- P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: FW: Uber goes from lawbreaker to lawmaker
by Michel Bauwens 15 Nov '18

15 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paul Wildman <paul(a)kalgrove.com> Date: Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 11:02 PM Subject: FW: Uber goes from lawbreaker to lawmaker To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004(a)gmail.com> Cc: taylor.daryl.r(a)gmail.com <taylor.daryl.r(a)gmail.com> [image: TrendWatching] <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W5wCG2t5…> [image: Uber IotD] [image: New call-to-action] <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W4YDthZ5…> ------------------------------ *Last month Uber sent a letter <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W6YBpVQ1…> to the SEC requesting that the law be changed to allow it to grant equity to its drivers.* Currently, US companies are only permitted to grant equity to employees. Uber’s ‘driver-partners’ are famously classified as contractors. Uber’s relationship with its drivers has been fraught, with drivers reportedly committing suicide in the *US <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W5pjcWZ2…>*, and drivers striking over pay and working conditions in the *UK <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W64RS6F7…>*, *India <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W51crd98…>* and *South Africa <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*VWD9P02T…>*, among others. Airbnb sent a *similar letter <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W4vMDk35…>* to the SEC in September. Three trend-driven insights for you to discuss with your team: *Legislative brands. *A majority of people (60%) across 28 countries *surveyed <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*N2DXJYp9…>* feel that their country is on the wrong track. We know what this has done politically. But this frustration is also reshaping the consumer sphere. Yes, brand activism is one potential tactic. But the most progressive brands are looking to do more than just raise awareness. Instead, LEGISLATIVE BRANDS will use their power to fight for, promote and even impose laws that create a better future for everyone. *Peer armies.* We can’t say we’re remotely surprised by Uber and Airbnb’s moves. Way back in 2016, we wrote in *PEER ARMIES <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W3MF17X3…>* that “expectations of mutually beneficial P2P consumerism are coming for even the most reluctant P2P giants. Uber are currently entrenched in disputes over driver unions that could eventually see them forced to improve pay and conditions. Surely it's better to embrace a trend, rather than be dragged, kicking and screaming?” It’s only taken two years… 🔮 *Trend babies. *Here’s another secret to applying trends successfully. Novel innovations often emerge at the intersection of trends, in this case LEGISLATIVE BRANDS and PEER ARMIES. We’ve just published our *5 Trends for 2019*, featuring LEGISLATIVE BRANDS and four other opportunity-rich trends. Here’s an exercise for your team. What happens if you combine two (or more!) of these trends? What innovations could you create? Good luck! ------------------------------ *Want more:* 🔗View & share online <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W6k4sgn2…> 🔍Search the archive <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W8wRd992…> 💬Discuss in Slack <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W7CWkPl2…> ------------------------------ [image: 2019 5 Trends for 2019] <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*Vrc4ll5F…> *The 2019 edition of TrendWatching Quarterly is here!* In 5 Trends for 2019 <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*V5vKjG3Z…>, we share five actionable, provocative, opportunity-rich consumer trends to sink your teeth into, as you make plans to prosper next year. Featuring trend-driven innovations from brands such as Patagonia, Forbes Brasil, Microsoft, the Louvre, Nestlé Japan, and many, many more! [image: READ NOW » ] <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W2Xhz851…> *ACADEMY <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W7ydqfs8…>* *FREE <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*Vmstpd95…>* *INSIGHT NETWORK <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W31zC6w6…>* <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W5pFD9-3…> <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W2cB39W2…> <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W5KZFm_4…> <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*N8457vCy…> <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W6yVdL33…> *LIVE <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W545SrJ7…>* *PREMIUM <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W92j8Q19…>* *NEWS <https://info.trendwatching.com/e2t/c/*W5FWXjW6Zx_6wW2kXHMS6f2HZg0/*W7fddQg3…>* TrendWatching 175 Varick Street New York NY 10014 NY 10014 You received this email because you are subscribed to Innovation of the Day from TrendWatching. Update your email preferences <https://info.trendwatching.com/hs/manage-preferences/unsubscribe?d=eyJlYSI6…> to choose the types of emails you receive. Unsubscribe from all future emails <https://info.trendwatching.com/hs/manage-preferences/unsubscribe?d=eyJlYSI6…> -- 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: Ways To Help Fire Victims In California
by Michel Bauwens 15 Nov '18

