October 2017 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Re: [P2P-F] A globa-local synthesis of a possible city-supported public-commons partnership for climate- friendly and ecologically balanced provisioning systems
by Roberto Verzola 16 Oct '17

16 Oct '17

By the way, the word cooperation strikes a resonant chord across several fields. For instance, in evolution, some biologists insist that cooperation is as widespread a paradigm, if not more dominant, as competition. In market economics, competition is often contraposed to monopoly. But an orthogonal view will contrapose cooperation to competition. I haven't seen the word being coopted in any effective way by corporates, probably because its deep connotations are to foreign to them. (Although Adam Smith once wrote, in paraphrase, beware of monopolies when businessmen start to cooperate...). Finally cooperative has less historical baggage than communes. Roberto On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 14:18:17 +0100 Henry Tam <htam.global(a)talk21.com> wrote: > Pat & colleagues, > > > > Mill, as Pat you reminded us previously, indeed has much to offer beyond being lumped with the ‘classical economists’. His philosophy enhanced by cooperative practices ought to be a source of inspiration for contemporary activists. Incidentally, the need to advance the vision of cooperation as a guide to reshaping the socio-economic order is well set out in Stephen’s book on Holyoake, about which I’ve written up this review: http://henry-tam.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/cooperation-new-order-of-life.html > > > > The democratic cooperative tradition running from Mill, the Owenites, Hobhouse, Hobson, Tawney, Cole, through to today’s solidarity coop advocates is one we should build on, because it has so much to offer, and has the ballast of a real tradition, and not just another concoction with a label the Right hasn’t yet tried to steal. A cooperative society, with a partner state guided by public social partnerships. Cooperation, not exploitation. > > > > In solidarity, > > > > Henry > > > > > > From: Pat Conaty <pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> > Reply-To: Pat Conaty <pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> > Date: Sunday, 15 October 2017 at 13:09 > To: Henry Tam <htam.global(a)talk21.com>, <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org>, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net>, Colm <colm(a)solidarityeconomy.coop>, Stephen Yeo <stephen.yeo(a)phonecoop.coop> > Cc: Stacco Troncoso <staccotroncoso(a)p2pfoundation.net>, Holemans Dirk <Dirk.Holemans(a)stad.gent>, Tim Crabtree <tim.crabtree(a)schumachercollege.org.uk>, John Restakis <restakis1(a)gmail.com>, P2P Foundation mailing list <p2p-foundation(a)lists.ourproject.org>, Mike Gismondi <mikeg(a)athabascau.ca>, David Bollier <david(a)bollier.org>, Cilla Ross <Cilla(a)co-op.ac.uk>, Margie Mendell <mendell(a)alcor.concordia.ca>, Michael Lewis <Lewiscccr(a)shaw.ca> > Subject: Re: [P2P-F] A globa-local synthesis of a possible city-supported public-commons partnership for climate- friendly and ecologically balanced provisioning systems > > > > Hi Henry, Roberto, Michel, Colm and Stephen > > Really good reflections and comments. > > The origin of words is important. I made that point about the Anglo-saxon word for Wealth being Wellbeing. > > Of course we know that liberty has the two meanings. Positive liberty which takes us in the direction of economic democracy and negative liberty which is the laissez-faire free market and limited liberty. JS Mill and others promoted Associative Democracy, shifting from consumer co-ops to producer co-ops and avoiding Mill's fear of a Tyranny of the Majority (Trump nativism, etc) by spreading and developing co-operative education. Mill's question was, yes we can all agree socialism is a great idea, but how the hell do we build and make it work. > > RH Tawney a century ago in his fabulous book, the Acquisitive Society, makes the case for Economic Democracy as the alternative and way out of false utopias, namely the then emerging Fordist consumerism that he was critiquing in the early 1920s. > > Tawney showed that democracy and freedoms (rights acquired) need to be seen as a hierarchy that has been layered up with rights for citizens through class and social struggle. Hence a thousand years ago commercial freedom can be traced back to the early charters for trade negotiated with overlords to set out a fair for people and artisans to meet and the quid pro quo being the right to such exchange was protected by the overlord in exchange for taxes. A huge battle to get to this outcome that took place all over Europe. But we must remember, these early markets in most cases were regulated in moral economy ways at least. > > Tawney goes on to show the next layers that emerged being freedom of religious expression through the reformation, freedom for science through Galileo, etc freedom of the press and communications thereafter and then civil liberties, the franchise etc But he indicates that Economic Democracy as a form of daily democracy really is a stage of democracy and liberty almost nowhere secured. It is the battle hardly yet advanced and really only since Tawney died 50 years ago via Mondragon and other more recent innovations like social co-ops are we now clearly about the co-operative economic science and arts needed to make these work. > > We have to remember also how recent have been the civil liberty battles and still how this remains the burning issue in the Middle East, China, etc. > > But also what happened with the Guild system it must recalled was that in some places this was an interesting form of economic democracy, planning emerging before laissez faire thinking and what today we would call neoliberalism gained hegemony. Kropotkin shows this in his classic book Mutual Aid. It was under Elizabeth I, over four centuries ago that artisanal guilds lost their powers to operate but the Queen did not restrict the lawyer, accountancy and higher skilled professions from practicing guild governance of their trades. > > Thus economic democracy has been very partial. This is core as extending economic democracy really requires co-ops, trade unions, local government and commoners to join forces. This is what Associative Democracy and Gulld Socialism are all about. What John calls a new partner state based on public social partnerships (thanks to Robin Murray for this!) > > That strategy would be what I have in mind about the science and arts of Co-operative Economics in practice in both seeing and engaging in Co-operative Commonwealth place shaping for all people and the planet. > > Pat > > On 15 October 2017 at 10:38 Henry Tam <htam.global(a)talk21.com> wrote: > > Roberto’s reflections illustrate the perennial problem of political mind-sets and word-choices. > > Words can always be claimed, co-opted, converted … Like everything else, it is sometimes necessary to contest and fight for them. > > Otherwise, the Right will keep taking whatever words they like as ‘right’. > & the Left will keep rummaging for alternatives out of the odd terms that are left. > > ‘Democracy’, ‘Sustainability’, ‘Commonwealth’, ‘Cooperation’, ‘Community’, ‘Citizenship’, ‘Values’, ‘Respect’, ‘Progress’, ‘Freedom’, ‘Equality’, ‘Integrity’, let us not concede such terms to those who do not in fact care for what they ought to convey. > > In solidarity, > > Henry > > On 15/10/2017, 07:53, "Roberto Verzola" <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> wrote: > > Thank you for this, Pat. > > Yes, "degrowth" can be a problem rather than a solution, especially to those who are already on the brink or are already caught in the sinkhole of poverty. > > I didn't mean to promote the term "sustainable development", which as you said is already corrupted/polluted. I used the terms separately in the sense that Daly meant them. > > I agree we need to find and settle on some new vocabulary that reflects precisely the ideas we are promoting. "Commonwealth" may work in some context. It is a good term, though the term also carries some historical baggage, which can be negative in some countries. "Cooperative", or even P2P are good words. "Democracy" is another overused word, and it is too identified with representative democracy, which as we know has been mostly hijacked by corporations. I haven't settled on the right term(s) yet, and I scan all the exchanges here and other lists in the hope of discovering the right term(s). > > I count myself as a Green, but the word "green" has also been coopted, and I now find myself having to explain everytime I use the term. > > But that is generally the case. When a term acquires positive connotations, corporate marketers jump on it and appropriate it for their own use. And they have a much larger media budget than most of us combined. Perhaps we can still find a combination of terms whose deep connotations are so anti-corporate that they dare not appropriate it. "Free software" is probably one such term (though RMS also found it necessary to clarify what "free" meant). > > I disagree that "there is no green version that will work at all", although this may be more because we associate different meanings to that word. I consider Green my description of closed material cycles fuelled by renewable energy, where the cycles of biological and non-biological materials are kept separate (with very well-defined interfaces between them, I would add--a concept I borrow from software design). I think this is already working in some situations. It even accomodates some form of growth (putting in more renewable energy to speed up the material flows). > > Greetings, > > Roberto > > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 18:47:26 +0100 (BST) > pat commonfutures <pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Roberto > > These are great points. Yes indeed, Daly talks in Beyond Growth, a very good book from about 1990 on using Sustainable Development as the term instead of ideas like Degrowth. We are experiencing degrowth in Europe in austerity stricken regions and here in the UK, Wales has been in a depression along with the North of England if you look at the falls in GDP post 2010. However these regional indicators are not talked about but but the national UK headline figures that show low-level aggregate growth. In fact degrowth and recession/depression is the underlying problem. > > Growth and its necessity is driven by returns required to capital to service debt both for households, nations and businesses. But as Mill indicated but also Keynes in his essay on the future a hundred years ago, we need to move to post capitalist society and end usury practices in relation to land, money and other speculation. This means as the old co-op saying has stressed, labour needs to hire capital or indeed reformulate money and make it neutral money or interest free. As Stephen Yeo has said, the early Owenite socialists but also the Proudhonians in France from the 1820s sought ways and means to develop co-op land and co-op money without economic rent, interest seekers, etc. See here the thinking of post Keynesians on cheap money, Daly on money as a commons (an essay of his), Silvio Gesell on negative interest rates, etc. This Owenite thinking was also an anti-politics then as working people had no franchise. The thinking is at the roots of what we have overlooked as Co-op > erative Economics. > > The problem with Sustainable Development is that the UN introduced it via the Brundtland report in 1987 but it has become a polluted and co-opted term by corporations and by global banks talking about green banking and SRI. Just so much greenwash. Daly like Schumacher earlier hoped that reforms like the Meidner Plan in Sweden would show how to fully democratise ownership of corporations over several decades. The Meidner Plan was a plan to transform the Swedish Welfare State into a co > > I think therefore that post capitalism, co-operative commonwealth are better notions and key words with the latter more specific and in the vernacular of those in the Co-op movement who have pursued past and present Economic Democracy (mainstream co-op movement does not go there) which means beyond wage labour and capital as we know them (the essence of debt driven growth and capitalism - there is no green version that will work at all). > > Pat > > On 09 October 2017 at 01:23 Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> wrote: > > May I add my few cents' worth to this discussion on growth, degrowth, steady state, etc. > > To introduce myself briefly: I am currently involved in social experiments in renewable energy, and we have since expanded this to sustainable technologies in general. We define a sustainable technology as one that involves a closed loop of material cycles run by renewable energy, where cycles of biodegradable materials and cycles of non-biodegradable materials (which McDonough and Braungart call "technical materials") are kept separate. Other technologies we actually work with include the system of rice intensification (SRI), which currently holds the world record in rice yield and can be implemented organically, low-power FM (in which the technology determines form and content to a significant extent), biogas digesters, a social (rather than technical) solution to power outages through the use of traditional and social media, and a few others. > > I think it was Daly too who distinguished between growth and development. Growth involves increases in quantity, while development may involve improvements in quality. > > As someone said earlier, "degrowth" is a politically untenable message especially in a country like the Philippines where almost a third of the population live below the poverty line. But calling for a shift in emphasis to development rather than growth is more easily defensible (plus of course a certain level of distribution). > > The point I wanted to contribute is that within our definition of sustainable technology, we can still imagine growth occurring when the material flows in the cycles I referred to above are increased as long as additional energy from renewable sources is available to feed into these cycles. So I can still see growth as a component in an overall strategy of development. > > By the way, her work is a bit dated now, but I still find Jane Jacobs' Cities and the Wealth of Nations and her paradigm of city-centered regional (i.e., sub-national) development very useful, especially if it is updated to take ecological matters as well as the information sector more into account. > > Greetings to all, > > Roberto Verzola > Philippines > > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:26:26 +0700 > Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: > > very helpful Pat, > > in the articles, not books, that I've read by Daly, i saw no reference to > this, > > Michel > > On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 6:59 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Michel > > A key question Michel, here is my attempt to answer this. Others like > Stephen Yeo may wish to chip in that know the history. > > Daly argues for a shift from growth economics to steady-state economics. > The latter implies no capitalism. His argument is based on the forecasts by > Adam Smith, JS Mill and Keynes that in future growth will decline when the > opportunities for it dry up. Marx called this the accumulation crisis. From > 1776 in the Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith foresaw this endpoint in about > 250 years. Keynes foresaw this in his Essay on the Future Economics of Our > Grandchildren as happening about 2025. Mill did not give a date. > > The issue for Daly was what system would replace an economy without growth > as other economists have foreseen such a state as leading to the abyss. > Mill argued that with worker ownership of the means of production via > worker co-ops and comprehensive land reform, this steady state could be a > positive future for qualitative human development. > > Mill argued though that the ownership question was crucial to set the > enabling circumstances for this. Hence his argument for land taxation to > move property into common ownership or public ownership. Henry George takes > his single tax idea directly from Mill. But Mill also argued as another > crucial reform for worker ownership and he made the case that consumer > co-ops were not sufficient. The reason for this Mill showed is that > economic democracy and in fact full democracy required participative > structures and educational reform to secure this. Only then could socialism > be practical he felt. This was his argument against other non-democratic > forms of socialism that he feared would lead to authoritarian outcomes. > > Polanyi is of this school of democratic socialism and Daly is a strong > supporter of Polanyi in his books Beyond Growth and For the Common Good. > > There is a major problem with the history of socialism. Socialism was the > term coined by the early Co-op movement in England from the 1820s. Robert > Owen in particular called it also social science. He used the terms almost > interchangeably. These socialists were also for land reform, co-operative > land solutions and interest free money. Mill picked up his ideas for a > democratic socialism from this original socialist movement. But Marx and > Engels argued for communism and derided the early socialists as utopian and > non-scientific. Sadly Marx also misunderstood money and the need for > interest-free forms as the Owenite socialists, the Proudhonian socialists > and other early co-op movements like these in the US understood. > > Polanyi followed all this and celebrates this in the Great Transformation > and so did the Guild socialists who felt strongly about economic democracy > (RH Tawney, GDH Cole, Bertrand Russell) and in the case of Clifford Douglas > (who was very involved with the early guild socialist movement), monetary > reform. Frederick Soddy picked up ideas from Douglas and Silvio Gesell in > the 1920s and argued for 100% money free of interest and debt. > > Daly's arguments follows closely Polanyi and Soddy who he quotes and > celebrates in Beyond Growth. > > But because Marx was muddled on the money question and weak on the need > for economic democracy, Marxists are blind to the needs for really taking > land, people and money out of the market as Polanyi showed the need for. A > pity this as like Polanyi Marx saw labour, money and land enclosure so well > and how they had been made into false commodities. > > I can recommend to you and others on this list an outstanding text book > that should be core reading for Synergia students and the entire commons > movement. It is by Mark Lutz and called Economics for the Common Good. > > John uses the term political economy and the need for a new political > economy in relation to the partner state. I understand the reason why but I > do think this is problematic historically as key words are important to be > clear about. In the late 19th century, political economy and capitalism > were one and the same thing. > > While the resisters to industrial capitalism coined the term socialism in > the 1820s as the humane alternative, until the 1870s, capitalism was not a > word really used. The term for it was political economy and this is why > Marx wrote his Capital as a critique of political economy. It was with the > publication of Capital that capitalism began to be used more widely. > > During the 19th century the movement against capitalism was indeed known > as social economy and included the co-ops and the trade unions. Sadly the > EU definition of social economy by Jacques Delor from the 1990s leaves out > trade unions and only talks about Co-ops, Mutuals, Associations and > Foundations (CMAF). > > The Lutz book traces a continuous strand of social economics from the late > 18th century to today (sometimes also called co-operative economics) that > is a radical strand of socialist thinking that avoids the blindspots of > Marx. > > Also in Daly's book. For the Common Good, he talks about the work of > Schumacher on innovative thinking viz. an ownership form for co-ops that > could become intergenerational for securing the common good. Schumacher saw > the solution as to ensure a structure of ownership in co-ops that required > a strong common ownership foundation. This is very relevant to your work > and to developing Social Solidarity Economy thinking. The Lutz book is > vital guidance here and for how we best frame Synergia's pedagogy on these > question and what this idea of Eco-socialism would look like. It would be a > vitally needed synergia of social economics and ecological economics. > Co-operative economics also ploughs in this direction if you look at the > adherents. > > But there is no teaching of Co-op Economics within the international Co-op > movement, though I think St. Mary's University in Halifax has run a course > like this prior to an ICA meeting in Montreal not that long ago. I just > heard this this week. > > Hope this is helpful. > > Pat > > On 08 October 2017 at 08:37 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > I did read several pieces from Daly but it seems to me he is not > challenging capitalism per se, > > anyone read him differently ? > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 10:43 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Mike and Michel > > Thanks Michel for the Commons Transition reports. Very good to see these. > Your reply to Mike is also helpful. > > Thanks also Mike for sharing the Stan Cox critique about renewable energy > wishful thinking. I found the comments by David Schwartzman very persuasive > about the Military Industrial Complex power elite and their focused role > viz. fossil fuel geopolitics and nuclear energy. This is a very little > discussed structural impediment. > > Also this confirms the need for Greens to focus on eco-soclalist ways > forward. As Streeck argues, Growth is bound in its hands and feet with the > Accumulation demands of capitalism and the money machine. Steady-state > economics based on thermodynamics as Herman Daly so well articulates this > necessitates a post capitalism system. Schwartzman underscores this. > > Pat > > On 05 October 2017 at 06:09 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > dear Michael, > > I will add some responses in-line > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Michael Lewis <Lewiscccr(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > > Pat I really like the memo you sent. But I have several questions. > (Michel - I wrote this and then see you have replied to Pat) I will think > about and perhaps comment later. I the meantime here is my response to Pat) > > I am a poor student of history, but as I have come to understand Cole his > guild strategy was rooted in the work place, although relevant to other > kinds of association. The role of the state was radially reduced. What > emerged was a decentralized, democratic approach to provisioning, where > workers were the central (but not only) actors. Advise me here what I am > missing. > > If this is the case there a large difference in what Michel is proposing? > The foundation of his proposition is public-commons partnerships. Is this > not very different? Given the radical difference in reference points - > Cole with workers a the base and this 21st idea where globally mediated > knowledge that enables localize production on an > open-mutualized-cooperative basis; I wonder where the context renders some > of Cole’s propositions less relevant. > > in my interpretation, the commons are themselves multi-stakeholders, so > this include the workers and the user communities ; you may be familiar > with the idea of some that today the workplace has exploded and is no > longer confined to the factory; but there is an obvious linkage between the > commons seen as the locus of co-production, and thus a sphere of production > including workers, and industrial and craft workers as they used to exist > > Second, as I understand it Michel, your proposition is critically > dependent of an member cities to be active at the city and global level, > the latter through associations. In short, cities are organized into a body > the coordinates and governs the terms under which sourcing technical > solutions is build and maintained on an open source base. Question here > Michel is whether access to the knowledge repository requires cities to be > active members of the global mutual…?? > > the code is open source, and would be accessible to everybody, but the > right to commercialization of that code may be subjected to some > reciprocity limitatations, in my opinion (reciprocity-based licensing) > > Third, the territorial platform co-operatives become critical > infrastructure for production, distribution and governing. Michel…a > question about the platform co-ops; are they conceived of as being > multi-stakeholder and, if so, what is the role of local state actors, if > any? > > yes, they are conceived as multi-stakeholder and I'm open to co-governance > by local public actors > > Lastly, I am wondering about the thinking to date on whether there will > be limits to what is gathered into the global digital open source > repository? Is the focus on all the critical elements to aid and > accelerate transition? Given the absolute urgencies emerging from climate > breakdown, this might make senses. Or is it broader? I think these are > important questions as they will shape the counters of the politics that > such a proposition would provoke. Even if it is restricted to urgent > transition related production, I can imagine that a global manufacturers of > say, public transit vehicles, and their employees, would be none to > pleased with a strategy that could has the potential for sidelining their > businesses and jobs.. But, then again, I may not be capturing the > fullness of the vision. > > for me, this would work for all provisioning systems, and is connected to > the climate/ecological/resource emergency of our time, i.e. this proposal > is one of the crucial ways to radicallly reduce our material footprint > > One interesting and attractive feature of what Michel is proposing is the > bypassing of national governments. Given the growing network of cities > collaborating on climate breakdown and transition strategies, and for those > involved, their leadership in advancing more progressive transition > politics, the proposal being put forward has a strategic context where it > can be tested. > > national partner-state governments could decide at a later stage to join > and support these global depositories > > by the way, this was written in the context of urban transitions, but I > realize it could be stronger in stressing the role of the cooperative > sector in supporting the deployment of such infrastructure > > Michel > > Anyways, a bit more grist for the proverbial mill. > > Michael L > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:04 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > Dear Pat, > > as I was schooled in marxism in my youth, and subsequently abandoned it, > this means that much of the tradition you speak of is completely unknown to > me, I had simply no idea that georgism and guild socialism even existed and > where so big back then ... for me there were revolutionaries, reformists > and anarchists (and stalinists <g>) ... > > when I decided to embark on p2p work, I decided to make a clear break with > my dogmatic past, and start constructing a 'low theory' that would be a > more direct expression of what is happening and possible today. Hence in my > wiki, I only include things that exist (no projects or plans) and use > concepts that are born from the very movement I am observing. > > as much as I think it is necessary, I don't see it as a very realistic > possibility for me to dig into that history, so I am very much counting on > you for this historical context and genealogy!! > > one note, you will have seen in my approach a combination of the local and > the global, bypassing the nation-state level. > > There is both a opportunistic and strategic reason for this > > Opportunistic as it appears in a report on urban transitions, > > but strategic as I see coalesced cities (and bioregions/territorities) as > a crucial new part of transnational governance, which can't be a > inter-statist world government, but must be based on global public-commons > alliances > > quid with the nation-state, > > I am not dissing it, but I think nation-states should now support > transnational commons infrastructures > > the double movement has become inoperative because of the > trans-nationalization of capital; national revolutions carry great risks > and dangers (syriza, venezuela), and keynesianism can only be a small part > of the solution in the context of overshoot > > so what is a progressive majority in a nation-state to do, for sure, let > it do green new deals at the national level, but crucially, it must also > understand that change today is not going to come from a frontal assault > against a stronger enemy, but from a global coalition of change efforts > everywhere, which are the only ones that can overwhelm the repressive > capacity of the transnational empire > > in other words, progressive national governments must absolute support the > kind of global commoning policies we are proposing and cannot limit their > vision on their own citizens > > Michel > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:21 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Michel > > Some feedback for consideration..... > > This is a really good summary and illustration. So much makes complete > sense to me. Thanks so much for this articulation. I think it is rich and > very helpful indeed. When will the report be coming out and who are the > authors? > > I have a sense of deja vu however? So my comments are about the practical > articulation and the dynamics as other forces are in play. For the past > two hundred plus years, the tension and indeed struggle between authority > at the political level and the striving for democratic authority from the > grassroots has been continuous and constant. Polanyi's Double movement > therefore has many dynamic aspects to consider. How is it best to do this > to be clear about the dialectical complexity? > > Stephen Yeo, a very close colleague of Robin Murray's over decades, is > writing a book on the Three Socialisms. These are Statism (from social > democracy to communism), Collectivism and Associationism. The last form is > the most forms that are participatively democratic and includes working > class self-help associations for mutual aid and including of course trade > unions that we should try to include in your illustration of the layers. > > The ideas you are advancing are a rekindling of the debates and thinking > from say 1900 right up to 1947 when the Cold War kicked off and when > Statism thereafter effectively crushed and suppressed associative democracy > thinking and ideas. Statists East and West told co-ops and unions thank, > but no thanks. We are taking over to make your bits and pieces integrated > and comprehensive. > > But to guide this earlier struggle by commoners, In 1919 GDH Cole produced > his book Guild Socialism Restated when he set out a very clear blueprint > with a remarkable coincidence with what you, David B, Janelle Orsi and > others are working up here. > > What is very creative about the Cole proposals that Bertrand Russell fully > supported in his book Roads to Freedom a century ago was to recognise > clearly that political socialism (social democracy shall we say) and > associative socialism need to be established at the territorial level and > at the national level in a system of checks and balances with a clear and > agreed division of labour between the politicos and the economic democrats. > > Essentially the proposal of Cole set out a blue print for how economic > democracy though a Guild Congress at local, regional and national levels > would relate and complement Parliamentary democracy. But what was wonderful > about the Cole proposals is that it considered co-operative commonwealth > building in all industries, services, arts and sciences and worked out > sector solutions for them. Plus Cole also proposed that cities should be > based on land held in commons to capture economic rent and to stop > speculation. Thus he argued for co-operative garden cities. > > 20 years earlier in Fields Factories and Workshops had attempted a very > creative blueprint as well for economic democracy and what in practice this > would look like. > > Okay Polanyi did not arrive in the UK until about 1933 and his way to > escape fascism was paid for by crowd funding by Guild Socialist, but given > that in Vienna in the 1920s Polanyi was at the forefront of associative > democracy solutions and thinking, you can see the resonance. > > Given that democratic socialism is being rekindled in parts of Europe > (Spain, Portugal, the UK and elsewhere), I think it would helpful to > connect the sound thinking from the 1920s before the lights began being > turned out with what you are proposing. > > I would suggest we are rediscovering co-operative commonwealth thinking > and practice which you are doing such a brilliant job of updating to the > digital age. > > I hope this helps. Drawing on the best practices from the past will > enable us to contextualise the arguments and link these to this vernacular > part of the Double Movement we should not overlook. > > All the best > > Pat > > On 04 October 2017 at 06:35 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > this is the very last section of our report which will come out soon with > the Boll foundation: > > 3.6. Towards a global infrastructure for commons-based provisioning > > We have argued in this overview that we are in a conjuncture in which > commons-based mutualizing is one of the keys for sustainability, fairness > and global-local well-being. In this conclusion, we suggest a global > infrastructure, in which cities can play a crucial role. > > See the graphic below for the stacked layer that we propose, which is > described as follows: > > - > > The first layer is the cosmo-local institutional layer. Imagine global > for-benefit associations which support the provisioning of infrastructures > for urban and territorial commoning. These are structured as global > public-commons partnerships, sustained by leagues of cities which are > co-dependent and co-motivated to support these new infrastructures and > overcome the fragmentation of effort that benefits the most extractive and > centralized ‘netarchical’ firms. Instead, these infrastructural commons > organizations co-support MuniRide, MuniBnB, and other applications > necessary to commonify urban provisioning systems. These are the global > “protocol cooperative” governance organizations. > - > > The second layer consists of the actual global depositories of the > commons applications themselves, a global technical infrastructure for open > sourcing provisioning systems. They consists of what is globally common, > but allow contextualized local adaptations, which in turn can serve as > innovations and examples for other locales. These are the actual ‘protocol > cooperatives’, in their concrete manifestation as usable infrastructure. > - > > The third layer are the actual local (urban, territorial, bioregional) > platform cooperatives, i.e. the local commons-based mechanisms that deliver > access to services and exchange platforms, for the mutualized used of these > provisioning systems. This is the layer where the Amsterdam FairBnb and the > MuniRide application of the city of Ghent, organize the services for the > local population and their visitors. It is where houses and cars are > effectively shared. > - > > The potential fourth layer is the actual production-based open > cooperatives, where distributed manufacturing of goods and services > produces the actual material services that can be shared and mutualized on > the platform cooperatives. > > ... > > [image: Figure 8.png] > > Figure 8: City-supported cosmo-local production infrastructure > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> > > -- > Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> > -- Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org>

