestion" start by supposing that I (and other people involved in this dynamic, but I speak only in my name) am not "really really sincere" and that your supposed "we" have to create a "totally autonomous spaces for commoners"... so I suppose that I am not a commoner or not enough pure ? > > The Commons Space is open to participation and to critics. It is the result of agreement with a fondation. It has its agenda and we (the organizations that have signed the invitation) have our owns. The existence of this commons space reveals that there are compromises between these visions. > > For me it will be more interesting to debate about the quality and the strategical interest of the proposals developed within the commons space, including yours, and their possible interactions for building an open and diverse culture, politic of the commons, for me, for you and for the people interested. But it is not an issue just for the fun and if I love trolls at 2 AM, I am preparing a workshop with activists working on the ground with their neighbours, so I would like to know if your complaint against Commons space is just "un effet colatéral" when you are bombing against the major groups P2PF and CSG, or something else. > > Best > Frédéric Sultan > > > > > > > > Le 05/07/2016 19:06, Silke Helfrich a écrit : >>> 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 >> >>

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] questions re funding of p2p value conference
by Orsan 05 Jul '16

05 Jul '16

Please Elisabetta, great to have another voice.. Also great that your ideas happen to be overlapping with a sort of important funder and political actor. That would only make it easier and mobile you enough to squeeze your own ideas and philosophy into the agendas, spaces, texts and actions. Happy for you, but how would it help to commons specifically, when there is a conflicting interest between your organizations interests and commoners' interest, for instance in agenda setting and space building? Best, Orsan > On 5 jul. 2016, at 18:07, Elisabetta Cangelosi <betta.cangelosi(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Orsan and all > sorry for jumping into the conversation, but I was mentioned both by you and Kevin so I feel like I can have a say.. Furthermore, we (Orsan and I) know each other since 2013, so I feel like I can maybe give a reply. First of all, I have no connection (nor ever had) with P2P so my response can't be about their position. I can only talk about me. > I perfectly see your point about the culture; personally I am doing that on my "spare" time, on top of my current job (unrelated), my political activism, my teaching at university, my independent research and a couple of other things. None pays my time and labor. The ideas I bring into it are mines, and the whole thing was an idea that Kevin and I had, one year ago, as independent activists (unpaid. Actually, personally, I have never been so lucky to be paid for my activism). Then when someone else got the funding for the space we got involved in it. > Even though I am member of Transform! at European and Italian level and they are paying my travel and accommodation, because I am working for some of the sessions on the commons we proposed to WSF (and I collaborate on several Transform! projects on the commons) I didn't get involved through them, rather the other way around. Of course since I am part of Transform! I also bring and reflect Transform!' s ideas, to a certain extent (however mines and Transform!'s - since it is not work, but activism- are of course very much alike, otherwise I would be an activist in another organisation!). > > I hope this clarify part of your issues! > And I would really be happy to see you soon! > > Best > Elisabetta > > > 2016-07-05 17:21 GMT+02:00 Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com>: >> >> Kevin, again it is not about individuals like you or me, but about culture we are supposed to support and nurture. 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> 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> 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> >>>> >>>> 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> 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> 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> 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>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> 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> 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 >

1 0

Fwd: [opennetcoalition] Directive on Terrorism : The EU on a Securitarian and Post-Democratic Drift?
by Michel Bauwens 05 Jul '16