15 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Neal Gorenflo, Shareable <info(a)shareable.net> Date: Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 12:00 AM Subject: Ways To Help Fire Victims In California To: Michael Bouwens <michelsub2004(a)gmail.com> <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=PhRuiz4x_CuV-VTdUGsue13cPnOdv3cMWgT-yA4Gp…> Dear Michael, Over the past few weeks we've been sharing ways for you to support Shareable's work, but right now we feel the need to pause our regularly scheduled fundraising efforts. So many members of our community — including friends and family of our staff — have been directly affected in recent months by natural disasters. From Hurricanes Florence and Michael in the southeastern U.S., to the Camp and Woolsey Fires still burning in California, our people are reeling from the devastation. The fires in California are hitting particularly close to home for our team this week since they are within hours of Shareable's headquarters in the San Francisco Bay Area. The gigantic toxic cloud over our region from the devastating wildfires is a powerful reminder that our neighbors are suffering from lost family members, homes, and even whole towns. We'd like to direct some of the amazing energy and good will from our community to those who need it most. Please consider supporting one of the many relief efforts organized by the groups below: - California Community Foundation, Wildfire Relief Fund <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=aJX_eBq6zI2B_hi_Oynnxf_mJ-Ra14FkGd49jvUyU…> - North Valley Community Foundation, Camp Fire Relief <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=01FzXJVLjitpjVXjUgfJQZC6x9LiZ9dffyVCo6HSI…> In recent years, we've also reported on the incredible ways that communities have come together to bounce back from things like hurricanes and fires, and we believe that the communities affected in recent months will be able to do the same. Here are some examples that may give you some hope for a positive recovery to come: - Resources for Community Resilience and Collective Disaster Response <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=PhRuiz4x_CuV-VTdUGsue5yzTfgUeFqxBGTptDhz1…> (Please add any resources you may know of. <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=PhRuiz4x_CuV-VTdUGsue5yzTfgUeFqxBGTptDhz1…> ) - Disaster collectivism: How communities rise together to respond to crises <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=PhRuiz4x_CuV-VTdUGsue6lu3oIsZzNZcgItAPgGj…> - The Response Podcast <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=PhRuiz4x_CuV-VTdUGsuezDsbGj-rCyWy4YcIBHNu…> With gratitude, Team Shareable Neal, Ambika, Tom, Joslyn and Courtney Shareable · 487 Central Ave, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States This email was sent to michelsub2004(a)gmail.com. To stop receiving emails, click here <http://www.sharingcities.net/unsubscribe?e=ceceb67696e2ef7bae91b06758c2cd2a…>. Created with NationBuilder <https://www.sharingcities.net/r?u=SWqLExi-4iBlEOa5qgO58jA2d62deOsOLwOgchKDe…>, software for leaders. -- 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: How To Be Successful Without Hurting Men’s Feelings | Uncertain Futures: How Economists Think About…
by Michel Bauwens 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: piqd - your piqs of the day <dailydigest(a)piqd.com> Date: Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM Subject: How To Be Successful Without Hurting Men’s Feelings | Uncertain Futures: How Economists Think About… To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004(a)gmail.com> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiQTQtR3F…> News from your channels Read articles on piqd: Thessa Lageman <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiX0czeV9…> | Boom and bust <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoibkVrRzN…> How To Be Successful Without Hurting Men’s Feelings <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/how-to-be-successful-without-hurtin…> Will Kherbek <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoidFFPT09…> | Boom and bust <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoibkVrRzN…> Uncertain Futures: How Economists Think About Uncertainty <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/uncertain-futures-how-economists-th…> Roshawn Terrell <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiaE5wMUp…> | Technology and society <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiWV9IVUU…> Why Self-Taught Artificial Intelligence Has Trouble With the Real World <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/technology-politics/why-self-taught-artificia…> Boom and bust <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoibkVrRzN…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiX0czeV9…> piqer: Thessa Lageman 5 <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/how-to-be-successful-without-hurtin…> How To Be Successful Without Hurting Men’s Feelings <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/how-to-be-successful-without-hurtin…> The presenter speaks to Sarah Cooper, comedian and former Google employee. She has just published “a handy manual” for women in male-dominated environments called ‘How to be successful without hurting men’s feelings’. "You’re a woman at a meeting and you just spotted that your male colleague has made a mistake," the presenter asks, "What do you do?" You kind of want to put yourself down a little bit and say you’re not sure and you don’t even really like numbers, you don’t even understand math really, but maybe these numbers might be wrong? When emailing a request, don’t say: show this to me. People will think you are mean. So use a lot of emojis, smiley faces, exclamation marks, XOXO if you want... Just make it seem really really friendly. "Are you trying to make grown women seem like little girls in the way that they communicate?" the presenter asks. People expect women to do this, Cooper says. "If we just respond in a direct way with 'no', people will think: wow, she is in a bad mood." She advices: Read my book and then stop doing all of these things. Before this part, you can also listen to an interview with Renee Adams of Said Business School at Oxford University. In the business world it’s often argued that having more women on the company’s board improves a company’s productivity, financial performance and value. The professor says: In the current policy debate everyone appeals to the commercial reasons for increasing gender diversity. But that evidence is simply not robust. It’s very hard to measure the actual benefits of diversity, but I think there is a case to be made for quotas to be argued on the basis of fairness. The presenter also speaks to Gay Collins of the 30% Club, a global movement that campaigns for more women on corporate boards, who says: There is no doubt that a diverse board makes better decisions. <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=How%20To%20Be%20Successful%20Without%…> <https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.piqd.com%2Fb…> <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/how-to-be-successful-without-hurtin…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiS0ZRTEg…> Source: Manuela Saragosa | bbc.co.uk on | Language: EN BBC World Service - Business Daily, Bossy Women and Women Bosses Read article <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiS0ZRTEg…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoidFFPT09…> piqer: Will Kherbek 5 <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/uncertain-futures-how-economists-th…> Uncertain Futures: How Economists Think About Uncertainty <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/uncertain-futures-how-economists-th…> Shortly after the economic crash of 2008, The Queen of England met with a group of economists and asked a simple question: “Why did no one see it coming?”. Whether anyone saw the crash coming is a disputable point, but the answer she was given was that there was a “collective failure of the imagination” on the part of the leading lights of economics. The question of how economists can visualise a future, particularly a future that is increasingly unpredictable and volatile, is the subject matter of the book *Uncertain Futures*, which is edited by Richard Bronk and Jens Beckert. These eminent economic scholars join a panel discussion including Lord Adair Turner, Dr. Waultraud Schelkle, and Dr. Ekaterina Svetlova in this mind-stretching podcast from London School of Economics. The key to creating economies that are safe for the future, the panelists argue, are two elements that are not traditionally acknowledged as aspects of economic thinking: narrative and imagination. In an economic environment characterised by “radical uncertainty” - in which no individual can know enough to effectively manage and maintain a system as complex as the global economy - the ways in which economic stories are told to politicians and the public matter greatly. “It’s not just about calculation," Dr. Svetlova says, “but how narratives are negotiated”. In discussing how such narratives gain purchase on the public imagination, the scholars dip into the literature of dozens of fields of study including ecology, cognitive science, philosophy, and (of course) economics. The discussion is complex, but not technical, indeed, the hyper-mathematical economics of the present is itself a concern. Lord Turner notes that the importance of distinguishing what can and cannot be known, mathematised, and modeled is an imperative for economists of the future. Too much certainty about uncertainty, the panelists remind the listener, can blind a person to reality. <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Uncertain%20Futures%3A%20How%20Econom…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.facebook.com?p=eyJzIjoiMWR…> <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/boom-bust/uncertain-futures-how-economists-th…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiZnNBQVB…> Source: LSE Podcasts | soundcloud.com on 11/05/2018 | Image: LSE Public Lectures | Language: EN Uncertain Futures: imaginaries, narratives, and calculation in the economy [Audio] by LSE Podcasts Read article <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiZnNBQVB…> Technology and society <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiWV9IVUU…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiaE5wMUp…> piqer: Roshawn Terrell 5 <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/technology-politics/why-self-taught-artificia…> Why Self-Taught Artificial Intelligence Has Trouble With the Real World <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/technology-politics/why-self-taught-artificia…> Listen to this podcast from Quantamagazine that covers the current state of the art of artificial intelligence, and why current techniques still have trouble with the real world. The first notable achievement, was probably when IBM's Deep Blue computer beat Garry Kasparov at chess in 1997. They did this in part by building their algorithm based off of centuries of chess wisdom. There have been many chess engines since then, with one the most powerful being Stockfish which analyzes over 70 million moves per second. Chess was beat, though only through brute force calculation. However the game of Go, is a much tougher nut to crack. As simple as the rules are, Go is a game of profound complexity. There are an astonishing 10 to the power of 170 possible board configurations - more than the number of atoms in the known universe - making Go a googol times more complex than Chess. You literally wouldn't have enough matter in the universe to build a computer capable calculating all the possible moves. Which is why it's so fascinating that the human brain can handle the game so well. Only recently with the power of algorithms modeled off of the human brain have we been able to conquer Go. The problem with all of these games though, is that they are games of 'perfect information,' which means the players see everything that's happening on the board at all times. The real world however, is mostly comprised of 'hidden information,' where you don't have all the variables, and yet you still must make a decision. Currently Deepmind the company that built the algorithm that conquered Go, are now setting their eyes toward a game known as StarCraft II. Which is a real time strategy game of immense complexity where players must make decisions based off of hidden imperfect information all the time. As the battlefield in the game is covered in a 'fog of war,' allowing the enemy to obscure their positions. If a game like StarCraft II can be beat, then we come one step closer to true AGI. <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Why%20Self-Taught%20Artificial%20Inte…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.facebook.com?p=eyJzIjoiNVk…> <https://www.piqd.com/tracking/technology-politics/why-self-taught-artificia…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiWE5Nb0V…> Source: Joshua Sokol | quantamagazine.org on | Image: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/maxuser | Language: EN Why Self-Taught Artificial Intelligence Has Trouble With the Real World | Quanta Magazine Read article <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiWE5Nb0V…> Your newsletter Not enough information in your newsletter? Don't receive it often enough? Not enough to read? change now <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiYjIxZnd…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/twitter.com?p=eyJzIjoiZWk2ZGxY…> <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.facebook.com?p=eyJzIjoiT0R…> piqd GmbH | Widenmayerstr. 38 | 80538 Munich Tel.: +49 (0) 8152 99 86 564 | Fax:+49 (0) 8152 9986571 | Email: contact(a)piqd.com Managing director: Marcus von Jordan | Seat and court of jurisdiction: Munich HRB 217337 Tax number: 143/134/81256 | VAT numer: DE 300221320 Imprint <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiR1R3NHF…> | Privacy <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiVzZEamN…> | Unsubscibe <https://mandrillapp.com/track/click/30835283/www.piqd.com?p=eyJzIjoiRGZmRVV…> -- 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: [ess-communs] Sharing Cities book
by Michel Bauwens 13 Nov '18