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] A globa-local synthesis of a possible city-supported public-commons partnership for climate- friendly and ecologically balanced provisioning systems
by Roberto Verzola 15 Oct '17

15 Oct '17

Dear Henry, Yes, I agree that certain terms we should not give up on... I like the way Richard Stallman never gave up on the term "free software" and kept up the fight (and continues to this day to do so...). These terms will reflects our deepest, non-negotiable values. Greetings, Roberto On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 10:38:43 +0100 Henry Tam <htam.global(a)talk21.com> wrote: > Roberto’s reflections illustrate the perennial problem of political mind-sets and word-choices. > > Words can always be claimed, co-opted, converted … Like everything else, it is sometimes necessary to contest and fight for them. > > Otherwise, the Right will keep taking whatever words they like as ‘right’. > & the Left will keep rummaging for alternatives out of the odd terms that are left. > > ‘Democracy’, ‘Sustainability’, ‘Commonwealth’, ‘Cooperation’, ‘Community’, ‘Citizenship’, ‘Values’, ‘Respect’, ‘Progress’, ‘Freedom’, ‘Equality’, ‘Integrity’, let us not concede such terms to those who do not in fact care for what they ought to convey. > > In solidarity, > > Henry > > On 15/10/2017, 07:53, "Roberto Verzola" <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> wrote: > > Thank you for this, Pat. > > Yes, "degrowth" can be a problem rather than a solution, especially to those who are already on the brink or are already caught in the sinkhole of poverty. > > I didn't mean to promote the term "sustainable development", which as you said is already corrupted/polluted. I used the terms separately in the sense that Daly meant them. > > I agree we need to find and settle on some new vocabulary that reflects precisely the ideas we are promoting. "Commonwealth" may work in some context. It is a good term, though the term also carries some historical baggage, which can be negative in some countries. "Cooperative", or even P2P are good words. "Democracy" is another overused word, and it is too identified with representative democracy, which as we know has been mostly hijacked by corporations. I haven't settled on the right term(s) yet, and I scan all the exchanges here and other lists in the hope of discovering the right term(s). > > I count myself as a Green, but the word "green" has also been coopted, and I now find myself having to explain everytime I use the term. > > But that is generally the case. When a term acquires positive connotations, corporate marketers jump on it and appropriate it for their own use. And they have a much larger media budget than most of us combined. Perhaps we can still find a combination of terms whose deep connotations are so anti-corporate that they dare not appropriate it. "Free software" is probably one such term (though RMS also found it necessary to clarify what "free" meant). > > I disagree that "there is no green version that will work at all", although this may be more because we associate different meanings to that word. I consider Green my description of closed material cycles fuelled by renewable energy, where the cycles of biological and non-biological materials are kept separate (with very well-defined interfaces between them, I would add--a concept I borrow from software design). I think this is already working in some situations. It even accomodates some form of growth (putting in more renewable energy to speed up the material flows). > > Greetings, > > Roberto > > > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 18:47:26 +0100 (BST) > pat commonfutures <pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > > Hi Roberto > > > > These are great points. Yes indeed, Daly talks in Beyond Growth, a very good book from about 1990 on using Sustainable Development as the term instead of ideas like Degrowth. We are experiencing degrowth in Europe in austerity stricken regions and here in the UK, Wales has been in a depression along with the North of England if you look at the falls in GDP post 2010. However these regional indicators are not talked about but but the national UK headline figures that show low-level aggregate growth. In fact degrowth and recession/depression is the underlying problem. > > > > Growth and its necessity is driven by returns required to capital to service debt both for households, nations and businesses. But as Mill indicated but also Keynes in his essay on the future a hundred years ago, we need to move to post capitalist society and end usury practices in relation to land, money and other speculation. This means as the old co-op saying has stressed, labour needs to hire capital or indeed reformulate money and make it neutral money or interest free. As Stephen Yeo has said, the early Owenite socialists but also the Proudhonians in France from the 1820s sought ways and means to develop co-op land and co-op money without economic rent, interest seekers, etc. See here the thinking of post Keynesians on cheap money, Daly on money as a commons (an essay of his), Silvio Gesell on negative interest rates, etc. This Owenite thinking was also an anti-politics then as working people had no franchise. The thinking is at the roots of what we have overlooked as Co-op > erative Economics. > > > > The problem with Sustainable Development is that the UN introduced it via the Brundtland report in 1987 but it has become a polluted and co-opted term by corporations and by global banks talking about green banking and SRI. Just so much greenwash. Daly like Schumacher earlier hoped that reforms like the Meidner Plan in Sweden would show how to fully democratise ownership of corporations over several decades. The Meidner Plan was a plan to transform the Swedish Welfare State into a co > > > > I think therefore that post capitalism, co-operative commonwealth are better notions and key words with the latter more specific and in the vernacular of those in the Co-op movement who have pursued past and present Economic Democracy (mainstream co-op movement does not go there) which means beyond wage labour and capital as we know them (the essence of debt driven growth and capitalism - there is no green version that will work at all). > > > > Pat > > > > > > > > On 09 October 2017 at 01:23 Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> wrote: > > > > May I add my few cents' worth to this discussion on growth, degrowth, steady state, etc. > > > > To introduce myself briefly: I am currently involved in social experiments in renewable energy, and we have since expanded this to sustainable technologies in general. We define a sustainable technology as one that involves a closed loop of material cycles run by renewable energy, where cycles of biodegradable materials and cycles of non-biodegradable materials (which McDonough and Braungart call "technical materials") are kept separate. Other technologies we actually work with include the system of rice intensification (SRI), which currently holds the world record in rice yield and can be implemented organically, low-power FM (in which the technology determines form and content to a significant extent), biogas digesters, a social (rather than technical) solution to power outages through the use of traditional and social media, and a few others. > > > > I think it was Daly too who distinguished between growth and development. Growth involves increases in quantity, while development may involve improvements in quality. > > > > As someone said earlier, "degrowth" is a politically untenable message especially in a country like the Philippines where almost a third of the population live below the poverty line. But calling for a shift in emphasis to development rather than growth is more easily defensible (plus of course a certain level of distribution). > > > > The point I wanted to contribute is that within our definition of sustainable technology, we can still imagine growth occurring when the material flows in the cycles I referred to above are increased as long as additional energy from renewable sources is available to feed into these cycles. So I can still see growth as a component in an overall strategy of development. > > > > By the way, her work is a bit dated now, but I still find Jane Jacobs' Cities and the Wealth of Nations and her paradigm of city-centered regional (i.e., sub-national) development very useful, especially if it is updated to take ecological matters as well as the information sector more into account. > > > > Greetings to all, > > > > Roberto Verzola > > Philippines > > > > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:26:26 +0700 > > Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: > > > > very helpful Pat, > > > > in the articles, not books, that I've read by Daly, i saw no reference to > > this, > > > > Michel > > > > On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 6:59 PM, pat commonfutures < > > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > > > Hi Michel > > > > A key question Michel, here is my attempt to answer this. Others like > > Stephen Yeo may wish to chip in that know the history. > > > > Daly argues for a shift from growth economics to steady-state economics. > > The latter implies no capitalism. His argument is based on the forecasts by > > Adam Smith, JS Mill and Keynes that in future growth will decline when the > > opportunities for it dry up. Marx called this the accumulation crisis. From > > 1776 in the Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith foresaw this endpoint in about > > 250 years. Keynes foresaw this in his Essay on the Future Economics of Our > > Grandchildren as happening about 2025. Mill did not give a date. > > > > The issue for Daly was what system would replace an economy without growth > > as other economists have foreseen such a state as leading to the abyss. > > Mill argued that with worker ownership of the means of production via > > worker co-ops and comprehensive land reform, this steady state could be a > > positive future for qualitative human development. > > > > Mill argued though that the ownership question was crucial to set the > > enabling circumstances for this. Hence his argument for land taxation to > > move property into common ownership or public ownership. Henry George takes > > his single tax idea directly from Mill. But Mill also argued as another > > crucial reform for worker ownership and he made the case that consumer > > co-ops were not sufficient. The reason for this Mill showed is that > > economic democracy and in fact full democracy required participative > > structures and educational reform to secure this. Only then could socialism > > be practical he felt. This was his argument against other non-democratic > > forms of socialism that he feared would lead to authoritarian outcomes. > > > > Polanyi is of this school of democratic socialism and Daly is a strong > > supporter of Polanyi in his books Beyond Growth and For the Common Good. > > > > There is a major problem with the history of socialism. Socialism was the > > term coined by the early Co-op movement in England from the 1820s. Robert > > Owen in particular called it also social science. He used the terms almost > > interchangeably. These socialists were also for land reform, co-operative > > land solutions and interest free money. Mill picked up his ideas for a > > democratic socialism from this original socialist movement. But Marx and > > Engels argued for communism and derided the early socialists as utopian and > > non-scientific. Sadly Marx also misunderstood money and the need for > > interest-free forms as the Owenite socialists, the Proudhonian socialists > > and other early co-op movements like these in the US understood. > > > > Polanyi followed all this and celebrates this in the Great Transformation > > and so did the Guild socialists who felt strongly about economic democracy > > (RH Tawney, GDH Cole, Bertrand Russell) and in the case of Clifford Douglas > > (who was very involved with the early guild socialist movement), monetary > > reform. Frederick Soddy picked up ideas from Douglas and Silvio Gesell in > > the 1920s and argued for 100% money free of interest and debt. > > > > Daly's arguments follows closely Polanyi and Soddy who he quotes and > > celebrates in Beyond Growth. > > > > But because Marx was muddled on the money question and weak on the need > > for economic democracy, Marxists are blind to the needs for really taking > > land, people and money out of the market as Polanyi showed the need for. A > > pity this as like Polanyi Marx saw labour, money and land enclosure so well > > and how they had been made into false commodities. > > > > I can recommend to you and others on this list an outstanding text book > > that should be core reading for Synergia students and the entire commons > > movement. It is by Mark Lutz and called Economics for the Common Good. > > > > John uses the term political economy and the need for a new political > > economy in relation to the partner state. I understand the reason why but I > > do think this is problematic historically as key words are important to be > > clear about. In the late 19th century, political economy and capitalism > > were one and the same thing. > > > > While the resisters to industrial capitalism coined the term socialism in > > the 1820s as the humane alternative, until the 1870s, capitalism was not a > > word really used. The term for it was political economy and this is why > > Marx wrote his Capital as a critique of political economy. It was with the > > publication of Capital that capitalism began to be used more widely. > > > > During the 19th century the movement against capitalism was indeed known > > as social economy and included the co-ops and the trade unions. Sadly the > > EU definition of social economy by Jacques Delor from the 1990s leaves out > > trade unions and only talks about Co-ops, Mutuals, Associations and > > Foundations (CMAF). > > > > The Lutz book traces a continuous strand of social economics from the late > > 18th century to today (sometimes also called co-operative economics) that > > is a radical strand of socialist thinking that avoids the blindspots of > > Marx. > > > > Also in Daly's book. For the Common Good, he talks about the work of > > Schumacher on innovative thinking viz. an ownership form for co-ops that > > could become intergenerational for securing the common good. Schumacher saw > > the solution as to ensure a structure of ownership in co-ops that required > > a strong common ownership foundation. This is very relevant to your work > > and to developing Social Solidarity Economy thinking. The Lutz book is > > vital guidance here and for how we best frame Synergia's pedagogy on these > > question and what this idea of Eco-socialism would look like. It would be a > > vitally needed synergia of social economics and ecological economics. > > Co-operative economics also ploughs in this direction if you look at the > > adherents. > > > > But there is no teaching of Co-op Economics within the international Co-op > > movement, though I think St. Mary's University in Halifax has run a course > > like this prior to an ICA meeting in Montreal not that long ago. I just > > heard this this week. > > > > Hope this is helpful. > > > > Pat > > > > On 08 October 2017 at 08:37 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > > wrote: > > > > I did read several pieces from Daly but it seems to me he is not > > challenging capitalism per se, > > > > anyone read him differently ? > > > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 10:43 PM, pat commonfutures < > > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > > > Hi