05 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: La Quadrature du Net <contact(a)laquadrature.net> Date: Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:07 PM Subject: [opennetcoalition] Directive on Terrorism : The EU on a Securitarian and Post-Democratic Drift? To: opennetcoalition(a)laquadrature.net Press Release *Tags : TERRORISM, EU DIRECTIVE, CENSORSHIP, BERNARD CAZENEUVE, CIVIL RIGHTS* La Quadrature du Net — For immediate release Permanent link: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorism-directive-LIBE Directive on Terrorism : The EU on a Securitarian and Post-Democratic Drift? Paris, july 5 2016 — *Yesterday evening, the LIBE Committee of the European Parliament (Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs) adopted the draft Directive on Combating Terrorism <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2015/…> proposed by the European Commission by 41 votes to 4 with 10 abstentions. The EPP (conservative) Rapporteur Monika Hohlmeier had turned the directive into a text that will give credence to the worst anti-terrorism and surveillance laws from across the European Union. She clearly bowed under pressure from the French Government <https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/050716/terrorisme-le-lobbyin…> (FR), who is seeking to whitewash its own controversial laws regarding surveillance and websites censorship at the European level. La Quadrature du Net denounces this "europeanisation" of extrajudicial surveillance and censorship, all the more considering that the process surrounding the directive is in and of itself a staggering denial of democracy: Indeed, the draft Directive will be further discussed in secret "trilogue" negotiations, which will preclude any substantial amendment during the plenary debate of the European Parliament. Under the guise of security, the European Union is undermining its own fundamental values.* The directive on combating terrorism presented by the Commission in December 2015. It is aimed at improving the cooperation between European law enforcement agencies, and seeks to provide a European framework for member States' national anti-terrorism legislations. However the rapporteur of the LIBE Committee in the EU parliament, Monika Holheimer (EPP) hardened her position under pressure from some member States, and France in particular. She turned it into a text expanding to the European level a number of dangerous measures that will profoundly undermine fundamental rights. La Quadrature du Net is particularly worried about this blank check given to the extension of websites blocking measures across the European Union (those were introduced in France in 2014). Such online censorship takes place without any prior judicial decision. It is not subject to sufficient legal remedy, and is ineffective. It has therefore been denounced from the very beginning as attacking the freedom of expression and of information. In addition, as pointed out in a study of the Council of Europe <https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?docum…>, it is extremeley doubtful that these measures comply with the European Convention on Human Rights. Nevertheless, under pressure from France, such extrajudicial censorship may be expanded all through the European Union! Similarly, calls for hosting providers to cooporate with public authorities to fight terorism - which is inspired from Rachida Dati's dismal report <https://www.laquadrature.net/en/mep-committee-libe-dati-report> and from the controversial practices of Europol - may accelerate the shift towards censorship and extra-judicial surveillance. Similarly, the widening scope of individuals and legal persons that could be sued for aiding and abetting terrorism is concerning. The mere knowledge that a tool or a service could be used for terrorist purposes would be sufficient to undergo judiciary prosecutions. Publicly offering an encryption or anonymisation service could therefore be considered as aiding and abetting terrorism. To make the matter even worse, strong antidemocratic trends within the Europan institutions are at play in the passing of this directive: The LIBE Committee voted to grant Ms. Hohlmeier a direct negociating mandate <https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorism-directive-LIBE> in a trilogue with the European Commission and the Council of the European Union before the vote of the draft directive in the plenary session of the European Parliament has taken place1 <https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorism-directive-LIBE#footnote1_sjlg2td>. The opaque negotiations of the trilogue, where Member States can press to obtain a directive that would legitimise their own national laws without any democratic control, will start on an already very concerning basis. The lack of real parliamentary control and transparency will only make things worse. The rest of MEPs, who will have to vote in plenary session of the European Parliament, will face a done deal and will not be able to amend this anti-terrorism Directive. *"This directive on combating terrorism is very worrying. While efforts for coordination and for a common notions are welcome, a large part of the text encourages the adoption of exceptional measures and risks setting back the rule of law across the European Union. Through pressure from the French government both in the Council and in the LIBE Committe of the European Parliament, the securitarian drift happening in France will scale up at the level of the whole European Union. We call for members of the European Parliament to insist for full transparency during the negociations with member States and the Commission. Fundamental values of the European Union are being endangered, just when they would need to be strenghened. Negociating dangerous texts in secret won't save the EU, but rather strenghening democratic processes will. It is the only way to obtain withdrawal of the dangerous surveillance and censorship measures that have been voted yesterday, and to return to a substantive approach, respectful of Human Rights and freedoms"* says Adrienne Charmet, campaign coordinator of La Quadrature du Net. *See also our analysis <https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Directive_Terrorisme/en> of the dispositions of the directive about Internet and electronic communication.* 1. <https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorism-directive-LIBE#footnoteref1_sjlg2…> According to our informations, a first meeting of the trilogue should take place on 14 July. MEPs who should be present are: Claude Moraes, Monika Hohlmeier, Caterina Chinnici, Timothy Kirkhope, Petr Jezek, Cornelia Ernst, Eva Joly, Laura Agea et Lorenzo Fontana, whom we should watch carefully. About La Quadrature du Net La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that defends the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge. In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the digital age. La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and Privacy International. List of supporting organisations: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-la-quadrature-du-net Press contact and press room contact(a)laquadrature.net – +33 (0)972 294 426 https://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room *To unsubscribe, click here <http://www.laquadrature.net/civicrm/mailing/optout?reset=1&jid=226&qid=8322…>* *La Quadrature du Net60, rue des OrteauxParis, 75020* _______________________________________________ Opennetcoalition mailing list Opennetcoalition(a)laquadrature.net https://lists.laquadrature.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opennetcoalition -- 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 04 Jul '16

04 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Great Transition Network <gtnetwork(a)greattransition.org> Date: Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 3:04 AM Subject: Against Ecocide (GTN Discussion) To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com >From Steven Freeland <S.Freeland(a)westernsydney.edu.au> ------------------------------------------------------- Femke's essay is a very timely and thoughtful piece that clearly outlines many of the reasons why the destruction of the environment in certain circumstances might constitute an 'international crime' that should be incorporated into the mechanisms of international criminal justice, in particular the permanent International Criminal Court (ICC). I have also argued for the inclusion within the ICC Statute of such a crime, which I have called 'Crimes against the Environment'. The rationale behind this is set out in a short opinion piece at < theconversation.com/crimes-against-the-environment-the-silent-victim-of-war… > and in more detail in a book published last year - details at < intersentia.com/en/addressing-the-intentional-destruction-of-the-environmen… > I believe that international criminal law is one important legal tool (out of a suite of legal tools) that can be effectively utilised to address certain acts of deliberate environmental destruction. In my view, the nature and scope of international criminal law, and the role of the International Criminal Court - not to mention the politics associated with any change to that Court's jurisdictional mandate - warrant that, at least in the first instance, the crime to be included in the ICC Statute should be primarily directed towards acts that demonstrate an intention to significantly target the environment as a victim of warfare. The existing international rules relating to warfare have in practical terms done little to deter deliberate environmental destruction, particularly when measured against perceived military advantages, and these needs to be urgently addressed. At the same time, other complimentary legal tools - including national (and regional) civil/criminal law - can and should be utilised to address other instances of environmental damage that fall outside of this description, but which still warrant appropriate legal sanction. Steven Freeland ************************* Friday, July 1, 2016 >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 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: Right to health: Food for a de-commodification thought
by Michel Bauwens 04 Jul '16