13 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Frédéric Sultan <fredericsultan(a)gmail.com> Date: Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 8:09 AM Subject: [ess-communs] Sharing Cities book To: echanges(a)bienscommuns.org <echanges(a)bienscommuns.org>, < ess-communs(a)bienscommuns.org> Bonjour, Travail très fouillé sur les plateformes pour les villes dans une perspective d'économie du partage publié à l'occasion de la rencontre Sharing cities de Barcelone : Sharing Cities A worldwide cities overview on platform economy policies with a focus on Barcelona Mayo Fuster Morell (ed.) Dimmons Research Group http://www.share.barcelona/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/SharingCities_book.pdf Bonne lecture. Frédéric Sultan Pour plus d'information ou gérer son abonnement à cette liste de discussion, suivre le lien suivvant : https://mail.cfcloud.fr/bienscommuns.org/info/ess-communs -- 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: [ess-communs] Appel à signature lettre ouverte aux gouvernements de l'UE
by Michel Bauwens 11 Nov '18

11 Nov '18

Open letter to EU governments *Stop the EU’s Services Notification Procedure - cities need democratic space to protect the interests of citizens!* We, representatives of European cities, civil society groups and trade unions, want to express our deep concern about the proposed Services Notification Procedure. Instead of reporting afterwards, new local rules and laws would in the future have to be notified in advance and receive prior approval from the European Commission. As stated in a September 2018 resolution by the city council of Amsterdam, the proposed notification procedure creates unnecessary delays and “seriously harms the autonomy of local governments and therefore poses a threat to the local democracy.” The proposal would create major new obstacles for progressive municipal policies, such as much needed measures to protect affordable housing. The proposed procedure is disproportional and at odds with the subsidiarity principle as well as the obligation of the EU to respect regional and local self-government, as outlined in the Lisbon Treaty. Cities have a crucial role to play in solving Europe’s social and environmental problems and in deepening democracy with active citizens’ engagement. The proposed Services Notification Procedure and its attempts to restrict the democratic space of municipalities is therefore completely unacceptable. Signatories - Barcelona en Comú - Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) - Transnational Institute (TNI) ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Frédéric Sultan <fredericsultan(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 10:55 PM Subject: [ess-communs] Appel à signature lettre ouverte aux gouvernements de l'UE To: echanges(a)bienscommuns.org <echanges(a)bienscommuns.org>, < ess-communs(a)bienscommuns.org>, communs <finance(a)bienscommuns.org> Bonsoir, Suite à la rencontre Municipalize Europe! à Bruxelles cette semaine avec des représentants des villes de Barcelone, Naples, Grenoble, Paris et Amsterdam, Barcelone en Comú, Observatoire de l'Europe des entreprises (CEO) et Institut transnational (TNI) ont lancé une lettre ouverte aux gouvernements de l'UE pour empêcher l'adoption de mesures qui brideraient les politiques progressistes des municipalités. Vous trouverez ci-dessous une traduction en français de la lettre ouverte et de l'appel à signature de Satoko Kishimoto (TNI). (Les originaux sont à la fin du message). Cet appel est urgent, échéance : avant la fin des heures de bureau le mardi 13 novembre. Merci de le faire circuler et adopter dans vos réseaux. Frédéric Sultan, Remix the commons *Appel à signature : * Chers amis du Mouvement Européen de l'Eau, Hier, le PDG de TNI, Barcelona en Comú a organisé avec succès l'événement Municipalize Europe ! à Bruxelles avec des représentants des villes de Barcelone, Naples, Grenoble, Paris et Amsterdam pour discuter des politiques municipales progressistes en matière de logement (abordable), énergie (transition), eau publique, remuniciaplisation, solidarité des réfugiés etc. Cependant, les institutions de l'UE représentent une menace directe pour réduire la marge de manœuvre politique des municipalités en ce moment même. Les institutions de l'UE sont actuellement dans la phase finale de négociation d'un accord sur la procédure de notification des services proposée (dans le cadre de la révision de la directive européenne sur les services, largement connue sous le nom de directive Bolkestein). La proposition aurait pour effet de retarder et de refroidir considérablement les politiques et les initiatives municipales progressistes. La procédure de notification proposée obligerait les municipalités à informer la Commission européenne de toute nouvelle mesure réglementaire affectant les services, trois mois avant la prise de décision. La Commission européenne évaluerait et prendrait alors une décision contraignante sur la question de savoir si les mesures enfreignent la directive sur les services. Actuellement, la notification n'intervient qu'après coup. Avec ses tendances néolibérales, la Commission européenne pourrait se dresser contre un large éventail d'initiatives municipales progressistes. La proposition prévoit également de donner aux "parties prenantes" (y compris les entreprises et leurs lobbyistes) la possibilité de commenter les mesures notifiées par les autorités publiques. Un accord entre les institutions de l'UE pourrait être conclu dès le 15 novembre, il est donc urgent de faire entendre notre voix ! Nous invitons chaleureusement votre organisation à signer la lettre (ci-jointe). Envoyez votre soutien à Olivier Hoedeman (CEO) <olivier(a)corporateeurope.org> <olivier(a)corporateeurope.org> avant la fin des heures de bureau le mardi 13 novembre (nom de l'organisation + pays). Merci de votre attention. En solidarité, Satoko Kishimoto/TNI *Lettre ouverte aux gouvernements de l'UE* Stop à la procédure de notification des services de l'UE - les villes ont besoin d'un espace démocratique pour protéger les intérêts des citoyens ! Nous, représentants des villes européennes, des groupes de la société civile et des syndicats, voulons exprimer notre profonde préoccupation au sujet de la procédure de notification des services proposée. Au lieu de les nouvelles règles et lois locales devraient à l'avenir être notifiées dans les délais suivants et recevoir l'approbation préalable de la Commission européenne. Comme indiqué dans une résolution de septembre 2018 du conseil municipal d'Amsterdam, la proposition de la de notification entraîne des retards inutiles et "porte gravement atteinte à l'autonomie des Etats membres de l les gouvernements locaux et constitue donc une menace pour la démocratie locale." La proposition créerait de nouveaux obstacles majeurs pour les politiques municipales progressistes, tels que ceux dont on a tant besoin des mesures pour protéger le logement abordable. La procédure proposée est disproportionnée et contraire au principe de subsidiarité qui fait obligation à l'UE de respecter l'autonomie régionale et locale, telle qu'elle a été définie dans le Traité de Lisbonne. Les villes ont un rôle crucial à jouer dans la résolution des problèmes sociaux et environnementaux de l'Europe et à l'approfondissement de la démocratie grâce à l'engagement actif des citoyens. Les services proposés La procédure de notification et ses tentatives de restreindre l'espace démocratique des municipalités est la suivante donc totalement inacceptable. Signataires - Barcelone en Comú - Observatoire de l'Europe des entreprises (CEO) - Institut transnational (TNI) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear European Water Movement friends, Yesterday, CEO, TNI, Barcelona en Comú successfully organized the event Municipalize Europe! in Brussels with city representatives from Barcelona, Naples, Grenoble, Paris and Amsterdam to discuss progressive municipal policies on (affordable) housing, energy (transition), public water, remuniciaplisation, refugee solidarity etc. It was an respiring debates however, the EU institutions are posing a direct threat to reduce policy space for municipalities at this right moment. The EU institutions are currently in the final phase of negotiating a deal on the proposed Services Notification Procedure <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-deeper-and-fairer-int…> (part of the review of the EU's Services Directive, widely known as the Bolkestein Directive). The proposal would have a massive delay and chill effect for progressive municipal policies and initiatives. The proposed Notification Procedure would *oblige municipalities to inform the European Commission of any new regulatory measures affecting services, three months in advance of making the decision. *The European Commission would then assess and make a binding decision on whether the measures violate the Services Directive. Currently the notification only happens afterwards. With its neoliberal leanings, the European Commission might throw up hurdles against a wide range of progressive municipal initiatives. The proposal also includes giving ‘stakeholders’ (including corporations and their lobbyists) the opportunity to comment on the measures notified by public authorities. A deal between the EU institutions might be reached already by November 15th, so it’s a matter of urgency to make our voices heard! We warmly invite your organisation to sign the letter (enclosedand attached). Send your organizational endorsement *to Olivier Hoedeman (CEO) <olivier(a)corporateeurope.org> <olivier(a)corporateeurope.org> before the end of office hours Tuesday 13 November* (name of organisation + country). Thanks for your attention. In solidarity, Satoko Kishimoto/TNI ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open letter to EU governments *Stop the EU’s Services Notification Procedure - cities need democratic space to protect the interests of citizens!* We, representatives of European cities, civil society groups and trade unions, want to express our deep concern about the proposed Services Notification Procedure. Instead of reporting afterwards, new local rules and laws would in the future have to be notified in advance and receive prior approval from the European Commission. As stated in a September 2018 resolution by the city council of Amsterdam, the proposed notification procedure creates unnecessary delays and “seriously harms the autonomy of local governments and therefore poses a threat to the local democracy.” The proposal would create major new obstacles for progressive municipal policies, such as much needed measures to protect affordable housing. The proposed procedure is disproportional and at odds with the subsidiarity principle as well as the obligation of the EU to respect regional and local self-government, as outlined in the Lisbon Treaty. Cities have a crucial role to play in solving Europe’s social and environmental problems and in deepening democracy with active citizens’ engagement. The proposed Services Notification Procedure and its attempts to restrict the democratic space of municipalities is therefore completely unacceptable. Signatories - Barcelona en Comú - Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) - Transnational Institute (TNI) Pour plus d'information ou gérer son abonnement à cette liste de discussion, suivre le lien suivvant : https://mail.cfcloud.fr/bienscommuns.org/info/ess-communs -- 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: Have you heard the news about December 5th?
by Michel Bauwens 06 Nov '18