Mike and Michel > > > > Thanks Michel for the Commons Transition reports. Very good to see these. > > Your reply to Mike is also helpful. > > > > Thanks also Mike for sharing the Stan Cox critique about renewable energy > > wishful thinking. I found the comments by David Schwartzman very persuasive > > about the Military Industrial Complex power elite and their focused role > > viz. fossil fuel geopolitics and nuclear energy. This is a very little > > discussed structural impediment. > > > > Also this confirms the need for Greens to focus on eco-soclalist ways > > forward. As Streeck argues, Growth is bound in its hands and feet with the > > Accumulation demands of capitalism and the money machine. Steady-state > > economics based on thermodynamics as Herman Daly so well articulates this > > necessitates a post capitalism system. Schwartzman underscores this. > > > > Pat > > > > On 05 October 2017 at 06:09 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > > wrote: > > > > dear Michael, > > > > I will add some responses in-line > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Michael Lewis <Lewiscccr(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > > > > Pat I really like the memo you sent. But I have several questions. > > (Michel - I wrote this and then see you have replied to Pat) I will think > > about and perhaps comment later. I the meantime here is my response to Pat) > > > > I am a poor student of history, but as I have come to understand Cole his > > guild strategy was rooted in the work place, although relevant to other > > kinds of association. The role of the state was radially reduced. What > > emerged was a decentralized, democratic approach to provisioning, where > > workers were the central (but not only) actors. Advise me here what I am > > missing. > > > > If this is the case there a large difference in what Michel is proposing? > > The foundation of his proposition is public-commons partnerships. Is this > > not very different? Given the radical difference in reference points - > > Cole with workers a the base and this 21st idea where globally mediated > > knowledge that enables localize production on an > > open-mutualized-cooperative basis; I wonder where the context renders some > > of Cole’s propositions less relevant. > > > > in my interpretation, the commons are themselves multi-stakeholders, so > > this include the workers and the user communities ; you may be familiar > > with the idea of some that today the workplace has exploded and is no > > longer confined to the factory; but there is an obvious linkage between the > > commons seen as the locus of co-production, and thus a sphere of production > > including workers, and industrial and craft workers as they used to exist > > > > Second, as I understand it Michel, your proposition is critically > > dependent of an member cities to be active at the city and global level, > > the latter through associations. In short, cities are organized into a body > > the coordinates and governs the terms under which sourcing technical > > solutions is build and maintained on an open source base. Question here > > Michel is whether access to the knowledge repository requires cities to be > > active members of the global mutual…?? > > > > the code is open source, and would be accessible to everybody, but the > > right to commercialization of that code may be subjected to some > > reciprocity limitatations, in my opinion (reciprocity-based licensing) > > > > Third, the territorial platform co-operatives become critical > > infrastructure for production, distribution and governing. Michel…a > > question about the platform co-ops; are they conceived of as being > > multi-stakeholder and, if so, what is the role of local state actors, if > > any? > > > > yes, they are conceived as multi-stakeholder and I'm open to co-governance > > by local public actors > > > > Lastly, I am wondering about the thinking to date on whether there will > > be limits to what is gathered into the global digital open source > > repository? Is the focus on all the critical elements to aid and > > accelerate transition? Given the absolute urgencies emerging from climate > > breakdown, this might make senses. Or is it broader? I think these are > > important questions as they will shape the counters of the politics that > > such a proposition would provoke. Even if it is restricted to urgent > > transition related production, I can imagine that a global manufacturers of > > say, public transit vehicles, and their employees, would be none to > > pleased with a strategy that could has the potential for sidelining their > > businesses and jobs.. But, then again, I may not be capturing the > > fullness of the vision. > > > > for me, this would work for all provisioning systems, and is connected to > > the climate/ecological/resource emergency of our time, i.e. this proposal > > is one of the crucial ways to radicallly reduce our material footprint > > > > One interesting and attractive feature of what Michel is proposing is the > > bypassing of national governments. Given the growing network of cities > > collaborating on climate breakdown and transition strategies, and for those > > involved, their leadership in advancing more progressive transition > > politics, the proposal being put forward has a strategic context where it > > can be tested. > > > > national partner-state governments could decide at a later stage to join > > and support these global depositories > > > > by the way, this was written in the context of urban transitions, but I > > realize it could be stronger in stressing the role of the cooperative > > sector in supporting the deployment of such infrastructure > > > > Michel > > > > Anyways, a bit more grist for the proverbial mill. > > > > Michael L > > > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:04 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > > wrote: > > > > Dear Pat, > > > > as I was schooled in marxism in my youth, and subsequently abandoned it, > > this means that much of the tradition you speak of is completely unknown to > > me, I had simply no idea that georgism and guild socialism even existed and > > where so big back then ... for me there were revolutionaries, reformists > > and anarchists (and stalinists <g>) ... > > > > when I decided to embark on p2p work, I decided to make a clear break with > > my dogmatic past, and start constructing a 'low theory' that would be a > > more direct expression of what is happening and possible today. Hence in my > > wiki, I only include things that exist (no projects or plans) and use > > concepts that are born from the very movement I am observing. > > > > as much as I think it is necessary, I don't see it as a very realistic > > possibility for me to dig into that history, so I am very much counting on > > you for this historical context and genealogy!! > > > > one note, you will have seen in my approach a combination of the local and > > the global, bypassing the nation-state level. > > > > There is both a opportunistic and strategic reason for this > > > > Opportunistic as it appears in a report on urban transitions, > > > > but strategic as I see coalesced cities (and bioregions/territorities) as > > a crucial new part of transnational governance, which can't be a > > inter-statist world government, but must be based on global public-commons > > alliances > > > > quid with the nation-state, > > > > I am not dissing it, but I think nation-states should now support > > transnational commons infrastructures > > > > the double movement has become inoperative because of the > > trans-nationalization of capital; national revolutions carry great risks > > and dangers (syriza, venezuela), and keynesianism can only be a small part > > of the solution in the context of overshoot > > > > so what is a progressive majority in a nation-state to do, for sure, let > > it do green new deals at the national level, but crucially, it must also > > understand that change today is not going to come from a frontal assault > > against a stronger enemy, but from a global coalition of change efforts > > everywhere, which are the only ones that can overwhelm the repressive > > capacity of the transnational empire > > > > in other words, progressive national governments must absolute support the > > kind of global commoning policies we are proposing and cannot limit their > > vision on their own citizens > > > > Michel > > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:21 PM, pat commonfutures < > > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > > > Hi Michel > > > > Some feedback for consideration..... > > > > This is a really good summary and illustration. So much makes complete > > sense to me. Thanks so much for this articulation. I think it is rich and > > very helpful indeed. When will the report be coming out and who are the > > authors? > > > > I have a sense of deja vu however? So my comments are about the practical > > articulation and the dynamics as other forces are in play. For the past > > two hundred plus years, the tension and indeed struggle between authority > > at the political level and the striving for democratic authority from the > > grassroots has been continuous and constant. Polanyi's Double movement > > therefore has many dynamic aspects to consider. How is it best to do this > > to be clear about the dialectical complexity? > > > > Stephen Yeo, a very close colleague of Robin Murray's over decades, is > > writing a book on the Three Socialisms. These are Statism (from social > > democracy to communism), Collectivism and Associationism. The last form is > > the most forms that are participatively democratic and includes working > > class self-help associations for mutual aid and including of course trade > > unions that we should try to include in your illustration of the layers. > > > > The ideas you are advancing are a rekindling of the debates and thinking > > from say 1900 right up to 1947 when the Cold War kicked off and when > > Statism thereafter effectively crushed and suppressed associative democracy > > thinking and ideas. Statists East and West told co-ops and unions thank, > > but no thanks. We are taking over to make your bits and pieces integrated > > and comprehensive. > > > > But to guide this earlier struggle by commoners, In 1919 GDH Cole produced > > his book Guild Socialism Restated when he set out a very clear blueprint > > with a remarkable coincidence with what you, David B, Janelle Orsi and > > others are working up here. > > > > What is very creative about the Cole proposals that Bertrand Russell fully > > supported in his book Roads to Freedom a century ago was to recognise > > clearly that political socialism (social democracy shall we say) and > > associative socialism need to be established at the territorial level and > > at the national level in a system of checks and balances with a clear and > > agreed division of labour between the politicos and the economic democrats. > > > > Essentially the proposal of Cole set out a blue print for how economic > > democracy though a Guild Congress at local, regional and national levels > > would relate and complement Parliamentary democracy. But what was wonderful > > about the Cole proposals is that it considered co-operative commonwealth > > building in all industries, services, arts and sciences and worked out > > sector solutions for them. Plus Cole also proposed that cities should be > > based on land held in commons to capture economic rent and to stop > > speculation. Thus he argued for co-operative garden cities. > > > > 20 years earlier in Fields Factories and Workshops had attempted a very > > creative blueprint as well for economic democracy and what in practice this > > would look like. > > > > Okay Polanyi did not arrive in the UK until about 1933 and his way to > > escape fascism was paid for by crowd funding by Guild Socialist, but given > > that in Vienna in the 1920s Polanyi was at the forefront of associative > > democracy solutions and thinking, you can see the resonance. > > > > Given that democratic socialism is being rekindled in parts of Europe > > (Spain, Portugal, the UK and elsewhere), I think it would helpful to > > connect the sound thinking from the 1920s before the lights began being > > turned out with what you are proposing. > > > > I would suggest we are rediscovering co-operative commonwealth thinking > > and practice which you are doing such a brilliant job of updating to the > > digital age. > > > > I hope this helps. Drawing on the best practices from the past will > > enable us to contextualise the arguments and link these to this vernacular > > part of the Double Movement we should not overlook. > > > > All the best > > > > Pat > > > > On 04 October 2017 at 06:35 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > > wrote: > > > > this is the very last section of our report which will come out soon with > > the Boll foundation: > > > > 3.6. Towards a global infrastructure for commons-based provisioning > > > > We have argued in this overview that we are in a conjuncture in which > > commons-based mutualizing is one of the keys for sustainability, fairness > > and global-local well-being. In this conclusion, we suggest a global > > infrastructure, in which cities can play a crucial role. > > > > See the graphic below for the stacked layer that we propose, which is > > described as follows: > > > > - > > > > The first layer is the cosmo-local institutional layer. Imagine global > > for-benefit associations which support the provisioning of infrastructures > > for urban and territorial commoning. These are structured as global > > public-commons partnerships, sustained by leagues of cities which are > > co-dependent and co-motivated to support these new infrastructures and > > overcome the fragmentation of effort that benefits the most extractive and > > centralized ‘netarchical’ firms. Instead, these infrastructural commons > > organizations co-support MuniRide, MuniBnB, and other applications > > necessary to commonify urban provisioning systems. These are the global > > “protocol cooperative” governance organizations. > > - > > > > The second layer consists of the actual global depositories of the > > commons applications themselves, a global technical infrastructure for open > > sourcing provisioning systems. They consists of what is globally common, > > but allow contextualized local adaptations, which in turn can serve as > > innovations and examples for other locales. These are the actual ‘protocol > > cooperatives’, in their concrete manifestation as usable infrastructure. > > - > > > > The third layer are the actual local (urban, territorial, bioregional) > > platform cooperatives, i.e. the local commons-based mechanisms that deliver > > access to services and exchange platforms, for the mutualized used of these > > provisioning systems. This is the layer where the Amsterdam FairBnb and the > > MuniRide application of the city of Ghent, organize the services for the > > local population and their visitors. It is where houses and cars are > > effectively shared. > > - > > > > The potential fourth layer is the actual production-based open > > cooperatives, where distributed manufacturing of goods and services > > produces the actual material services that can be shared and mutualized on > > the platform cooperatives. > > > > ... > > > > [image: Figure 8.png] > > > > Figure 8: City-supported cosmo-local production infrastructure > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > -- > > Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> > > -- > Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> > > > > -- Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org>