04 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Claudio Schuftan <cschuftan(a)phmovement.org> Date: Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 5:16 PM Subject: Right to health: Food for a de-commodification thought To: michel(a)p2pfoundation.net Right to health: Food for a de-commodification thought Human Rights Reader 390 OUR STRUGGLE IS NOT FOR GLOBAL HEALTH JUSTICE; IT IS FOR GLOBAL HEALT Like <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.269.1.2308da1ea4cb8452496d828…> Tweet <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.270.1.f9662a4cd0c1c52356ca06a…> Pin <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.271.1.5a55c4a8e7de0cb322cda23…> +1 <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.272.1.f0718e86e2b59e68e024470…> in <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.273.1.5659bbe7d3a56d2ac3786b1…> [image: Claufotowglasses2] Right to health: Food for a de-commodification thought Human Rights Reader 390 *OUR STRUGGLE IS NOT FOR GLOBAL HEALTH JUSTICE; IT IS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH AND JUSTICE, AS WELL AS FOR GOLBAL HEALTH WITH JUSTICE.* (Lawrence Gostin) 1. The reason why global health policy-makers are not implementing the knowledge generated by global health scholars with the right empirical, every-day experience, is not because they use different normative standards; it is because, *when selecting priorities, too many policy-makers are politically constrained by the interests and the power structures in their environment.* The conflict is not a difference in normative opinion, but rather a political issue. (C. Askheim) 2. Alex Scott-Samuel speaks of ‘fantasy paradigms leading to health inequalities’ or, as he says, of utopian health thinking’. He argues that in this world fantasy its proponents describe how *global policy officials tend to write and speak within a parallel world in which the political economy of the global economic crisis and the brutality of imperial geopolitics do not exist* and add that global health policies must simply comprise cost-effective interventions, political promises and philanthropic largesse. *Choices on offer in health care attract consumerist sympathy* 3. Fact: **The appropriation of health care by business is being legitimized by policy makers** --and, with that, goes the loss of the ideas of citizenship and solidarity implicit and explicit in social rights. So strong has the pressure to extend capitalist appropriation in the profitable domain of health care been that not even ideological consistency has been respected: Actually, neoliberal principles such as efficiency have themselves been ignored. In poor countries, excessive emphasis on cost-effectiveness has brought health care systems not only not to focus on the most vulnerable, but also to be run in an economically unsustainable way. **Since the middle and upper classes are more likely to have their voices heard, their more exclusive and expensive health care needs are prioritized to the detriment of the vast majority of the people rendered poor.** What social rights primarily demand is the de-commodification of key areas such as the provision of health care, education and other essential social services. (Eduardo Arenas) 4. As regards the effects of privatization on research, note that influential randomized trials are largely done by and for the benefit of industry. Moreover, fashionable meta-analyses supposedly leading to guidelines have become a factory also often serving vested interests. **National and international research funds are funneled almost exclusively to research with little relevance to global health outcomes.** Bottom line here, under market pressure, clinical medicine has been transformed to finance-based medicine. (John Ioannidis) 5. **We thus need a whole new wave and breed of public interest civil society health activism** to address what has been called the "GLP" virus (standing for Globalization, Liberalization and Privatization) that is causing a monumental global health divide that has become shocking if not criminal. (Anwar Fazal) *Our human rights struggle in health focuses on addressing the eminently social function of health and nutrition* (Malik Ozden, CETIM) 6. Let me start with a **caveat: It is not an innocent stands when colleagues and whole health systems attempt to reduce the right to health to the-right-to-receive-medical-care.**(i) For the right to health to become a reality, policies of all sectors must fall into place. Further (and much) more, the fulfillment of the right to health requires the social mobilization of claim holders to grow steadfastly --to demand the needed changes. (Julio Monsalvo) (i): This is typical for countries that, despite high levels of economic growth and of consumption, have not implemented the needed institutional reforms that guarantee homogeneous progress by deliberately giving priority to measures in the realm of social and human development. Yes, *inequality is unfair and cruel, as well as unacceptable in a society striving to be called ‘developed’*. (Foro Salud Peru) 7. Why the caveat? Because *the right to health simply has to guarantee:* • universal and comprehensive health care that includes claim holders’ active participation; • an increase in the public expenditures on health with priority given to address the needs of the neediest; • universal access to generic medicines and essential medical equipment including sovereign pharmaceutical policies; • a rejection of the signing and ratification of undemocratic and unfair trade agreements; • quality health care and dignified treatment; • a closing of the gap in essential health personnel and their needs; • addressing the social determinants of health and pursuing active health promotion activities and, last but not least, • addressing the special needs of women, gender issues and all issues of sexual and reproductive health. (Foro Salud, Peru) I ask: *How can all this possibly be achieved using a top-down approach?* 8. For our colleagues in El Salvador, *the right to health tasks at hand further include:* • The immediate abolition of all payments in the public health system allowing an increase in the access to health according to need all the way to the tertiary level. • Passing legislation that regulates the prices of medicines nationwide. • Giving a decisive push to citizens’ participation in the planning and monitoring of health policies from the primary to the tertiary level.(ii) • Setting up immediate and ongoing evaluation mechanisms of the delivery of patient-friendly, non-discriminatory health services.(ii) • Giving No.1 priority to comprehensive primary health care with ad-hoc health care teams assigned to specific geographic areas. • Organizing and coordinating the sector’s claim holders to coalesce into public interest civil society pressure groups. (ii): But the health indicators currently in use are ambivalent; some advance slowly (…and more for some in society) while other stay put or deteriorate. *The time for less-than-useful statistics to yield to right-to-health-sensitive data has come*; reality and truth must impose themselves on the data being/to be collected so that social and health policies start addressing real human and citizens’ needs. (Foro Salud Peru) 9. Given the above, *organized claim holders, therefore, must:* • *Urgently organize and mobilize* to repeal irresponsible public policies that highlight economic growth, but hide stagnating poverty indexes. [Perpetuating the use of national averages in health statistics is an example of how this hiding operates]. • *Use all their energies* to negotiate/demand the needed political changes/compromises based on pragmatic and legally-binding measures that will fulfill the right to health for all. [The dialogues with government and with public opinion leaders (duty bearers), as well as the claimants’ presence in the public debate through the media must be matched by their organizations’ capacity to monitor health policies (their application) and health statistics (their use) in all health services]. • *Work within a political framework* that actively pursues the right to health and that deepens all people’s participation making sure