06 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Sustainable Economies Law Center <communications(a)theselc.org> Date: Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:00 PM Subject: Have you heard the news about December 5th? To: Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> Dear Michel, For more than two years The Law Center has been incubating two groundbreaking cooperatives! The East Bay Permanent Real Estate Cooperative <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=KzlbMa9pSXkRl1TeGZ8bnNNeMjY8sWE7w7Nb1m3CRhU&e=5…> and People Power Solar Cooperative <https://www.theselc.org/pcec?e=5af0fb96cc323505133b237ae4b8287128238f30&utm…> will engage everyday people – like YOU – to co-own, develop, and steward our community’s critical assets: permanently affordable real estate and renewable energy. Each now has a dynamic leadership team ready to welcome hundreds or thousands of members! We are celebrating the launch of a new people-powered economy with a HUGE party, and you’re invited! Please join us on December 5 at Impact Hub Oakland for a night of food, drinks, and a special program unveiling the cooperatives. We can’t wait to see you <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=uuUyPGiVHWR_V3cUbcvCWU61v8MAmyPB3TKd8oo7N-LPRxA…> ! <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=uuUyPGiVHWR_V3cUbcvCWU61v8MAmyPB3TKd8oo7N-LPRxA…> Get your tickets here <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=uuUyPGiVHWR_V3cUbcvCWU61v8MAmyPB3TKd8oo7N-LPRxA…> ! Sustainable Economies Law Center http://www.theselc.org/ <http://www.theselc.org/?e=5af0fb96cc323505133b237ae4b8287128238f30&utm_sour…> -=-=- Sustainable Economies Law Center · 1428 Franklin St, Oakland, CA 94612, United States This email was sent to michel(a)p2pfoundation.net. To stop receiving emails, click here <http://www.theselc.org/unsubscribe?e=5af0fb96cc323505133b237ae4b8287128238f…>. You can also keep up with Sustainable Economies Law Center on Twitter <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=7Sn_jlQ3J2wHxMyMtp8UNGTZcC7hDfn9mZRv3LJ52CE&e=5…> or Facebook <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=27Ax0UmWOX2J8J_QwK9Z6rZ8l6wpOCFViazjPpgTSEyzaQh…>. -=-=- Created with NationBuilder <https://www.theselc.org/r?u=SWqLExi-4iBlEOa5qgO58jA2d62deOsOLwOgchKDecY&e=5…>, software for leaders. -- 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

Release of RESET Issue 7 'Political Forms and Movements in the Digital Era'
by Francesca Musiani 05 Nov '18