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] A globa-local synthesis of a possible city-supported public-commons partnership for climate- friendly and ecologically balanced provisioning systems
by Roberto Verzola 15 Oct '17

15 Oct '17

Thank you for this, Pat. Yes, "degrowth" can be a problem rather than a solution, especially to those who are already on the brink or are already caught in the sinkhole of poverty. I didn't mean to promote the term "sustainable development", which as you said is already corrupted/polluted. I used the terms separately in the sense that Daly meant them. I agree we need to find and settle on some new vocabulary that reflects precisely the ideas we are promoting. "Commonwealth" may work in some context. It is a good term, though the term also carries some historical baggage, which can be negative in some countries. "Cooperative", or even P2P are good words. "Democracy" is another overused word, and it is too identified with representative democracy, which as we know has been mostly hijacked by corporations. I haven't settled on the right term(s) yet, and I scan all the exchanges here and other lists in the hope of discovering the right term(s). I count myself as a Green, but the word "green" has also been coopted, and I now find myself having to explain everytime I use the term. But that is generally the case. When a term acquires positive connotations, corporate marketers jump on it and appropriate it for their own use. And they have a much larger media budget than most of us combined. Perhaps we can still find a combination of terms whose deep connotations are so anti-corporate that they dare not appropriate it. "Free software" is probably one such term (though RMS also found it necessary to clarify what "free" meant). I disagree that "there is no green version that will work at all", although this may be more because we associate different meanings to that word. I consider Green my description of closed material cycles fuelled by renewable energy, where the cycles of biological and non-biological materials are kept separate (with very well-defined interfaces between them, I would add--a concept I borrow from software design). I think this is already working in some situations. It even accomodates some form of growth (putting in more renewable energy to speed up the material flows). Greetings, Roberto On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 18:47:26 +0100 (BST) pat commonfutures <pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > Hi Roberto > > These are great points. Yes indeed, Daly talks in Beyond Growth, a very good book from about 1990 on using Sustainable Development as the term instead of ideas like Degrowth. We are experiencing degrowth in Europe in austerity stricken regions and here in the UK, Wales has been in a depression along with the North of England if you look at the falls in GDP post 2010. However these regional indicators are not talked about but but the national UK headline figures that show low-level aggregate growth. In fact degrowth and recession/depression is the underlying problem. > > Growth and its necessity is driven by returns required to capital to service debt both for households, nations and businesses. But as Mill indicated but also Keynes in his essay on the future a hundred years ago, we need to move to post capitalist society and end usury practices in relation to land, money and other speculation. This means as the old co-op saying has stressed, labour needs to hire capital or indeed reformulate money and make it neutral money or interest free. As Stephen Yeo has said, the early Owenite socialists but also the Proudhonians in France from the 1820s sought ways and means to develop co-op land and co-op money without economic rent, interest seekers, etc. See here the thinking of post Keynesians on cheap money, Daly on money as a commons (an essay of his), Silvio Gesell on negative interest rates, etc. This Owenite thinking was also an anti-politics then as working people had no franchise. The thinking is at the roots of what we have overlooked as Co-op erative Economics. > > The problem with Sustainable Development is that the UN introduced it via the Brundtland report in 1987 but it has become a polluted and co-opted term by corporations and by global banks talking about green banking and SRI. Just so much greenwash. Daly like Schumacher earlier hoped that reforms like the Meidner Plan in Sweden would show how to fully democratise ownership of corporations over several decades. The Meidner Plan was a plan to transform the Swedish Welfare State into a co > > I think therefore that post capitalism, co-operative commonwealth are better notions and key words with the latter more specific and in the vernacular of those in the Co-op movement who have pursued past and present Economic Democracy (mainstream co-op movement does not go there) which means beyond wage labour and capital as we know them (the essence of debt driven growth and capitalism - there is no green version that will work at all). > > Pat > > > > On 09 October 2017 at 01:23 Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> wrote: > > May I add my few cents' worth to this discussion on growth, degrowth, steady state, etc. > > To introduce myself briefly: I am currently involved in social experiments in renewable energy, and we have since expanded this to sustainable technologies in general. We define a sustainable technology as one that involves a closed loop of material cycles run by renewable energy, where cycles of biodegradable materials and cycles of non-biodegradable materials (which McDonough and Braungart call "technical materials") are kept separate. Other technologies we actually work with include the system of rice intensification (SRI), which currently holds the world record in rice yield and can be implemented organically, low-power FM (in which the technology determines form and content to a significant extent), biogas digesters, a social (rather than technical) solution to power outages through the use of traditional and social media, and a few others. > > I think it was Daly too who distinguished between growth and development. Growth involves increases in quantity, while development may involve improvements in quality. > > As someone said earlier, "degrowth" is a politically untenable message especially in a country like the Philippines where almost a third of the population live below the poverty line. But calling for a shift in emphasis to development rather than growth is more easily defensible (plus of course a certain level of distribution). > > The point I wanted to contribute is that within our definition of sustainable technology, we can still imagine growth occurring when the material flows in the cycles I referred to above are increased as long as additional energy from renewable sources is available to feed into these cycles. So I can still see growth as a component in an overall strategy of development. > > By the way, her work is a bit dated now, but I still find Jane Jacobs' Cities and the Wealth of Nations and her paradigm of city-centered regional (i.e., sub-national) development very useful, especially if it is updated to take ecological matters as well as the information sector more into account. > > Greetings to all, > > Roberto Verzola > Philippines > > On Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:26:26 +0700 > Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: > > very helpful Pat, > > in the articles, not books, that I've read by Daly, i saw no reference to > this, > > Michel > > On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 6:59 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Michel > > A key question Michel, here is my attempt to answer this. Others like > Stephen Yeo may wish to chip in that know the history. > > Daly argues for a shift from growth economics to steady-state economics. > The latter implies no capitalism. His argument is based on the forecasts by > Adam Smith, JS Mill and Keynes that in future growth will decline when the > opportunities for it dry up. Marx called this the accumulation crisis. From > 1776 in the Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith foresaw this endpoint in about > 250 years. Keynes foresaw this in his Essay on the Future Economics of Our > Grandchildren as happening about 2025. Mill did not give a date. > > The issue for Daly was what system would replace an economy without growth > as other economists have foreseen such a state as leading to the abyss. > Mill argued that with worker ownership of the means of production via > worker co-ops and comprehensive land reform, this steady state could be a > positive future for qualitative human development. > > Mill argued though that the ownership question was crucial to set the > enabling circumstances for this. Hence his argument for land taxation to > move property into common ownership or public ownership. Henry George takes > his single tax idea directly from Mill. But Mill also argued as another > crucial reform for worker ownership and he made the case that consumer > co-ops were not sufficient. The reason for this Mill showed is that > economic democracy and in fact full democracy required participative > structures and educational reform to secure this. Only then could socialism > be practical he felt. This was his argument against other non-democratic > forms of socialism that he feared would lead to authoritarian outcomes. > > Polanyi is of this school of democratic socialism and Daly is a strong > supporter of Polanyi in his books Beyond Growth and For the Common Good. > > There is a major problem with the history of socialism. Socialism was the > term coined by the early Co-op movement in England from the 1820s. Robert > Owen in particular called it also social science. He used the terms almost > interchangeably. These socialists were also for land reform, co-operative > land solutions and interest free money. Mill picked up his ideas for a > democratic socialism from this original socialist movement. But Marx and > Engels argued for communism and derided the early socialists as utopian and > non-scientific. Sadly Marx also misunderstood money and the need for > interest-free forms as the Owenite socialists, the Proudhonian socialists > and other early co-op movements like these in the US understood. > > Polanyi followed all this and celebrates this in the Great Transformation > and so did the Guild socialists who felt strongly about economic democracy > (RH Tawney, GDH Cole, Bertrand Russell) and in the case of Clifford Douglas > (who was very involved with the early guild socialist movement), monetary > reform. Frederick Soddy picked up ideas from Douglas and Silvio Gesell in > the 1920s and argued for 100% money free of interest and debt. > > Daly's arguments follows closely Polanyi and Soddy who he quotes and > celebrates in Beyond Growth. > > But because Marx was muddled on the money question and weak on the need > for economic democracy, Marxists are blind to the needs for really taking > land, people and money out of the market as Polanyi showed the need for. A > pity this as like Polanyi Marx saw labour, money and land enclosure so well > and how they had been made into false commodities. > > I can recommend to you and others on this list an outstanding text book > that should be core reading for Synergia students and the entire commons > movement. It is by Mark Lutz and called Economics for the Common Good. > > John uses the term political economy and the need for a new political > economy in relation to the partner state. I understand the reason why but I > do think this is problematic historically as key words are important to be > clear about. In the late 19th century, political economy and capitalism > were one and the same thing. > > While the resisters to industrial capitalism coined the term socialism in > the 1820s as the humane alternative, until the 1870s, capitalism was not a > word really used. The term for it was political economy and this is why > Marx wrote his Capital as a critique of political economy. It was with the > publication of Capital that capitalism began to be used more widely. > > During the 19th century the movement against capitalism was indeed known > as social economy and included the co-ops and the trade unions. Sadly the > EU definition of social economy by Jacques Delor from the 1990s leaves out > trade unions and only talks about Co-ops, Mutuals, Associations and > Foundations (CMAF). > > The Lutz book traces a continuous strand of social economics from the late > 18th century to today (sometimes also called co-operative economics) that > is a radical strand of socialist thinking that avoids the blindspots of > Marx. > > Also in Daly's book. For the Common Good, he talks about the work of > Schumacher on innovative thinking viz. an ownership form for co-ops that > could become intergenerational for securing the common good. Schumacher saw > the solution as to ensure a structure of ownership in co-ops that required > a strong common ownership foundation. This is very relevant to your work > and to developing Social Solidarity Economy thinking. The Lutz book is > vital guidance here and for how we best frame Synergia's pedagogy on these > question and what this idea of Eco-socialism would look like. It would be a > vitally needed synergia of social economics and ecological economics. > Co-operative economics also ploughs in this direction if you look at the > adherents. > > But there is no teaching of Co-op Economics within the international Co-op > movement, though I think St. Mary's University in Halifax has run a course > like this prior to an ICA meeting in Montreal not that long ago. I just > heard this this week. > > Hope this is helpful. > > Pat > > On 08 October 2017 at 08:37 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > I did read several pieces from Daly but it seems to me he is not > challenging capitalism per se, > > anyone read him differently ? > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 10:43 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Mike and Michel > > Thanks Michel for the Commons Transition reports. Very good to see these. > Your reply to Mike is also helpful. > > Thanks also Mike for sharing the Stan Cox critique about renewable energy > wishful thinking. I found the comments by David Schwartzman very persuasive > about the Military Industrial Complex power elite and their focused role > viz. fossil fuel geopolitics and nuclear energy. This is a very little > discussed structural impediment. > > Also this