they achieve not only voice, but influence as the only way to guarantee needed changes are eventually made. [An effective popular participation is the key element that gives legitimacy to the claim holders’ human rights (HR) protection struggle and gives legitimacy to their fight against the stigma, the discrimination and the exclusion that affects so many in their quest for quality health care]. • *Demand* that health interventions apply HR principles and standards respecting all international HR covenants and conventions. • *Consolidate* an active and wide social and political movement that will address the social determinants of health face-on. [The commoditization and the medicalization of health are just two examples of important determinants of people’s health that need to be tackled]. • *Involve* the above movement much more with the struggle for a cleaner and cooler environment. • *Lobby* for the curricula of health professionals to be amended so as to revert the current model being taught centered around treating diseases and increasing the productivity of the health work force. [Breaking with the biomedical model is urgent since it leads individuals and society to situations detrimental to health]. • *Become part of the struggle* for fairer remuneration of the health workforce, and • *Denounce*, amend and/or revert all the current measures that affect HR and people’s liberties. [An example is all current and in-negotiation free trade agreements]. (Foro Salud, Peru) *In the Universal Health Coverage era: Is health equality a sibling of the right to health?* 10. **If and where universal health care (UHC) is implemented in line with the recommendations of WHO, it is said it can come close to being anchored in the right to health. But is it?** Let us see: • *First*, UHC anchored in the right to health requires that cost–effectiveness criteria are used with much more care to avoid justifying UHC when it is not complying with the minimum principles and standards demanded by the right to health. • *Second*, identifying and overcoming the multiple barriers stemming from socioeconomic exclusion and/or discrimination is certainly vital to advancing UHC --but it is not sufficient in itself. Efforts are required to identify the specific groups that are vulnerable or marginalized in a given country and region(s) to make sure they are included in all UHC plans so as to ensure that health coverage is truly universal. • *Third*, comparing UHC and right to health norms highlights the difference between a UHC anchored in the right to health and UHC not explicitly anchored in the right to health. (Ooms) *The right to health demands a set of core obligations that apply to all countries, regardless of their wealth* 11. **The right to health guarantees a minimum level of health care --anywhere. In that sense, UHC cannot have any kind of ‘floor’**. If the economic context of a given country leads to a level of health care that does not even address standard health threats of the most vulnerable, how can UHC, **as currently proposed**, tolerate that? Beware: Such a **UHC does not guarantee a commensurate level of core health care entitlements to vulnerable groups as the right to health does.** Furthermore, UHC norms pay little attention to vulnerable and marginalized groups in terms of their active participation in decision-making. (Ooms) 12. Bottom line, **if UHC is not anchored in the right to health it risks not being universal with respect to providing coverage to all people. It is the focusing on coverage percentages** not disaggregating data by vulnerable groups what **mask**s **exclusion**. The complex interplay between social marginalization or exclusion and economic exclusion can render vulnerable and marginalized individuals (e.g. the child of an unmarried, undocumented migrant) and groups invisible to the authorities. Addressing this added dimension of exclusion is thus a priority if UHC is to be anchored in the right to health. Procedurally, **UHC anchored in the right to health requires that authorities engage with those who are excluded and devise policies with them** to amend the health system accordingly --actually the whole social system more broadly. Only this will make UHC truly universal. (Gorik Ooms for WHO) *Universal Health Coverage, taxes and wages* 13. **Tax revenue is a major statistical determinant of progress towards UHC**. Each U$10 per-capita increase in tax revenue is associated with up to an additional U$1 of public health spending per capita. Whereas each $10 increase in GDP per capita is statistically associated with increases in the order of U$0.10. Crucially, tax revenues sit on the pathway between economic growth and health spending. In short, **tax reform is an efficient way of translating economic growth into greater health spending**. Over time, taxation within a country is associated with changes in infant mortality. The results have been crystal clear. Where taxes on goods and services increase (thereby increasing the cost of food and health care), infant mortality also increases. However, where taxes on income, profits, and capital gains increase (progressive taxation), we do not find this same relationship. Some countries can further increase revenues through reducing corporate tax evasion. Bottom line here, **taxes are a cornerstone for us to achieve UHC.** (A. Reeves) 14. The above notwithstanding, defending wage subsidies to secure a ‘basic income’ is not the solution for UHC; we ought to think twice before defending this. **Receiving a ‘better’ basic income to only then have to pay for privatized health services will certainly not tackle inequalities.** (Francine Mestrum) Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City cschuftan(a)phmovement.org *Postscript/Marginalia* *Twelve arguments pointing towards why we need to embark on empowering community capacity building activities in health* (From HR Reader 15) *I.* The notions of duty and justice (…and not compassion!) give the right to health its cutting edge. *II.* Power is a key relation between health and HR issues. A right confers power, i.e. the power to make key changes as far reaching as the prevailing health system allows claim holders to demand for. (It is our duty to help making the latter possible). *III.* People have full power only when they are able to alter existing power relations. (It is our duty to help making this possible too). *IV*. X has to have power over Y to affect results. Power thus needs to be used to change an existing unfair health system and to turn it to the people’s advantage. (It is our duty to help this use is made). *V*. Only exercising power can people freely select among the realistic available possible solutions (people’s empowerment is thus needed). *VI*. Active claims are rather useless if there is no power to have duty bearers enforce their public health duties. *VII.* A party other than the duty bearers has to have power over the duties in order to make sure most public health duties are enforced. *VIII.* Ergo, to enforce a duty, the claim holder needs power over the duty bearer. *IX.* It is not good if the claim holders have no power or control over the enforcement of their health claims. *X.* Actually, people can only have a true health claim when they also have the power to claim for it; the power is a necessary ingredient in their claim; ergo, having a claim necessarily involves having (or acquiring) power. *XI.* Claim holders cannot only be passive beneficiaries of the duties of others. *XII.* People’s health rights are recognized as long as the claim holders have power over the duties not being enforced. (Urban Jonsson) [image: 1px] ©2016 Claudio Schuftan | 121 38 St BTT D2, Saigon, Vietnam [image: 1px] Web Version <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.274.1.497a3f63806c26181b9090a…> Forward <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.275.1.b35c509c031ffaa0a034390…> Unsubscribe <https://go.madmimi.com/opt_out?fe=1&pact=52617-132255971-8183963508-983f76d…> Powered by *Mad Mimi*®A GoDaddy® company <http://sable.madmimi.com/click?id=16266.52617.276.1.7f957d3d2745c137ff11e0a…> -- 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 03 Jul '16