05 Nov '18

(With apologies for cross-posting) ------- Dear colleagues, Clément Mabi and Célya Gruson-Daniel (issue editors), and the editorial board of the RESET journal (Social Science Research on the Internet) are delighted to announce the publication of Issue 7, 'Political Forms and Movements in the Digital Era'. The ambition of this issue of the RESET journal is indeed to question how digital technologies, embedded in different contexts, produce new forms of political mobilization and organization, or stabilize older ones, while conveying multiple values and principles which are, in turn, transforming technologies themselves. The issue is freely accessible in its entirety at the following address: https://journals.openedition.org/reset/899 with a bilingual introduction. With kindest regards The issue editors and the RESET editorial board. --------- Cher-e-s collègues, Clément Mabi et Célya Gruson-Daniel (coord.) ainsi que le comité de rédaction de la revue RESET (Recherches en sciences sociales sur Internet) sont heureux de vous annoncer la parution du numéro 7 de la revue, 'Formes et mouvements politiques à l'ère numérique'. Ce numéro de la revue RESET cherche à questionner la manière dont le « numérique », inséré dans différents contextes, produit de nouvelles formes de mobilisation et d’organisation politiques, ou en stabilise d’anciennes, tout en embarquant avec lui une série de valeurs et de principes qui contribuent en retour à les faire elles-mêmes évoluer. Le numéro est librement accessible en texte intégral à l'adresse: https://journals.openedition.org/reset/899. Bien cordialement, Les coordinateurs et le CR RESET -- Francesca Musiani (ph.d.) associate research professor (*chargée de recherche*), CNRS, ISCC <http://www.iscc.cnrs.fr/> associate researcher, i3, CSI <http://www.csi.ensmp.fr/>, MINES ParisTech vice-chair, CPT <http://iamcr.org/s-wg/section/cp-t>, IAMCR academic editor, @PolicyR <http://policyreview.info/> on the web <http://www.iscc.cnrs.fr/spip.php?article1960> | on twitter <https://twitter.com/franmusiani>

1 0

Fwd: Why Ecosocialism: For a Red-Green Future (GTN Discussion)
by Michel Bauwens 04 Nov '18