confirms the need for Greens to focus on eco-soclalist ways > forward. As Streeck argues, Growth is bound in its hands and feet with the > Accumulation demands of capitalism and the money machine. Steady-state > economics based on thermodynamics as Herman Daly so well articulates this > necessitates a post capitalism system. Schwartzman underscores this. > > Pat > > On 05 October 2017 at 06:09 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > dear Michael, > > I will add some responses in-line > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Michael Lewis <Lewiscccr(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > > Pat I really like the memo you sent. But I have several questions. > (Michel - I wrote this and then see you have replied to Pat) I will think > about and perhaps comment later. I the meantime here is my response to Pat) > > I am a poor student of history, but as I have come to understand Cole his > guild strategy was rooted in the work place, although relevant to other > kinds of association. The role of the state was radially reduced. What > emerged was a decentralized, democratic approach to provisioning, where > workers were the central (but not only) actors. Advise me here what I am > missing. > > If this is the case there a large difference in what Michel is proposing? > The foundation of his proposition is public-commons partnerships. Is this > not very different? Given the radical difference in reference points - > Cole with workers a the base and this 21st idea where globally mediated > knowledge that enables localize production on an > open-mutualized-cooperative basis; I wonder where the context renders some > of Cole’s propositions less relevant. > > in my interpretation, the commons are themselves multi-stakeholders, so > this include the workers and the user communities ; you may be familiar > with the idea of some that today the workplace has exploded and is no > longer confined to the factory; but there is an obvious linkage between the > commons seen as the locus of co-production, and thus a sphere of production > including workers, and industrial and craft workers as they used to exist > > Second, as I understand it Michel, your proposition is critically > dependent of an member cities to be active at the city and global level, > the latter through associations. In short, cities are organized into a body > the coordinates and governs the terms under which sourcing technical > solutions is build and maintained on an open source base. Question here > Michel is whether access to the knowledge repository requires cities to be > active members of the global mutual…?? > > the code is open source, and would be accessible to everybody, but the > right to commercialization of that code may be subjected to some > reciprocity limitatations, in my opinion (reciprocity-based licensing) > > Third, the territorial platform co-operatives become critical > infrastructure for production, distribution and governing. Michel…a > question about the platform co-ops; are they conceived of as being > multi-stakeholder and, if so, what is the role of local state actors, if > any? > > yes, they are conceived as multi-stakeholder and I'm open to co-governance > by local public actors > > Lastly, I am wondering about the thinking to date on whether there will > be limits to what is gathered into the global digital open source > repository? Is the focus on all the critical elements to aid and > accelerate transition? Given the absolute urgencies emerging from climate > breakdown, this might make senses. Or is it broader? I think these are > important questions as they will shape the counters of the politics that > such a proposition would provoke. Even if it is restricted to urgent > transition related production, I can imagine that a global manufacturers of > say, public transit vehicles, and their employees, would be none to > pleased with a strategy that could has the potential for sidelining their > businesses and jobs.. But, then again, I may not be capturing the > fullness of the vision. > > for me, this would work for all provisioning systems, and is connected to > the climate/ecological/resource emergency of our time, i.e. this proposal > is one of the crucial ways to radicallly reduce our material footprint > > One interesting and attractive feature of what Michel is proposing is the > bypassing of national governments. Given the growing network of cities > collaborating on climate breakdown and transition strategies, and for those > involved, their leadership in advancing more progressive transition > politics, the proposal being put forward has a strategic context where it > can be tested. > > national partner-state governments could decide at a later stage to join > and support these global depositories > > by the way, this was written in the context of urban transitions, but I > realize it could be stronger in stressing the role of the cooperative > sector in supporting the deployment of such infrastructure > > Michel > > Anyways, a bit more grist for the proverbial mill. > > Michael L > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:04 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > Dear Pat, > > as I was schooled in marxism in my youth, and subsequently abandoned it, > this means that much of the tradition you speak of is completely unknown to > me, I had simply no idea that georgism and guild socialism even existed and > where so big back then ... for me there were revolutionaries, reformists > and anarchists (and stalinists <g>) ... > > when I decided to embark on p2p work, I decided to make a clear break with > my dogmatic past, and start constructing a 'low theory' that would be a > more direct expression of what is happening and possible today. Hence in my > wiki, I only include things that exist (no projects or plans) and use > concepts that are born from the very movement I am observing. > > as much as I think it is necessary, I don't see it as a very realistic > possibility for me to dig into that history, so I am very much counting on > you for this historical context and genealogy!! > > one note, you will have seen in my approach a combination of the local and > the global, bypassing the nation-state level. > > There is both a opportunistic and strategic reason for this > > Opportunistic as it appears in a report on urban transitions, > > but strategic as I see coalesced cities (and bioregions/territorities) as > a crucial new part of transnational governance, which can't be a > inter-statist world government, but must be based on global public-commons > alliances > > quid with the nation-state, > > I am not dissing it, but I think nation-states should now support > transnational commons infrastructures > > the double movement has become inoperative because of the > trans-nationalization of capital; national revolutions carry great risks > and dangers (syriza, venezuela), and keynesianism can only be a small part > of the solution in the context of overshoot > > so what is a progressive majority in a nation-state to do, for sure, let > it do green new deals at the national level, but crucially, it must also > understand that change today is not going to come from a frontal assault > against a stronger enemy, but from a global coalition of change efforts > everywhere, which are the only ones that can overwhelm the repressive > capacity of the transnational empire > > in other words, progressive national governments must absolute support the > kind of global commoning policies we are proposing and cannot limit their > vision on their own citizens > > Michel > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:21 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutures(a)phonecoop.coop> wrote: > > Hi Michel > > Some feedback for consideration..... > > This is a really good summary and illustration. So much makes complete > sense to me. Thanks so much for this articulation. I think it is rich and > very helpful indeed. When will the report be coming out and who are the > authors? > > I have a sense of deja vu however? So my comments are about the practical > articulation and the dynamics as other forces are in play. For the past > two hundred plus years, the tension and indeed struggle between authority > at the political level and the striving for democratic authority from the > grassroots has been continuous and constant. Polanyi's Double movement > therefore has many dynamic aspects to consider. How is it best to do this > to be clear about the dialectical complexity? > > Stephen Yeo, a very close colleague of Robin Murray's over decades, is > writing a book on the Three Socialisms. These are Statism (from social > democracy to communism), Collectivism and Associationism. The last form is > the most forms that are participatively democratic and includes working > class self-help associations for mutual aid and including of course trade > unions that we should try to include in your illustration of the layers. > > The ideas you are advancing are a rekindling of the debates and thinking > from say 1900 right up to 1947 when the Cold War kicked off and when > Statism thereafter effectively crushed and suppressed associative democracy > thinking and ideas. Statists East and West told co-ops and unions thank, > but no thanks. We are taking over to make your bits and pieces integrated > and comprehensive. > > But to guide this earlier struggle by commoners, In 1919 GDH Cole produced > his book Guild Socialism Restated when he set out a very clear blueprint > with a remarkable coincidence with what you, David B, Janelle Orsi and > others are working up here. > > What is very creative about the Cole proposals that Bertrand Russell fully > supported in his book Roads to Freedom a century ago was to recognise > clearly that political socialism (social democracy shall we say) and > associative socialism need to be established at the territorial level and > at the national level in a system of checks and balances with a clear and > agreed division of labour between the politicos and the economic democrats. > > Essentially the proposal of Cole set out a blue print for how economic > democracy though a Guild Congress at local, regional and national levels > would relate and complement Parliamentary democracy. But what was wonderful > about the Cole proposals is that it considered co-operative commonwealth > building in all industries, services, arts and sciences and worked out > sector solutions for them. Plus Cole also proposed that cities should be > based on land held in commons to capture economic rent and to stop > speculation. Thus he argued for co-operative garden cities. > > 20 years earlier in Fields Factories and Workshops had attempted a very > creative blueprint as well for economic democracy and what in practice this > would look like. > > Okay Polanyi did not arrive in the UK until about 1933 and his way to > escape fascism was paid for by crowd funding by Guild Socialist, but given > that in Vienna in the 1920s Polanyi was at the forefront of associative > democracy solutions and thinking, you can see the resonance. > > Given that democratic socialism is being rekindled in parts of Europe > (Spain, Portugal, the UK and elsewhere), I think it would helpful to > connect the sound thinking from the 1920s before the lights began being > turned out with what you are proposing. > > I would suggest we are rediscovering co-operative commonwealth thinking > and practice which you are doing such a brilliant job of updating to the > digital age. > > I hope this helps. Drawing on the best practices from the past will > enable us to contextualise the arguments and link these to this vernacular > part of the Double Movement we should not overlook. > > All the best > > Pat > > On 04 October 2017 at 06:35 Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > this is the very last section of our report which will come out soon with > the Boll foundation: > > 3.6. Towards a global infrastructure for commons-based provisioning > > We have argued in this overview that we are in a conjuncture in which > commons-based mutualizing is one of the keys for sustainability, fairness > and global-local well-being. In this conclusion, we suggest a global > infrastructure, in which cities can play a crucial role. > > See the graphic below for the stacked layer that we propose, which is > described as follows: > > - > > The first layer is the cosmo-local institutional layer. Imagine global > for-benefit associations which support the provisioning of infrastructures > for urban and territorial commoning. These are structured as global > public-commons partnerships, sustained by leagues of cities which are > co-dependent and co-motivated to support these new infrastructures and > overcome the fragmentation of effort that benefits the most extractive and > centralized ‘netarchical’ firms. Instead, these infrastructural commons > organizations co-support MuniRide, MuniBnB, and other applications > necessary to commonify urban provisioning systems. These are the global > “protocol cooperative” governance organizations. > - > > The second layer consists of the actual global depositories of the > commons applications themselves, a global technical infrastructure for open > sourcing provisioning systems. They consists of what is globally common, > but allow contextualized local adaptations, which in turn can serve as > innovations and examples for other locales. These are the actual ‘protocol > cooperatives’, in their concrete manifestation as usable infrastructure. > - > > The third layer are the actual local (urban, territorial, bioregional) > platform cooperatives, i.e. the local commons-based mechanisms that deliver > access to services and exchange platforms, for the mutualized used of these > provisioning systems. This is the layer where the Amsterdam FairBnb and the > MuniRide application of the city of Ghent, organize the services for the > local population and their visitors. It is where houses and cars are > effectively shared. > - > > The potential fourth layer is the actual production-based open > cooperatives, where distributed manufacturing of goods and services > produces the actual material services that can be shared and mutualized on > the platform cooperatives. > > ... > > [image: Figure 8.png] > > Figure 8: City-supported cosmo-local production infrastructure > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > 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/ > > -- > Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org> -- Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org>