03 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Great Transition Network <gtnetwork(a)greattransition.org> Date: Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 10:28 PM Subject: Against Ecocide (GTN Discussion) To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com >From Stephen Woolpert <woolpert(a)stmarys-ca.edu> ------------------------------------------------------- An excellent precursor to the concept of ecocide is Christopher Stone's iconic 1972 Yale Law Review article, ‘Should Trees Have Standing?’. It remains the definitive statement as to why trees, oceans, animals, and the environment as a whole should be bestowed with legal rights. Stone argued that special guardians should be empowered to speak for the "voiceless" elements in nature, in effect, to give legal standing to endangered species and threatened forests. Human rights courts have taken important steps to protect the environment, but always so as to protect the rights of the human. This leads some to identify a fundamental contradiction: by placing environmental claims in a human rights framework, the system reinforces the very conditions that give rise to natural harms in the first place, by shackling the protection of the natural object to the interests of the human(s) espousing the claim. Stone challenged the assumption that the human person is necessarily and naturally at the center of any legal order, be it national or international. He caused a great many readers to reflect in an ecological manner, by imagining what it means to conceive of the interests of a natural object from a non-human perspective. The Journal of Human Rights and the Environment published a retrospective, "Should trees have standing: 40 years on?" here: www.elgaronline.com/view/journals/jhre/3-0/jhre.2012.02.00.xml Steve Woolpert ************************** On 7/1/16 8:17 AM, Great Transition Network wrote: >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: Pew Research Center Study on the Future of the Internet
by Michel Bauwens 02 Jul '16