04 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Great Transition Network <gtnetwork(a)greattransition.org> Date: Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 4:33 PM Subject: Why Ecosocialism: For a Red-Green Future (GTN Discussion) To: <michelsub2004(a)gmail.com> >From Victor Wallis <zendive(a)aol.com> ------------------------------------------------------- Dear colleagues and friends, Michael Löwy's voice has long been an important one in these discussions. I agree entirely with his basic statement here, and am glad that he specifically recognizes the capitalist roots of productivism and the condemnation of productivism by Marx. In terms of Paul's question as to whether the concept of ecosocialism is sufficiently all-encompassing, this is a topic that I take up at length in my book Red-Green Revolution: The Politics and Technology of Ecosocialism ( www.politicalanimalmagazine.com/political-animal-press/) My discussion includes a chapter on potential pro-ecological constituencies, in which I focus on the links between ecological demands and the interests of the various sectors that have suffered from -- or whose suffering has been amplified and/or institutionalized by -- the workings of capital. Another chapter (originally written for a collection on intersectionality that appeared in December 2015 in New Political Science) discusses the history and theoretical considerations behind efforts to bring together all these constituencies. My basic argument is that if we want to build a political force that can implement our vision, it's not enough to add more and more prefixes to our core concept. We must instead seek to understand how our central concept fully valorizes and honors all the specific concerns that may motivate people's activism. So far as the term ecosocialism is concerned, I argue that the basic principles of ecology and of socialism converge, in that both reject the structure in which decisions about production are made on the basis of profit calculations. In this sense, the prefix "eco-" might be considered redundant. However, I accept the term partly in recognition of the separate intellectual histories of its two strands and partly because the ecological dimension uniquely underscores the urgency of a socialist transformation. (See my recent remarks on this point here: www.mronline.org/2018/11/01/a-sound-ecological-policy-cannot-be-achieved-wi… ). Returning to Michael Löwy's essay, I also fully share his emphasis on the participatory nature of the necessary planning processes. This is of course an aspect that needs to be spelled out in greater detail. Michael advocates what he calls "Internet-enabled direct democracy" (p. 4), but this seems to apply mainly to the expression of broad preferences. It leaves open the actual process by which specific measures will be hammered out. Here the long-standing limitations of plebiscitary rule will need to be overcome. Structures for informed discussion will need to be put in place, so that the merits of a given approach will be tested not simply by the percentage of the population that finds it appealing, but will rather emerge from a deliberative process in which all the relevant considerations -- both social and technological -- are taken into account. In this connection, Michael speaks of free time as "a condition for the participation of working people in the democratic discussion and management of economy and of society" (p. 3). This has long been recognized as a problematic matter, given the common tendency of people to recoil at the idea of having to attend an endless succession of meetings. Admittedly, this tendency reflects in part the negative conditioning they have experienced under capitalism, but the point is that the problem needs to be confronted directly, and the conditions created in which such reactions will no longer stand in the way of necessary participation. An initial step in this direction would be to define the participation as being in part an aspect of people's work-responsibilities and therefore as an activity for which they would be compensated under the heading of work-time. Additional requirements for facilitating the necessary quality of participation will readily come to mind, but they need to be integral to the vision we put forward. One of the biggest tasks will be to establish guidelines for distinguishing between the wasteful and the necessary lines of production that Michael refers to (p. 5) (and which I address in Chapter 1 of my book). Discussion on this point can readily raise fundamental philosophical questions about what is of value in human existence. Weaning people away from certain tastes/addictions fostered by capitalist society will not be easy. One can hope that the "eco-" framework -- i.e., recognition of the emergency faced by our entire species -- will help spur the necessary collective introspection. I would also like to respond to a few points from Herman Daly’s comment as well: 1. I think that Daly’s allusions to the complexity of the necessary planning process are on target. The difficulties he evokes are what I have in mind when I refer (above) to the need to go beyond merely plebiscitary expressions of preference and to instead establish clearly defined structures for discussion and accountability at every level. 2. I believe that Marxists have learned from the negative aspects of the 20th-century experiences of socialism. Efforts at delineating democratic approaches to planning are an indication of this (see Richard Wolff, Democracy at Work, 2012), and there is indeed widespread agreement on the need to redefine the objectives of economic policy away from an emphasis on growth (see continuing coverage of ecological issues in Monthly Review). It is certainly possible to criticize existing models of planning while retaining a socialist framework (see Michael Lebowitz, The Contradictions of Real Socialism, 2012). The politically important point, though, is that the supposed “Marxist” pursuit of growth, to the extent that it has prevailed, is in fact a reflection of the persistent impact of capitalism, whether in the form of competitive or military pressure from imperialist powers or in the form of an internalization of capitalist values, as currently embodied in the Chinese case. (The Chinese government’s allegiance to Marxism may be fruitfully compared with the US government’s allegiance to democracy.) 3. Regarding the issue of social equality, the point is not to prescribe multiples of difference between top and bottom incomes, but rather to assure that there is no dominant *class*. The size of individual incomes becomes less vital to the extent that an increasing share of necessary goods and services is provided independently of the market. The irrationality of market indicators for such necessities as healthcare is widely recognized. In light of ecological considerations, it should be clear that this also applies to the use of land and energy resources, among other things. One should not let the shortcomings of previous attempts at socialism get in the way of seeing that a socialist framework is necessary to addressing ecological issues on the scale that they require. Whatever residual role markets may play for allocating items of immediate personal consumption, they have no legitimate role in determining the overall utilization of space. The prerogative of an individual or a corporation to “own” land and thereby have a “right” to have all the trees on it cut down can have no place in an ecological vision. But it remains a possibility in the context of capitalism. Victor Wallis www.victorwallis.com *************************************************************************************** Friday, November 2, 2018 >From Herman Daly <hdaly(a)umd.edu> ----- Those of us old enough to remember the Cold War know that it was basically a contest between Socialism and Capitalism to see who could grow faster, and thereby accumulate more wealth and military power. The audience was the uncommitted countries of the world who would supposedly adopt the economic system of the winner of the growth race. What happened? Basically, Socialism collapsed, and Capitalism won by default. The losers (Russia, China, Eastern Europe) got back in the growth race by adopting State Capitalism, and China has become the growth champion. The present system of world growthism, in the broadly capitalist mode, is triumphant. But growthism itself has turned out to be a false god because growth in our finite and entropic world now increases ecological and social costs faster than production benefits, making us poorer, not richer (except for the top few percent). Recognition of this reversal is obscured by the fact that our national accounts (GDP), do not subtract the costs of growth, but effectively add them by counting the expenditures incurred to defend ourselves from the un-subtracted costs of growth. Even more egregiously, GDP counts the consumption of natural capital as income. Growthism is consuming the life support capacity of the ecosystem for the benefit of a small minority of the present generation, while shifting the real but uncounted costs on to the poor, future generations, and other species. (see www.greattransition.org/publication/economics-for-a-full-world ) Ecosocialists, ably represented by the distinguished scholar Michael Lowy, seem to recognize this disaster, so environmentalists and ecological economists are inclined to be glad of their help in opposing rampant growthist capitalism. We certainly need help. But how much help in developing a workable green economy are red ecosocialists likely to be? Maybe not much, for reasons suggested below. Marx himself was overwhelmingly a perceptive critic of capitalism, and hardly at all an architect of socialism, which remained for him a vague prophetic vision. Marxist socialist states have an impressive historical record of economic failure, political oppression, and abuse of human rights and religious freedom. The net flow of refugees was decidedly away from, not toward, socialist countries. How does Lowy deal with this well-documented and very negative historical experience? First by frankly recognizing it, and then by asking us to simply ignore the "*actually existing socialisms of the twentieth century*" and focus on Marxist *theory* instead. This reminds me of the growth economists who ask us to focus on the elegance of neoclassical optimization theory and downplay the massive external costs and monopoly concentration of wealth and power of actual corporate capitalism. Theory is always neater than reality---for both capitalism and socialism. While Scandinavian socialism is an example we can benefit from, Marxist socialist economies no longer exist (except for North Korea). Our given starting point for reform is rampant growthist capitalism. If socialism had won the disastrous growth Race, then we would be starting our reforms from socialist initial conditions, and Marxist theory would have been more relevant. But that did not happen, however much Marxists may regret the fact. If one believes that Marxist theory is nevertheless true, then it would be worth starting over on that basis. But it contains basic errors that would likely lead to a repeated failure. Marxists have been very slow to recognize the reality of limits to growth, in spite of Marx's now oft-quoted prescient paragraph about "metabolic rift"---a paragraph certainly worth building on. Furthermore, there are some basic reasons for Marxists' unwillingness to identify growth as the core problem. Marx dismissed any appeal to morality or sharing as "utopian socialism.” The "new socialist man" would emerge from his bourgeois greed only on the basis of overwhelming material abundance, emerging under