1 0

Fwd: Labouratory - monbiot.com
by Michel Bauwens 15 Oct '17

15 Oct '17

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Linda Ellinor <lellinor25(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 11:16 PM Subject: Fwd: Labouratory - monbiot.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: George Monbiot <noreply+feedproxy(a)google.com> Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 12:48 AM Subject: Labouratory - monbiot.com To: lellinor25(a)gmail.com Labouratory - monbiot.com <http://www.monbiot.com> ------------------------------ Labouratory <http://www.monbiot.com/2017/10/13/labouratory/> Posted: 13 Oct 2017 08:20 AM PDT We should use the political space being opened by the Labour resurgence to develop a new, participatory economy By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 11th October 2017 We are still living in the long 20th Century. We are stuck with its redundant technologies: the internal combustion engine; thermal power plants; factory farms. We are stuck with its redundant politics: unfair electoral systems; their capture by funders and lobbyists; the failure to temper representation with real participation. And we are stuck with its redundant economics: neoliberalism, and the Keynesianism still proposed by its opponents. While the latter system worked very well for 30 years or more, it is hard to see how it can take us through this century, not least because the growth it seeks to sustain smacks headlong into the environmental crisis. Sustained economic growth on a planet that is not growing means crashing through environmental limits: this is what we are witnessing, worldwide, today. A recent paper in Nature <https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate3352.epdf?referrer_access_token=ItG…> puts our current chances of keeping global heating to less than 1.5°C of at just 1%, and less than 2° at only 5%. Why? Because while the carbon intensity of economic activity is expected to decline by 1.9% a year, global per capita GDP is expected to grow by 1.8%. Almost all investment in renewables and efficiency is cancelled out. GDP, the index that was supposed to measure our prosperity, instead measures our progress towards ruin. But the great rupture that began in 2008 offers a chance to change all this. The challenge now is to ensure that the new political movements <https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/24/momentum-brighton-labour-p…> threatening established power in Britain and elsewhere create the space not for old ideas (such as 20th Century Keynesianism) but for a new politics, built on new economic and social foundations. There may be a case for one last hurrah for the old model: a technological shift that resembles the Second World War’s military Keynesianism. In 1941, the US turned the entire civilian economy around on a dime <https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Autocrats+Detroit+and+the+Politics+of+Po…>: within months, car manufacturers were producing planes, tanks and ammunition. A determined government could do something similar in response to climate breakdown: a sudden transformation, replacing our fossil economy. But having effected such a conversion, it should, I believe, then begin the switch to a different economic model. The new approach could start with the idea of private sufficiency and public luxury. There is not enough physical or environmental space for everyone to enjoy private luxury: if everyone in London acquired a tennis court, a swimming pool, a garden and a private art collection, the city would cover England. Private luxury shuts down space <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/31/private-wealth-labour…>, creating deprivation. But magnificent public amenities – wonderful parks and playgrounds, public sports centres and swimming pools, galleries, allotments and public transport networks – create more space for everyone, at a fraction of the cost. Wherever possible, I believe such assets should be owned and managed by neither state nor market, but by communities, in the form of commons <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/27/rich-assets-resources…>. A commons in its true form is a non-capitalist system, in which a resource is controlled in perpetuity by a community, for the shared and equal benefit of its members. A possible model is the commons transition plan <http://commonstransition.org/commons-transition-plan-city-ghent/#section1> commissioned by the Flemish city of Ghent. Land value taxation <http://www.landvaluetax.org/what-is-lvt/> also has transformative potential. It can keep the income currently siphoned out of our pockets in the form of rent – then out of the country and into tax havens – within our hands. It can reduce land values, bringing down house prices. While local and national government should use some of the money to fund public services, the residue can be returned to communities. Couple this with a community right to buy <http://www.gov.scot/Topics/farmingrural/Rural/rural-land/right-to-buy/Commu…>, enabling communities to use this money to acquire their own land, with local commons trusts that possess powers to assemble building sites, and with a new right for prospective buyers and tenants to plan their own estates <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/children-towns-and-ci…>, and exciting things begin to happen. This could be a formula for meeting housing need, delivering public luxury and greatly enhancing the sense of community, self-reliance and taking back control. It helps to create what I call the Politics of Belonging <https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/09/george-monbiot-how-de-we-get-…> . But it doesn’t stop there. The rents accruing to commons trusts could be used to create a local version of the citizens’ wealth funds (modelled on the sovereign wealth funds in Alaska and Norway) proposed by Angela Cummine <https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300218947/citizens-wealth> and Stewart Lansley <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/newe.12050/full>. The gain from such funds could be distributed in the form of a local basic income. And the money the government still invests? To the greatest extent possible, I believe it should be controlled by participatory budgeting. In the Brazilian city of Porto Allegre, the infrastructure budget is allocated by the people: around 50,000 citizens typically participate. The results – better water, sanitation, health, schools and nurseries – have been so spectacular <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X13000156> that large numbers of people now lobby the city council to raise their taxes <https://www.foe.co.uk/page/put-people-charge-their-taxes-what-happens>. When you control the budget, you can see the point of public investment. In countries like the UK, we could not only adopt this model, but extend it beyond the local infrastructure budget to other forms of local and even national spending. The principle of subsidiarity – devolving powers to the smallest political unit that can reasonably discharge them – makes such wider democratic control more feasible. All this would be framed within a system such as Kate Raworth’s doughnut economics <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/12/doughnut-growth-econo…> which, instead of seeking to maximise growth, sets a lower bound of wellbeing below which no one should fall, and an upper bound of environmental limits, that economic life should not transgress. A participatory economics could be accompanied by participatory politics, involving radical devolution and a fine-grained democratic control over the decisions affecting our lives – but I will leave that for another column. Who could lead this global shift? It could be the UK Labour Party. It is actively seeking new ideas. It knows that the bigger the change it offers, the greater the commitment of the volunteers on which its insurgency relies: the Big Organising model <https://mobilisationlab.org/big-organizing-guide-to-2017-and-beyond/> that transformed Labour’s fortunes at the last election requires a big political offer. (This is why Ed Miliband’s attempts to create a grassroots uprising failed <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/13/leftwing-labour-latin…> ). Could Labour be the party that brings the long 20th Century to an end? I believe, despite its Keynesian heritage, it could. Now, more than at any other time in the past few decades, it has a chance to change the world. www.monbiot.com You are subscribed to email updates from George Monbiot <http://www.monbiot.com>. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now <https://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailunsubscribe?k=4eh__ujjKzz_tUWZhCS99r…> . Email delivery powered by Google Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States <https://maps.google.com/?q=1600+Amphitheatre+Parkway,+Mountain+View,+CA+940…> -- 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

thinking true meta-governance and the gaps in p2p theory regarding the household economy
by Michel Bauwens 14 Oct '17

14 Oct '17

the following was prompted by Jose Ramos, who was thinking about his new book on commons policy, SO, WE NEED TO WORK ON SIGNIFICANT GAPS IN P2P THEORY, and in particular: after hearing a recent monbiot video where he mentioned 4 economic spheres, (market-state-commons-households), rather than the 3 we are using at the p2p foundation (market-state-commons) ... I have started thinking that in our (at least mine) own work, I have really collapsed household and commons, because I on the one hand, I see the family as a commons and caring as commoning, but on the other hand, I have not seen any solution yet emerge, as how commons-based peer production can actually help the household economy, so basically, I am asking for help and ideas on how we could think this through, here is a potential framework: I would suggest a potential scheme take the 4 economic sectors: commons, state, market and households each of these has internal governance aspects and specific characteristics then, they need to relate to each other, given us commons-market, commons to state, commons-households, etc.. then, all of this needs a meta-framework so far the work at the p2p foundation has been at the intersection of 1) a general framework for commons/state/market, and I believe we have done good work on this 2) work on commons-state (in value in the commons economy and other work) 3) state-commons: our work in ecaudor (focusing on social knowledge commons) and our work in ghent, focusing on institutional design for public-commons cooperation; I think we have done good work and advanced significantly in these 3 directions -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

2 1

Fwd: See dynamic duo nurture communities and educate teenagers
by Michel Bauwens 14 Oct '17

14 Oct '17

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Terry Edlin <invite(a)eventbrite.com> Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 9:38 AM Subject: See dynamic duo nurture communities and educate teenagers To: michel(a)p2pfoundation.net You are invited to the following event: Dynamic duo nurtures communities, creates housing, educates youth <https://www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-duo-nurtures-communities-creates-housi…> Event to be held at the following time, date, and location: Saturday, November 18, 2017 from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM (CST) *Sacred Keepers Sustainability Lab* 4445 South King Drive <https://maps.google.com/?q=4445+South+King+Drive+2nd+floor+Chicago,+IL+6065…> 2nd floor <https://maps.google.com/?q=4445+South+King+Drive+2nd+floor+Chicago,+IL+6065…> Chicago, IL 60653 <https://maps.google.com/?q=4445+South+King+Drive+2nd+floor+Chicago,+IL+6065…> View Map <http://maps.google.com/maps?q=4445+South+King+Drive,+Chicago,+IL+60653+Unit…> *Yes* <https://www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-duo-nurtures-communities-creates-housi…> No <https://www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-duo-nurtures-communities-creates-housi…> Maybe <https://www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-duo-nurtures-communities-creates-housi…> *Share:* [image: Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventbrite.com%2Fe%2F3…> [image: Twitter] <http://twitter.com/home?status=I%27m+attending+Dynamic+duo+nurtures+communi…> [image: LinkedIn] <http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventb…> <https://www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-duo-nurtures-communities-creates-housi…> Cheer yourself up in this uncertain time by coming to the November 18th reception at the Sacred Keepers Sustainability Lab to learn about two exciting initiatives. New Community Vision <http://www.newcommunityvision.coop> partners with congregations and community groups to revitalize communities from within while creating good housing opportunities. Sacred Keepers Sustainability Lab <http://www.sacredkeepers.org>'s STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and math) curriculum engages and educates teenagers. There is *plenty* of parking AND it is easy to get to by car or the CTA. Unfortunately, it is not ADA accessible. Here’s a tip, north siders: venturing from the north side is fun and broadens your horizon. It’s good for you. Refreshments will be served so RSVPs are *required. *Limit 50 Share this event on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=https%3A//www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-…> and Twitter <http://twitter.com/home?status=https%3A//www.eventbrite.com/e/dynamic-duo-n…>We hope you can make it! Terry Edlin [image: eventbrite] This invitation was sent to michel(a)p2pfoundation.net by Terry Edlin <http://www.eventbrite.com/org/101723112> the organizer. To stop receiving invitations from this organizer, you can unsubscribe <http://www.eventbrite.com/inviteunsubscribe?email=michel%40p2pfoundation.ne…>. Eventbrite, Inc. | 155 5th St, 7th Floor <https://maps.google.com/?q=155+5th+St,+7th+Floor+%7C%0D+San+Francisco,+CA+9…> | San Francisco, CA 94103 <https://maps.google.com/?q=155+5th+St,+7th+Floor+%7C%0D+San+Francisco,+CA+9…> [image: Eventbrite] <http://www.eventbrite.com/?ref=eemail&utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&…> -- 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: [commoning] Fwd: The Commons in Latin America: Struggles, Policies and Research - Dec 12-13, Amsterdam
by Michel Bauwens 13 Oct '17

13 Oct '17

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Miguel Said Vieira via Commoning <commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org > Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 2:34 AM Subject: [commoning] Fwd: The Commons in Latin America: Struggles, Policies and Research - Dec 12-13, Amsterdam To: Commoning-list Some SN <commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org> Dear friends, this event might be of interest to you. Best, Miguel -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Castro, Fabio de <F.deCastro(a)cedla.nl> Date: Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:05 PM Subject: The Commons in Latin America: Struggles, Policies and Research - Dec 12-13, Amsterdam Dear colleagues We are organizing the event ‘The Commons in Latin America: Struggles, Policies and Research’ to take place in December 12-13, 2017 in Amsterdam. This Co-Lab is limited to 50-60 people targeting scholars and PhD students but also including practitioners and policy-makers. Our goal is to stimulate a critical debate on different perspectives on the commons in the region. We aim at expanding the debate beyond traditional commons (natural resources) – so those working/interested in urban commons, digital commons, knowledge as commons, etc, are also welcome to participate! *Registration is open until October 21, 2017*! We have limited individual funds for PhD students (max 500 euros). For more information on the conference and how to register, please go to the website http://www.cedla.uva.nl/CO_LAB/index.html. The full program and a position paper on the Latin American commons will be uploaded soon. Please forward this message to your colleagues interested in Latin America! Best, *Fabio de Castro* *Brazilian Studies/Political Ecology* *CEDLA* Roetersstraat 33 1018 WB Amsterdam *Tel* +31 20 525 3257 <+31%2020%20525%203257> *www.cedla.uva.nl/20_research/researchers/Fabio_de_Castro.html <http://www.cedla.uva.nl/20_research/researchers/Fabio_de_Castro.html>* *https://amsterdam.academia.edu/FabioCastro <https://amsterdam.academia.edu/FabioCastro>* *https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fabio_De_Castro <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fabio_De_Castro>* Recent books and special issues: Environmental Governance in Latin America. Palgrave MacMillan http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9781137505712 Governança Ambiental no Brasil: Entre o Socioambientalismo e a Economia Verde. Paco Editorial http://editorialpaco.com.br/livro/governanca-ambiental-no-brasil/ Enhancing stweardship in Latin America and Caribbean small-scale fisheries - Special Issue http://www.springeropen.com/collections/lacssf _______________________________________________ nepam-doutorado-docentes-l mailing list nepam-doutorado-docentes-l(a)listas.unicamp.br https://www.listas.unicamp.br/mailman/listinfo/nepam-doutorado-docentes-l -- Marko Monteiro Departamento de Política Científica e Tecnológica-UNICAMP Science and Technology Policy Department-State University of Campinas (Brazil) -- Você recebeu essa mensagem porque está inscrito no grupo "GEICT - Grupo de Estudos Interdisciplinares em Ciência e Tecnologia" dos Grupos do Google. Para cancelar inscrição nesse grupo e parar de receber e-mails dele, envie um e-mail para geict+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com. Para postar nesse grupo, envie um e-mail para geict(a)googlegroups.com. Acesse esse grupo em https://groups.google.com/group/geict. Para mais opções, acesse https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- *Monique Oliveira* *Doutoranda em Saúde Pública - FSP/USP* Editora-assistente - Saúde!Brasileiros <http://brasileiros.com.br/saude/> http://www.moniqueoliveira.com _______________________________________________ Commoning mailing list Commons-Institut e.V. Germany Commoning(a)lists.commons-institut.org https://lists.schokokeks.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/commoning -- 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: Venezuela's National Network of Communes Statement to the Constituent Assembly: Venezuela and ALBA Weekly 10.13.2017
by Michel Bauwens 13 Oct '17