02 Jul '16

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: lrainie(a)pewresearch.org via surveymonkey.com <member(a)surveymonkey.com> Date: Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:59 PM Subject: Pew Research Center Study on the Future of the Internet To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com Future of the Internet 2016 The Pew Research Center and Elon University’s Imagining the Internet Center conduct surveys of important stakeholders like you to assess the likely future impacts of the Internet. We hope you'll take 10-15 minutes to share your thoughts in this new canvassing of experts about technology’s trajectory in the coming decade. The question topics ask you to consider the likely evolution of technology in the next decade and its impact on the future of: the tone of public discourse, education innovation for future skills, the opportunities and challenges of algorithm-based everything, and trust in online interaction. To begin the survey click on the "Begin Survey" box at the bottom of this email. *Each elaboration you provide will remain anonymous unless you put your name and professional identity at the start of it. *This is a confidential survey, however we encourage you to take credit for your remarks as this lends credibility to the results and contributes to a more vibrant conversation. The Pew Research Center and Elon University will issue a series of reports based on this survey in 2016 and 2017. Your answers, attributed or anonymous, will also be added to Imagining the Internet research site. If you have any questions, please contact one of us. Thank you! Lee Rainie, lrainie(a)pewInternet.org Director, Internet, Science and Technology Research Pew Research Center Janna Anderson, andersj(a)elon.edu Director, Imagining the Internet Center, Elon University Begin Survey <https://surveymonkey.com/tr/v1/te/akU_2BQc2vAhAsa_2B264x1g6_2FpF_2Fhy3Ehxbp…> Please do not forward this email as its survey link is unique to you. Unsubscribe <https://surveymonkey.com/tr/v1/te/akU_2BQc2vAhAsa_2B264x1g6_2FpF_2Fhy3Ehxbp…> from this list -- 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