historically determined scientific socialism, "guided" by the dictatorship of the proletariat. Overwhelming abundance requires growth to the point that scarcity is objectively overcome, and therefore the moral demands for sharing scarce goods, emphasized by the "utopian" socialists, become unnecessary in "scientific" socialism. Lowy has a section on growth, in which he opines that, "*The issue is not excessive consumption in the abstract, but the prevalent type of consumption*" dominated by fashion and advertising. I agree with his criticism of advertising, but the basic problem is the actual, not abstract, level of per capita resource consumption, mainly of the wealthy, not just the frivolous things they consume. And of course the number of consumers. There is no discussion of limiting resource consumption, much less limiting population growth, the latter a topic which Marxists, as well as the capitalist cheap-labor lobby, go far out of their way to avoid. With the exception of post-Maoist China, Marxist regimes have generally thought that more people are better than fewer, a view that environmentalists would actually agree with, as long as the people are not all alive at the same time! Marx's hatred for Malthus and his dismissal of overpopulation are well known, and continue to mute Marxist attention to limits to growth. Lowy, and Marxists in general, take a very dim view of markets and a very rosy view of central planning. There is plenty of need for both markets and planning, depending on the type of good in question. Goods are either physically rival or non-rival, and either legally excludable or non-excludable. My shirt is a rival good--if I am wearing it, you can't wear it at the same time; it is also excludable because I have the right to keep you from wearing it, or to allow you to. Goods that are both rival and excludable are market goods that can be, and usually are, allocated by markets. Goods that are non-rival and non-excludable are pure public goods, like a just legal and ethical code or the Pythagorean Theorem, for which there can be no market. Goods that are rival but non-excludable, like fish caught on the high seas or water pumped from an aquifer, are subject to the tragedy of the open-access commons and require collective action to avoid overexploitation. Goods that are non-rival but excludable, like patented knowledge or information, are inefficiently allocated and the revenue from their artificial price is unjustly distributed by markets. For the last three categories, markets work poorly or not at all, and consequently, collective planning is necessary. That should provide plenty of opportunity for ecosocialists' contributions! For market goods, a large category including the basics of food, clothing, and shelter, market allocation usually works better than planning, if governments can limit or regulate monopoly. Since three of the four categories require government planning, it is doubly important to avoid overloading government capacity for needed collective planning by unnecessarily imposing it on the large first category as well. However, Lowy, and Marxists generally, have an ideological antipathy to markets---to supply and demand, and prices, and especially to profit. They prefer central planning, or as Lowy calls it robust "*democratic ecological planning*." How did *economic* planning become *ecological* planning? Do ecosocialists really intend to centrally plan the ecosystem as well as the economy? Perhaps they mean economic planning in the light of ecological limits---but then we would need more discussion of limits. The historical failure of War Communism with its direct physical requisitioning of goods was corrected by Lenin's New Economic Policy, which reinstated considerable reliance on markets. That socialist lesson seems to be ignored. Likewise ignored are the theoretical criticisms of even socialist economists, such as Oskar Lange, who in his On the Economic Theory of Socialism demonstrates how markets can efficiently serve socialism as well as capitalism. Lowy dismisses criticism of central planning as "conservative fearmongering". Instead he tells us that "*the core of ecosocialism is the concept of democratic ecological planning, wherein the population itself, not “the market” or a Politburo, make the main decisions about the economy*." Imagine the consequences of market goods (food, clothing, and shelter plus a whole lot more) being "*freely distributed, according to the will of the citizens*." The democratic will of the citizens is to be expressed by voting. How much steel shall we produce? Citizens vote. How much of that steel will go to the production of, say, wood screws, for example? The citizens vote again. Of the wood screws how many will be round head, how many flat head countersunk, slot head, or Phillips head? How many cadmium-plated; how many chrome-plated? And some screws are made of brass or aluminum, not steel. And how many of each length and diameter, etc.? And who shall receive how many of each type? The citizens robustly and democratically vote again and again as conditions change, although most have no idea of the myriad special uses of different types of screw, and may not even know which end of a screwdriver to hold. Meanwhile those people who actually use screws and know their uses are not able to "vote" with their money in markets and thereby convey reliable information to producers about what mix of the nearly infinitely many types of screw is most needed, and would be most profitable to produce. Instead we have all citizens spending absurd amounts of their time "democratically" voting, mostly about things they don't understand, while those with the most information about actual use-values of screws are "disenfranchised" by the absence of markets. Yet Lowy claims that in a planned ecosocialist economy, "*use-value would be the only criteria for the production of goods and services*." Use-value as judged mostly by non-users---what could possibly go wrong? With so much effort wasted on attempting to plan the allocation of market goods there will be little capacity left to plan the use of true public goods, to avoid the tragedy of the commons, and the larcenous market enclosure of non-rival goods. Of course, the humble wood screw is only one of millions of market goods that would be grossly misallocated by "democratic ecological planning". If one thinks my example of the wood screw is too trivial, then ask the same questions about a more complex commodity of your choice. Lowy expects that, "*as the ecosocialist transition moves forward, more products and services critical for meeting fundamental human needs would be freely distributed, according to the will of the citizens*." Overwhelming material abundance and the "new socialist man" will apparently have arrived, along with the abolition of scarcity. But with little discussion of growth or its costs. Without markets (supply and demand, prices, and yes, profit), there could be no self-employment. Everyone would be a salaried employee of the state, giving the state monopsony power in the labor market. No one could identify a needed good or service and make a living by providing it. Happily, Lowy at least would allow small shops and artisan enterprises to escape the planner. Ecosocialism aspires to be egalitarian and ecologically sustainable. But nothing is said in this essay about proper limits to the range of inequality in the distribution of income and wealth. Should the richest citizen be four times as wealthy as the poorest, as Plato thought? Ten times? A thousand times? And what do ecosocialists think about macro limits to growth of resource throughput? Many of the ecosocialists' objections to market allocation would disappear if the underlying degree of inequality of wealth and income distribution were more formally and tightly limited, and if the aggregate scale of throughput of energy and materials were restricted to some level of ecological sustainability. Instead of correcting excessive throughput scale, and excessive distributional inequality, which of course are reflected in market prices and allocation, ecosocialists just attack market allocation itself, as if underlying scale and distribution problems could be solved by breaking the mirror that reflects them. What are ecosocialists' policies for directly limiting throughput scale and distributional inequality? Voting is indeed required at this point, but there must be some policy to vote on. And in the three categories where planning has long been recognized as necessary, what policies are recommended for providing and financing public goods, for avoiding overexploitation of the commons, and for protecting non-rival goods from illicit privatization? I realize that not everything could be considered in a brief essay. But I hope that these omitted policy questions, as well as ecosocialist laxity in recognizing both limits to growth and historical failures of socialism, will be explored in the ensuing discussion. Herman Daly ****************************************************************************************** Thursday, November 1, 2018 Ecosocialism: For a Red-Green Future (GTN Discussion) >From Paul Raskin <praskin(a)tellus.org> ----- Dear GTN, Is the Great Transition a post-capitalist project? Yes: its core values and aims—human solidarity, quality of life, ecological resilience—contradict the individualism, consumerism, and abuse of nature fostered by societies that grant primacy to the profit motive. But post-capitalism is mere negation. Can what-we-are-for be boiled down to a single “ism”? Not easily, since a systemic transition invites a pluralistic praxis that weaves a whole cloth from myriad threads. GTN’s November discussion considers the twining of two cardinal “isms”—socialism and environmentalism. In the past, the green and the red have tended to snub or excoriate one another. Now, however, Michael Löwy argues in “Why Ecosocialism: For a Red-Green Future,” environmentalists need to be socialists, and socialists need to be environmentalists. The essay sets the challenge in historic context, makes the case for a red-green synthesis, and sketches the contours of an ecosocialist future. Michael gives us much to chew on and build on. Yet, I’m left wondering: Is ecosocialism the best formulation in the current context? Or should we be stressing a larger synthesis that encircles not only red and green, but all the colors of our rainbow movement? And to build that movement, shouldn’t our vision accommodate plural solutions to post-capitalist societies? For example, my “report from the future” depicts a regionally-diverse global civilization that includes Michael’s ecosocialist vision, but not exclusively.* I hope you’ll read Michael’s essay at www.greattransition.org/publication/why-ecosocialism-red-green-future, and weigh in. Comments are welcome through Friday, NOVEMBER 30. Over to you, Paul GTI Director *See Journey to Earthland, pp. 71-108, www.greattransition.org/publication/journey-to-earthland. ----- Hit reply to post a comment on the GT Network Read all comments (or reply) at www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/208-why-ecosocialism-for-a-re… Note: Expect a delay between posting and receiving your comment Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org ------------------------------------------------------- Hit reply to post a comment on the GT Network Read all comments (or reply) at https://greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/208-why-ecosocialism-for-… Note: Expect a delay between posting and receiving your comment Need help? Email jcohn(a)tellus.org -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: How America Can Free Itself from Wall Street
by Michel Bauwens 03 Nov '18