13 Oct '17

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alliance for Global Justice <AFGJ(a)afgj.org> Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 4:29 AM Subject: Venezuela's National Network of Communes Statement to the Constituent Assembly: Venezuela and ALBA Weekly 10.13.2017 To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com [image: Alliance for Global Justice] *October 10, 2017* This weekly email contains a few useful articles on Venezuela and ALBA Countries that contain bite-sized dose of the truth so that you can fight the disinformation in your own community, that so much of the media, including alternative media are putting out. It is AfGJ's conviction that we in the US defend Venezuela's sovereignty and recognize that the Bolivarian Revolution has improved the lives of its citizens, led the movement toward Latin America integration, and is building participatory democracy structures that are an example for us in the US as well. -AfGJ staff AFGJ Friends – we would like to include statements, events, and actions in solidarity with Venezuela. If you are aware of any or are planning any, please send them to us: stansfieldsmith100(a)gmail.com <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=NBtCttN1etksBYGlEqZ4clSscdn63…>. These may also be used as part of the redesigned international solidarity page on Venezuelanalysis.com ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Venezuela’s National Network of Communes Statement to the Constituent Assembly <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=0Qp06sD9XyL%2BUOZBBoKenlSscdn…> <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Pv%2FDqGiUOmrUmuDjzZk%2BhVSsc…> Even the BBC Notes the Contrast: How Cuba and Puerto Rico Responded to their Hurricanes <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Ne0mMIXJl3NZHEhaCWEwyVSscdn63…> How Far Has Corruption Gone in Venezuela? <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=fcxtNLCXnrD3Agqx%2FMHFLGSpa3o…> Venezuela Launches Third Satellite with China <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=dlTmSj9OjCKXbaU94ZC9UFSscdn63…> China Comes Out in Strong Show of Support for Venezuela <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=vCFP6td3YtnccBlsv%2BvYzlSscdn…> Report from Todos Somos Venezuela Solidarity Summit: Venezuela Wants Peace, Sovereignty and Bolivarian Democracy <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kBqXRVBfKNsEPoz0TZfKrFSscdn63…> Alison Bodine: Canada Hands Off Venezuela <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=A2iDTuNsDL5wdMg5cWmHI1Sscdn63…> "Dare to Dream" Film on Cuba's Latin American School of Medicine <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=KHqQGIcI1NeRGa0NWhcmIlSscdn63…> <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=qoJ27h%2BQY3ujS0OEsHf3dVSscdn…> Chuck Kaufman: Nica Act Passes the House. Now What? <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=7ez7G5rA3rq%2BpwzIRofLFlSscdn…> Evo Morales Pays Tribute to Che on 50th Anniversary of his Murder in Bolivia <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=4JmbWSB%2F88hplRdqp6ptNmSpa3o…> Allied Events Join the Tear Down the Walls Border Encuentro <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=V9maS9bHBjP2akUYyKDVplSscdn63…> <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=LyMC9CVTv%2B3gp2Iyruc39lSscdn…> Nov. 10-12 organized by SOA Watch. <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=7oadL5B%2B3PP%2FmNy59%2Fgl6VS…> <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=JkPo38PhYw3RtV64LfZaM1Sscdn63…> Register for the People’s Congress <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=1xaxiA5bNMn3%2FzyIUypCVFSscdn…>September 16-17 in Washington, DC at the Blackburn Center at Howard University. Delegation to China: Pearl River Delta Region - Shenzhen, Dongguan, Hong Kohn Labor, Globalization, Migrant Workers, with Celebrate New Year in Hong Kong! <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=OCz583oOEQ1psrhbxbejQlSscdn63…> U.S. Activist Solidarity Delegation to China, organized by National Immigrant Solidarity Network and Action LA Network. <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=xETZdopoA3cWkgy%2FRVKZWGSpa3o…> <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=H9U69B78izKobQNLUp5YBlSscdn63…> *Receive the News from Venezuela Each Week- ** <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=K7FEng%2F25JMGBPbtUKfeomSpa3o…>* *Sign Up <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=dFq3pOQyp42xFOsdJLr951Sscdn63…>* * for the Venezuela Weekly!* Like the work AFGJ is doing? <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Rb1BO6%2Fkv2S29zARnpNcMFSscdn…> <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=1l6Ad%2FCh%2BxZq8o1Iy9K%2Bk1S…> *Please support us today.* <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=8tCeEzTNT0xfpimRlDVX9FSscdn63…> You are subscribed to Alliance for Global Justice's email list. Click here to unsubscribe <http://org2.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=7mMb0OJ9a47JS5D4RMKKuVSscdn63…> [image: empowered by Salsa] <http://www.salsalabs.com/?email> -- 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: Introduction to the Course "A Delicate Activism - – An Invitation Towards a Practice that is Alive", Algarve - Portugal, 6 to 10 of February 2018
by Michel Bauwens 13 Oct '17

13 Oct '17

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Nuno Da Silva <silvamago(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:07 AM Subject: Introduction to the Course "A Delicate Activism - – An Invitation Towards a Practice that is Alive", Algarve - Portugal, 6 to 10 of February 2018 To: Dear friend, We hope life is taking good care of you:-) Please help us spread this message to your contacts in Europe who you feel might resonate with this call. We are inviting people who are deeply involved in community development work and especially those who are dancing with national and international networks, communities of practice and movements working to support the great turning/transition to regenerative cultures that nurture eco-systems and the planet as a whole. We are in this together!!! Much love and gratitude, Nuno on behalf of RECIFE and The EMERGENCE NETWORK Dear friends, The RECIFE <https://recifealgarve.wordpress.com/> and The Emergence Network <http://www.emergencenetwork.org/>, in collaboration with ARISE Education <http://www.arise.education/>, are pleased and thrilled to invite you to come and join us in the course "A Delicate Activism - – An Invitation Towards a Practice that is Alive", that we are hosting in the south of Portugal, from the 6th to the 10th of February 2018. This course will be facilitated by The Proteus Initiative <http://www.proteusinitiative.org/> amazing team composed of Allan Kaplan and Sue Davidoff, who are coming from South Africa to share with us their deep and lively approach to community development, change processes and activism in general. We invite you to read the article "A Delicate Activism" <http://socialself.org/Articles/adelicate.aspx> to investigate what this course is inviting you to explore and sense if it resonates with you. The instrumental nature of much contemporary social activism has become a contributing factor to – rather than a resolution of – the rapid and escalating social and ecological crises that beset our world. Our urgency to achieve change often unfolds a calculative, strategic mindset; results, rather than process, become primary. Yet a closer look at how life actually lives reveals that means are the ends that we arrive at – that our points of departure foretell our places of arrival. The approach introduced in these five days offers the possibility to understand and work with radically different, more appropriate, more organic approaches to social and ecological process and practice. To work in ways that are respectful of the complexity and true nature of our challenges. Encountering the problems we face in the world today requires the exercise of a responsive creativity premised on our own transformation in the process of engagement. This, we suggest, is built through the disciplined practice of observation as it enters the living processes through which life on earth unfolds. These five days introduce a grounded, aware, engaged and imaginative interpersonal practice. Pratical Information: Location: Set amidst the hills, in a beautiful valley in the heart of Algarve, the Monte Mariposa Retreat Centre will offer the possibility of a deep individual and group immersion. http://montemariposa.co.uk/ Arrivals to Faro (closest airport) are expected on the 5th of February and departures on the 11th of February 2018. *Registration fee: 650 euros (early bird before 31st of October); 720 euros after that. Registrations are limited to 24 participants.The fee covers all costs related with board, lodging, and course related work and materials. The travel costs from your place to the venue are not included.* More information and registration form available in RECIFE webpage: https://recifealgarve.wordpress.com/formacoes/#30 We look forward to meet you here for this unique opportunity to learn from the authors of "Development Practitioners and Social Process - Artists of the Invisible" <http://www.cdra.org.za/store/p1/Development_Practitioners_and_Social_Proces…> and "The Development Practitioner's Handbook" <https://books.google.pt/books?id=Y1CtgqVvjzYC&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=Develop…'s%20Handbook&f=false> as well as "The Learning School: An Organisation Development Approach" <https://books.google.pt/books/about/The_Learning_School.html?id=LP4eiPUf0iY…> . Nuno da Silva *‘There are no solutions; there is only the ongoing practice of being open and alive to each meeting, each intra-action, so that we might use our ability to respond, our responsibility, to help awaken, to breathe life into ever new possibilities for living justly.’* *Karen Barad* Personal Website <https://nunodasilvablog.wordpress.com/> RECIFE - REde Colaborativa de Iniciativas para um Futuro Eco-sistémico (Coordinator <https://recifealgarve.wordpress.com/>) The Emergence Network Curator <http://www.emergencenetwork.org/> Comunidade de Empreendedores Evolucionários, João Sem Medo <http://www.joaosemmedo.org/> FESCOOP - The Cooperative of Ethical Finances in Portugal (founding member <https://financaseticas.mautic.net/movimentofinancaseticas>) Rede Educação Viva - Southeast Algarve hub coordinator <http://www.educacaoviva.pt/> Pool of Trainers, Portuguese Platform for Development Organizations (Plataforma ONGD) <http://www.plataformaongd.pt/formacao/bolsa-de-formadores/> Transition Portugal <http://transicaoportugal.net/> (Trainers Team and Communication Team) SALTO Trainers online for Youth <http://trainers.salto-youth.net/NunoDaSilva/> Council of Europe, Youth Directorate trainers pool <http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Training/Quality_NFE/TP_presentation_en.asp> P Antes de imprimir pense em sua responsabilidade ecompromisso com o MEIO AMBIENTE Before printing, think of the environment Nota de Confidencialidade: Esta mensagem destina-se a utilização por parte do(s) destinatário(s) identificado(s) acima e pode conter informação confidencial e/ou privilegiada. Se não for o destinatário desta mensagem, contacte o remetente e apague esta mensagem. Qualquer utilização não autorizada da informação contida nesta mensagem está proibida. Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the use of the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete this message. Any unauthorized use of the information contained in this message is prohibited. -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] A new industrial revolution?
by Michel Bauwens 13 Oct '17

13 Oct '17

dear paul, I shared and tagged you on the p2p group, and copy this message to our mailing list as well, Michel On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Paul B. Hartzog < PaulBHartzog(a)paulbhartzog.org> wrote: > Thx Vasilis, this space is of particular interest to me. > > I have done two pieces on this topic that others may find interesting: > > Make. Less. More. — Why Adaptive Production Can Save The Planet > https://medium.com/panarchy-101-or-how-i-learned-to-stop- > worrying-and/make-less-more-why-adaptive-production-can- > save-the-planet-fb6f3b6f52a5 > > Panarchy 101: We Can Make It — Pioneering the Thing Commons > https://medium.com/panarchy-101-or-how-i-learned-to-stop- > worrying-and/panarchy-101-we-can-make-it-pioneering-the- > thing-commons-eb6a193ed3ce > > I would love some feedback on them. > Feel free to share these around. > And please do share anything else from the "Industry 4.0" buzz. :-) > > much thx > -Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------- > http://www.PaulBHartzog.org > PaulBHartzog(a)PaulBHartzog.org (o|o) > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------- > If you bow deeply to the universe, it bows back. > ~ Ueshiba Morihei > > The Universe is made of stories, not of atoms. > ~ Muriel Rukeyser > > Act as if what you do makes a difference. It does. > ~ William James > > We come out of the world, not into it. > ~ Alan Watts > > If the path before you is clear, you're probably on someone else's > ~ Joseph Campbell > > And if you have a subject, you're going to have objects too > ~ Richard Adler > > Perceive differently, then you will act differently. > ~ Paul B. Hartzog > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------- > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Vasilis Kostakis <kostakis.b(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On cosmolocalism and dgml: https://theconversation.com/de >> sign-global-manufacture-local-a-new-industrial-revolution-82591 >> >> -- >> Dr. Vasilis Kostakis >> >> Senior Research Fellow, Tallinn University of Technology >> Research Affiliate, Harvard University >> Founder, P2P Lab >> > > -- 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