Eu funded Global Commons Conference, 2-3 September, Amsterdam
by Orsan Senalp 02 Jul '16

02 Jul '16

I am based very Amsterdam but heard about this event from Facebook. It was not clear from the website if registration fee will be charged. In case there is a fee for participation, although I am very close it seems as many other commoners it would not possible for me to join this event; let alone the ethic problem of charging people for already funded event by EU, with public money. ..... Peer Value:Advancing the Commons Collaborative Economy is a conference integrating conversations and plans of action for shaping and connecting the Commons on a global level. The conference is organized along three tracks: Track 1: P2P: Inclusive Politics, Activism and Law for the Commons Track 2: Decentralized Tech and Beyond:Global Design,Local Production Track 3: From Platform to Open Cooperativism We will explore questions such as: What are the conditions that encourage communities to work as peers, creating commons? What are the best practices communities can adopt to safeguard their resilience? Decentralization - why is it important, and how is it implemented and maintained? How can the working methodologies honed by well-established digital communities act as transitional guidelines for sustainable “material” manufacturing? What about social innovation and livelihoods - how does contributory and open accounting work with the systems of value creation found in CBPP? How can civil society participate in recommending policy proposals that support CBPP for governments at the local, regional, national - even global - levels? Join your peers, add your voice and take part in the growing conversation about the Commons as an important, emerging collaborative social model. Register now > This event is funded by a European Union FP7 research grant. Web: Peervalueconf.eu .... In solidarity, Örsan

2 1

Fwd: [commoning] Commons Space at the World Social Forum
by Orsan Senalp 01 Jul '16

01 Jul '16

Begin forwarded message: > From: Nicole Leonard <nicole.leonard92(a)gmail.com> > Date: 27 Jun 2016 17:20:26 GMT+2 > To: commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org, echanges(a)bienscommuns.org > Subject: [commoning] Commons Space at the World Social Forum > > Hello everyone, > > This email is to inform you of the progress to date on the organizing of Commons Space at the World Social Forum. As explained in the general invitation (attached), it is an open space to collectively discuss, document, and connect within and across social movements related to the commons. We also want to open up the organizing process before the Forum takes place. > > For this, we have started a Commons Space pad so that we can work together in collectively planning activities: > > https://commonsspace.hackpad.com/Commons-Space-k6rOCvUgyhC#:h=Activities-re… > > As you will see in the table on the pad, there are over 10 activities that are already in the course of being prepared. Please if you have any ideas, contacts, or other points, add to them to write under the respective activity, or if there is a new activity you’d like to propose, add it to the table in a new line (with your name/contact information!) and we can schedule a call of some sort to coordinate. > > We are also open to ideas for documenting these sessions and using participatory forms of media so that we leave the WSF with a good record of the events. And of course, for those that will be in Montreal, we welcome you to participate in the activities during the Forum or co-organize your own. > > In solidarity, > Nicole Leonard > _______________________________________________ > Commoning mailing list > Commons-Institut e.V. Germany > Commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org > https://lists.schokokeks.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/commoning

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: [Debate-List] You Talk About the Collapse of Western Civilisation as If It Would be a Bad Thing
by Örsan Şenalp 01 Jul '16

