https://www.academia.edu/14169439/Commons_Movements_and_Progressive_Governme... Not sure if it was bob or peter asking me for a comment on the critique of the partner state proposal I can't copy paste the one paragraph here, but do a 'find' for Bauwens and the single paragraph will pop up I can't imagine he has thoroughly read about our concept, 1) he believes it is platonian: can't be further from the truth since the partner state is rooted in already really existing practice, i.e. those of the FLOSS Foundations 2) he calls rojava and chiapas non-state institutions, but this is for me problematic, both of them have armies that protect the carocoles (chiapas) and comunes (rojava); since the state has also been defined as a body of armed men existing separately from society, I believe myself these are new state forms, i.e. they exist separately from any contract between sovereign individuals or communities, and cover a whole territory; in other words, to the degree they permit the autonomous existence of the councils, they are actually the best possible example of a partner state; and if you add that at least rojava is centered our cooperative enterprise, they are very close to the model proposal by Vasilis and myself. 3) he believes states won't do anything responsible for their own undoing. In essence, this is correct, which is why the partner state is about radical transformation of the existing state form. Nevertheless, social democrats were historically responsible for a deep transformation of the western state, and neoliberalism actually an example of the state dismantling itself to a large degree. What I think is realistic today are prefigurative examples of partner state approaches , certainly at the local level, and given a change in the political balance of power, a transformation of the state form. Given the historical experience, which has shown multiple examples of this, to believe this is impossible flies in the face of historical reality. To achieve a partner state in the context of the current market state, seems to me illusory however, Michel social praxis apart from