03 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Ellen Brown <Ellen.Brown(a)publicbankinginstitute.org> Date: Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 11:53 PM Subject: How America Can Free Itself from Wall Street To: <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> Hi, here is my latest article, posted on Truthdig.com -- Trump's War on the Fed <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1…> Best wishes, Ellen http://EllenBrown.com <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1…> http://PublicBankingInstitute.org <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1…> P.S. to Los Angeles voters: Vote Yes on Charter Amendment B for a City-owned Bank! See Introductory Video here <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1…> by PublicBankLA <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1…> Unsubscribe <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1…> michel(a)p2pfoundation.net from this list. Update your profile <https://wordpress.us7.list-manage.com/profile?u=8829ce026276832f7fc66a1a9&i…> -- 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: [Networked-Labour] #Googlewalkout employee interviews | Vox
by Michel Bauwens 03 Nov '18

03 Nov '18

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Örsan Şenalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 12:06 AM Subject: [Networked-Labour] #Googlewalkout employee interviews | Vox To: Networked Labour <networked-labour_igopnet(a)lists.igopnet.cc> https://snuproject.wordpress.com/2018/11/02/googlewalkout-employee-intervie… Nearly 17,000 Google employees walked off the job yesterday. The Google walkout was about sexual harassment as well as a lack of transparency and accountability at the company, employees said. Google employees in Cambridge, Massachusetts, join a worldwide walkout in protest of company policies on sexual harassment.Lane Turner/Boston Globe via Getty Images Nearly 17,000 Google employees walked off the job yesterday as part of a massive, worldwide protest against the company’s mishandling of sexual harassment cases. The walkout, which was organized by seven Google employees, was a response to a New York Times report on the multimillion-dollar payouts offered to high-level employees who had been accused of sexual misconduct. Some protesters carried signs that read, “Happy to quit for $90m,” a reference to the exit package Google gave Andy Rubin, the creator of Android, who was forced to leave the company in 2014 after an employee accused him of forcing her to perform oral sex on him. “What do I do at Google? I work hard every day so the company can afford $90,000,000 payouts to execs who sexually harass my coworkers,” read another. It was also an opportunity for Google employees — who have repeatedly clashed with senior management on a number of topics, from censorship in China to the company’s role in government projects — to put forth a vision for a better, more equitable company. “A company is nothing without its workers,” the organizers wrote in a piece for the Cut. “From the moment we start at Google, we’re told that we aren’t just employees; we’re owners. Every person who walked out today is an owner, and the owners say: Time’s up.” Some of the employees who chose to speak with me about why they protested asked to be referred to by a pseudonym and to not specify which campus they work at, but felt that it was important to come forward. Two of the three people who agreed to speak with me are men, as are nearly 70 percent of all Google employees, according to the company’s annual diversity report. All of them emphasized that despite enjoying their jobs, they felt responsible for creating an environment where anyone could thrive, regardless of gender, race, or ethnicity, and where no one was afraid to report harassment or assault. They also referred to past Google controversies, like the sexual harassment reported by former Google software engineer Kelly Ellis, who quit the company in 2014 because of its “sexist culture”; and the fact that internal company communications, including a video from an all-hands meeting, were leaked to the right-wing website Breitbart. Despite the massive size of the protests and the fact that Google sanctioned the walkout, support for it wasn’t universal. One employee told me that there were “people in the company who are against the walkout” and disagree with the organizers’ demands. (It’s worth noting that James Damore, the author of an “anti-diversity” manifesto who was fired in 2017, had plenty of ideological allies at the company.) Those who did participate in the walkout, though, view it as a necessary step in the ongoing fight toward equity and transparency at one of the world’s biggest companies. Their responses have been condensed and edited for clarity. Ashley*, a major US campus that isn’t Mountain View I’ve worked here for 11 years. I’m now a manager with around two people in my group. I have never experienced direct gender-based discrimination at Google, which I count myself lucky for. I have heard many other people’s stories, however — enough to make me sure that there’s an overall problem. I decided to participate because I wanted the execs to get the message that this is something a lot of people care about. Whether I participated was going to be visible to the people in my office, because there are literally five women at my site at this level. “I’ve been seeing more and more of a rift between the top-level execs and the rest of the company” We need to end forced arbitration in case of harassment and discrimination. I would also like a real commitment to end pay and opportunity inequity. I would be okay with starting with pay, which is easier. Transparent data on gender, race, and ethnicity compensation across all levels — accessible to all Google employees — would be really nice. This is something the US Department of Labor asked Google for, and [Google claims] it’s too expensive to provide while also claiming there is no gap. That doesn’t make sense to me or a lot of other people. I’ve been seeing more and more of a rift between the top-level execs and the rest of the company, and I’ve seen it growing slowly over time. It seems like some people are actively trying to make it worse. We have a real problem with [people] leaking internal communications, especially to right-wing sites, in a way that’s extremely divisive [and] corrosive to the idea of trust and open communication within the company, which is something that we really used to rely on. Google used to have this weekly meeting where the execs would take all kinds of hard questions from the employees, and they would field them pretty honestly and transparently. That was great. Without that kind of channel, it’s been pretty tough. I’ve been working in the tech industry for about 20 years, and this is the most concerted effort I’ve seen by engineers in the tech sector [to address these issues]. Today was really astonishing. Frankly, there were more men than women walking out — that’s the demographics [at Google]. But it’s great to have allies. I didn’t say anything either way to my team, because I didn’t want there to be social pressure to do it or not do it. But at 11:08, my entire team stood up simultaneously around me and I got shivers. I got up too, and we all walked out together. Jacob*, a West Coast campus I participated to show solidarity and support for my co-workers. I’m a guy; it’s so much easier to shoot the shit with other guys, and stuff like that helps [professionally]. But I don’t think that’s what this walkout is about. This walkout dealt with things that are a lot more severe. I had heard stories regarding Kelly Ellis. That was the first Google [sexual harassment] story that broke out a few years ago. What’s most important is getting rid of [forced] arbitration. Uber got rid of it after their big scandal, and I think Google needs to follow suit. We need accountability, transparency, and making sure it’s easier for people to report harassment. I’ve never reported harassment, but from what I’ve heard from my friends, it is not fun. It’s scary as hell. [The person you’re reporting] might not be your boss but your boss’s boss. They have all the power over your career. If they do a shitty thing, we should be empowering employees to say, “Hey, stop that.” That’s what I think the demands are trying to cover. Alex, Mountain View campus I’ve heard too many stories from friends, some co-workers, about being sexually harassed or assaulted at Google, but also in other parts of the tech industry or more generally. I work with several women engineers, and I really think it’s important for them to feel safe and to actually be safe at work and in general. I don’t want these people to be in a position where they have to be constantly worrying about that sort of thing. “I have worked with an overwhelming majority of men. That, in and of itself, leads me to think that the fact that I am male-identified and male-presenting makes things easier for me.” I have worked with an overwhelming majority of men. That, in and of itself, leads me to think that the fact that I am male-identified and male-presenting makes things easier for me. It’s been mostly subtle things, like [women] being interrupted more often [or] ending up in all note-taking responsibilities for meetings. Sometimes managers and team members are good at trying to fix [that], but those more subtle things are not always very obvious. It’s the nature of privilege that as a man, some of these things I just don’t see and I’m just used to, unfortunately. We need more employee representation and more ability for employees to [raise concerns with] people who are actually on their side. I think there’s not much trust in human resources to do the right thing for employees. There’s a lot of trust that they’re going to do the right thing for the company, which is sometimes the same thing, but sometimes it’s not. I also think there’s a dearth of transparency about compensation. Several of us have asked, in the past, for the company to release salary data, so we could look at it ourselves and say, “Well, it looks like this is biased toward a particular demographic.” Management has been reluctant to do that, claiming it would put them at a competitive disadvantage, which I frankly don’t buy. Transparency and letting employees have a seat at the table are two things that would be most impactful in letting us address these issues, not just in terms of gender but also race. I like my job, but everybody has concerns. If you participated in the Google walkout and want to talk about your experience at the company, you can contact me by email here. *Names have been changed. original post: https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/2/18056390/google-walkout-employee-in… _______________________________________________ Networked-labour_igopnet mailing list Networked-labour_igopnet(a)lists.igopnet.cc http://grups.pangea.org/mailman/listinfo/networked-labour_igopnet -- 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