01 Jul '16

Is this what you mean Peter: http://www.commonssense.it/emend/european-charter-of-the-commons-eng/ We did indeed start to compile a draft text and discussion material here: https://globalcommonscharter.titanpad.com/1 This is globally open to anyone who like to contribute to the wiki-writing (ideally multi-lingual) process. Next monday we will have a workgroup meeting over skype to discuss core issues and before that we will try to send around an appealing invitation. However whoever feels to join please do so without waiting invite; this as an totally open peer to peer commoning process; note in your agenda that we meet next Monday, at 16:00 UK Time, on Skype. My skype ID is orsan1234 if you add me and call (or Ellen, or Anna) you can join the call. Best, Orsan > On 1 July 2016 at 15:49, peter waterman <peterwaterman1936(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Orsan > > I have an idea there is some kind of Charter of the Commons online somewhere. I'll try to find it. But if I can't, why don't you draft one. > > Peter W > Charter Lover > >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> What needed is a commons program designed and carried out by the emancipatory forces struggling to unite in the global south (transnationally located in east-west-north-south). >> >> Inter-networks of local, national and global communities needs to form defacto global 'unState'; based on self-organized and direct-democratic economic, cultural, decision making, and execution bodies. >> >> Wsf can play a crucial role, as well as a most radical commons charter (a global Magna Charta) movement demanding end of domination of elite-ruling classes, their yoke on all the commons, means of production, culture, and sources of social power. >> >> ... >> Orsan >> >> >> >>> On 01 Jul 2016, at 13:01, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I recently shared a draft translation of Sultan-galiev's ~1929 article in which he described the nature of slaver-master relationship build consciously by the West towards the East during the colonial period. >>> >>> In the so called post-colonial era however, as middle classes has become skeleton for ruling power structures within the Western stable capitalist Nation-states (which are clonned in the periphery) European and broader Western consumer-worker aristocracy of the past did become center of gravity in the new post-colonial imperial value extraction, accumulation by exploitation. It's asthetic, individualizm, and economics has spread by clonned of nation state structures and given the legitimacy of all mass killings, wars, genocides in the service of capitalist accumulation at the world level... We experienced in the 20 and 21cc transnationalization of production, classes, and the state system out of which global south - global north framework emerged. West and East expanded all over the world so to say. >>> >>> In case Europe, and the West collapse and the center of gravity of the Global North's imperialism over the global south things can even go worst. So for the sake of global emancipation and liberation of humanity what needs to fall is, with its translocal and transnational structures, the entire rule of the global north over the global south. >>> >>> Orsan >>> >>> >>>> On 30 Jun 2016, at 14:04, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Agree with your questioning and solutioning. :) >>>> >>>> I have a different set of networked and self-organized 'unstate' 'uninstitutions' as part of translocally transnationally forging of rebuildng-struggle but rest sounds good to me. >>>> >>>> Orsan >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 24 Jun 2016, at 21:59, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> interesting, here are some questions of my own: >>>>> >>>>> * would a more neoliberal, anti-workers EU, be better for African nations .. is the collapse of Greece and all its human costs, good for the majority of the African population >>>>> >>>>> * what is the evidence that European neoliberal oligarchies, and their terms of trade, would be more friendly towards these populations without the EU and the countervailing power of European social movements ? >>>>> >>>>> * what is the evidence that new imperial forces, if the power of Europe would collapse, would be more friendlier (in the beginning, there seemed to be a lot of enthusiasm of the African elite towards China, is that still the case ?) >>>>> >>>>> My own inkling would be to answer in a negative way, i.e. a further neoliberalisation of Europe would not be a good thing for anyone >>>>> >>>>> Nevertheless, I am not very optimistic about the attempt by Varoufakis and DIEM, althought it probably must be tried, as it would require a wholesale progressive electoral revoluton in the whole of Europe, while a left-right polarisation seems so much more likely .. Second, if such a mobilisation was the case, wouldn't it be better to recreate European and other multilaterial structures, on a wholly different footing as the current neoliberal institutions ? (and agreeing with the author, such a re-organization would seek fair trade, not unfair free trade) >>>>> >>>>> my own bias would be to work at the transnational level, using direct links between European, African and other populations, see: http://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Why_the_P2P_and_Commons_Movement_Must_Act_Tra… >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Toussaint Losier <toussaint.losier(a)gmail.com> >>>>>>> Date: 24 Jun 2016 16:24:54 GMT+2 >>>>>>> To: Debate is a listserve that attempts to promoteinformation and analyses of interest to the independent left in South andSouthern Africa <debate-list(a)fahamu.org> >>>>>>> Subject: [Debate-List] You Talk About the Collapse of Western Civilisation as If It Would be a Bad Thing >>>>>>> >>>>>>> written prior to today's referendum results ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> June 23, 2016 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You Talk About the Collapse of Western Civilisation as If It Would be a Bad Thing >>>>>>> >>>>>>> by Kalundi Serumaga >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Former Greek Finance Minister Yiannis Varoufakis’ crusade to help save the 60 year old European Union from a growing potential disintegration is intriguing. He, and the other activists talk ultimately about the collapse of Western civilization, and more so as if it would necessarily be a bad thing. Some of us –for whom the world is a catastrophe already-, are not so sure. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Coming from a far left perspective, Dr Varoufakis argues that the purpose of the campaign is to prevent the emergence of something worse. That such a rescue mission will inevitably also bolster the economic system upon which the EU rests, not to mention many of the super-rich who derive disproportionate benefits from it, is regarded as a necessary evil. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This could be a mistake. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Certainly, an unraveling of the EU, even partially, would be momentous, particularly in terms of the economic impact on lives and communities there. Those arguing for its preservation –especially those on the Left of the political spectrum- are probably also correct about a resultant vastly increased risk of a return to the earlier pan-European penchant for large-scale war and extreme intolerance as methods of managing political problems. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, if the matter of the future of the EU continues be treated as a matter for its member states and their citizens alone, then these advocates of progress will find they have become the advocates of the very evils they seek to strike down. Dr Varoufakis may well find himself committing the same kind of betrayal of which he accuses his former boss (Greek Prime Minister) Alex Tsipiras: sacrificing a pig or two so the big bad corporate wolf does not blow the whole house down. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Varoufakis’ country was able to freely elect a government of its own choice, to speak on its behalf against the new economic regime. By contrast, much of the same measures, when brought to Africa by the same EU and its other partners, were agreed to by stealth with the resident dictator/election cheat running the state, and then imposed, without much debate, if any, on the population. What is more, some of these measures have now been in effect for so long (over twenty years in Uganda, where I come from), that the have become the norm for many in the population, intelligentsia included. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The EU is a global power in its own right. It is the major trading partner for a whole host of states, many of which were created by European countries during their empire phase. The vast majority of them, now collected in the African Caribbean Pacific (ACP) also form the bulk of the Least Developed Nations list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The family of trade agreements between the EU and the ACP region are the direct descendants of trade pacts made between then EU’s own ancestor known as the European Commission, and the various fledgling regional trade blocs throughout the South. In 1974, a major sit-down was held where all such blocs were grouped as the ACP region, and all such Agreements became the Lome’ Convention. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Renamed today as Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) their primary features is a lopsided arrangement greatly favouring the EU, particularly through preserving European agricultural subsidies while eliminating ACP ones, and also forcing open the ACP agricultural sector to foreign domination, and commodity dumping. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> “These trade and investment agreements serve the interests of multinationals and undermine the legal sovereignty of participating countries. Not only do EPAs hinder the development of many Africans, they lead to growing inequality, violence and migration.” Ugandan trade activist Yash Tandon, author of Trade is War, explains. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Today, the seventy-nine member ACP is locked into a 2000-2020 EPA with the EU, and thousands of young African economic migrants from bankrupted farming and fishing families are making the dangerous crossing to try and enter the Eurozone. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> While it is clear that something has fallen apart, this side of the matter seems wholly absent from the European parties on all sides of the ongoing debate. They talk about the EU’s economic crisis, and the African migrant crisis, as if they are two completely unrelated things. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Western economic policy has never just been a matter of skill. It has always been a matter of power. The current global world order was created out of a half-millennial process of the powerful imposing their vision of how things should be, on the weak. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If it were simply a question of implementing knowledge then perhaps Queen Elisabeth would not have had to ask the Professors at LSE why none of them saw the crash coming. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is how unequal “trade” (for lack of a more precise word) comes in to help resolve some of the glaring contradictions contained within Western economic assumptions: From where will new actual value be created to pay off the ever-lengthening line of credit being extended to the general population? Is it reasonable for societies with massively shrinking manufacturing bases to expect to live to the same, or even better, material standards that existed before the contraction? If your economies are not producing as much new actual value as they did a few generations ago, then what exactly is keeping your currencies “strong”? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any African wishing to amuse a group of western thinker-activists, could try explaining to them how what appears as trade on their end of the contract looks very much like sophisticated looting on the African/ACP end. This assertion is often met with derision. Nevertheless, there is a lot of data and anecdote now available to show how the gap between what Western economies actually make, and what they actually spend, is bridged by the relentless forcing down of the prices of the basic commodities and labour that they are able to extract from the “developing” world. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pro-EU activists must ask themselves: who bears the real cost of keeping the European Union together? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The EU’s EPAs EU backstop a whole pattern of economic relations planted through colonial violence. Large areas of fertile ACP land are still given over to the production of crops consumed largely in the west, at prices fixed in their commodity exchanges. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In that context, the EU members, individually and collectively, have done much to shape the contemporary economic landscape in Africa and elsewhere. And guess what? Much of it has been in the form of the very “austerity” economic policies that Varoufakis has heroically battled against both as Finance minister, and after, as Europeans began discovering what Africans have been living with for a generation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The EU is a vast political safety device formed after the 1939-1945 war that Europeans started. It is based on the notion that it may be harder to start a fight with someone with whom you are locked in a tight embrace. What began as an initiative toward integrated trade in certain key commodities has grown in to complex political and economic system taking in much of the wealthier parts of the European landmass. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In practical terms, this means a greater likelihood of western commercial interests driving war in the oilfields of the Middle East, rather than another one over the vast mineral wealth of the Alsace-Lorraine region . It is the ultimate outsourcing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The campaign argues for keeping the EU together, but while fundamentally reforming it so that its bureaucracy becomes more democratically accountable to its populations, particularly in economic affairs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But to us non-Europeans, it would appear that the campaigners’ real complaint is that social democratic compact between the rich and the poor countries and economic social classes that was ruptured with the onset of austerity measures across Europe following the Western 2008 banking collapse, is not being respected. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dr Varoufakis accuses the wealthy European economic classes of in fact using the economic crisis as an opportunity to abandon the decades-old social democratic obligations under the cover of a fictitious “need” for austerity programmes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As an African living within an EPA, I believe that no European discussion on how best to recover their economic prosperity, and what then to do with it, will be legitimate and ultimately productive, unless Europeans (and in particular, the former colonial powers in western Europe) also address the basis upon which they acquired and maintain that prosperity in the first place. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Trade indeed is still war, and a direct continuation of the “first real First World War” (1520-1550) when the then European powers fought each other to grab the Americas and first real “Second World War”, when even more European powers scrambled against each other and Asians and Africans for more real estate. We saw it again during the 1947-1990 “Cold War”, which, apart from serving as an excuse to impede the many struggles for progress and emancipation, was anything but “Cold” in the African and Asian theatre. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For the ACP region, with ongoing conflicts over arable land and “blood minerals” being fuelled by Western demand and implemented by western-friendly warlords (sometimes masquerading as heads of state), “there is no past, everything is still happening” to quote native Australian Elder Banjo Clarke. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Short of such a fuller discussion, the “save the EU” campaign will risk looking more like an attempt to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, instead of first asking him to think about why, given his fragility, he decided to perch himself so high up on a wall to begin with. Africa, along with the entire ACP region will be expected to retain their “proper” place as a poorer trading partner, so as to help guarantee a certain standard of living for even the poorest >>>>>>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetworkedLabour mailing list >> NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org >> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour > > > > -- > Click here for Peter's recent writings

1 0