In relation to this discussion, just wanted to identify the debate on Modular production networks in china and us as the new mode of production:
http://icc.oxfordjournals.org/content/11/3/451.short?rss=1&ssource=mfc,
and this http://netglobalcapitalism.files.wodpress.com/2013/12/abstract-of-chen-shuoyings-book.pdf)

Here is Kees' recent peace on China and class struggles: 
https://www.academia.edu/7864649/Class_Struggles_and_Development_in_Contemporary_China._On_the_Threshold_of_a_New_World_Order

And Another line of empirical research and theoretical argumentation is also very relevant imho:
http://netglobalcapitalism.wordpress.com/articles/information-technology-and-the-global-ruling-class/
For example to get a better grasp on the positions of various transnational and national ruling class fractions
With respect to, for instance, the four transition scenarios you have been writing about Michel. This would probably also involve in the state forms analysis, revolution-reform, alliances, and partnerships alliances so on.

Best, orsan





On 03 Aug 2014, at 10:02, Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift@gmail.com> wrote:

On 08/02/2014 01:29 PM, Michel Bauwens wrote:
I have one question, you say Minqi Li says there is no longer a reserve
periphery .. but what about Africa ? (and the rise of latin america in
the naugthies ?)
http://p2pfoundation.net/Rise_of_China_and_the_Demise_of_the_Capitalist_World-Economy

Minqi Li's claim is that too many formerly peripheral countries -- especially the giants, India and China -- have moved into the position of what the world systems theorists call "semi-peripheral" countries, supplying mid-range or partially elaborated products to the central, high-technology producers. The result is a declining pool of people to exploit, both in terms of labor and resources, and in terms of defenseless markets that must necessarily buy products from the center. When large percentages of the world population have access to at least mid-level producer technology, capital can no longer accumulate at the former centers, whose power declines. The current state of affairs in Western Europe and the US/Canada seems to bear this thesis out.

In such a perspective, Michel, your ideas and those of everyone working on p2p and commons approaches become far more pertinent. When the centers of capital accumulation can off the fruits of very high technology to all of those, across the world, who rise into the middle classes, then there is scant likelihood of winning them over to a cooperative approach -- the powers of capitalist seduction are just too strong. Yet in a condition of long-term stagnation, coupled with environmental threats stemming directly and visibly from capital accumulation, alternative proposals may become much more attractive across a flattening global hierarchy.

Of course I agree with Orsan that everything possible must always be tried right now. But it is encouraging to realize that over the middle term, there are some dynamics going our way. It is tough to sustain the fascist-type solution for very long. Too many people have too much agency, even under severe conditions. If it is true that capitalism can no longer produce employment of even the precarious kind that prevailed under the last cycle, then there is really room for something new under the sun, that's what I see as an historic chance.

warmly, Brian
_______________________________________________
NetworkedLabour mailing list
NetworkedLabour@lists.contrast.org
http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour