dear Alex, I don't think the two visions are mutually incompatible, i.e. one that sees competition within the labor movement between different visions, and one that sees the state centric vision partially inspired by several dozens of years of cooperative, mutualist and syndicalist development, which sat together co-governing the labor parties and out of which various compromises resulted in belgium for example, state welfare incorporated a huge level of governance by the original mutualities, existing to this day, and unions are still funded by the state for their social services, Michel On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:40 PM, Alex Foti <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Pat,
thanks for your observations on mutualism and the ecological and social rights to the city. i'm a big gdh cole fan, btw. the weekend has overwhelmed me with obligations. i ll try to come back to in more detail tomorrow with more time. however the only thing i m doubtful the fact that mutualism is replaced by the welfare state which was a way of neutralizing and institutionalizing the commonist and separatist tendencies of the working class. at least since 1919 it seems to me social democracy opted for state intervention rather than self-reliant mutualism (or worse, syndicalism).
best ciaos!
lx
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 7:27 PM, pat commonfutures < [email protected]> wrote:
Hi Michel and Alex
My two cents......
Enjoyed reading your review Michel and hearing loud and clear the comments from Alex. Glad to see you recognise strategically the role for economic democracy organisations to come together to develop commonwealth solutions. Challenge is to animate and mobilise co-ops, trade unions, mutual aid organisations and commons movements and other actors to cross connect.
Capital needs to be on tap not on top. Labour needs to hire capital. Thus economic democracy is the operative mantra. But how.....?
I think the analysis of Massimo De Angelis in Omnia sunt communia that focuses on commons solutions for provisioning to address precarious housing, precarious work, precarious social services, etc. is the way to increasingly Walk the Talk.
But so much of the infrastructure needs aligning to develop a generative system to build the new to replace the toxic old. In the period from 1910 to 1948 it was the working class self-organisations and partnerships with municipalities that co-developed a turn key system for affordable housing, mutual insurance services for access to health care, patient finance instruments, etc. As you highlight Michel, without this proving of the possible, the Post 1945 welfare states would not have been practical. History has airbrushed out of memory all the working class achievements leading up to social democracy's action to rebuild war torn Europe with guidance from Keynes. Keynes himself took credit for what commoners had innovated and brought into being over many decades.
But we are back to the same situation again.
To pursue pluralist commonwealth post capitalist futures, the facts are similar at least as a pattern to 1945...
Many good solutions that emerged out of commoner struggles since the 1970s now exist as viable and proven models. Examples include Community Land Trusts for housing and workspace, social co-operatives for care services, community renewable energy, freelancer co-ops, etc but we lack the general assembly of protagonists to plan and co-ordinate them all and bring them together into a viable system. Neoliberalism continues to repress and marginalise these Cinderella Liberties that if nurtured and united could tackle the multiplying wants that make no sense among economies of plenty perversely allocated.
The Garden City movement pioneers developed socialist planning guidance in 1906 which played a key role to unite the fragments. We need to revive democratic planning again and make this participative to set in train evolutionary urban and rural reconstruction and to help animate, activate and co-ordinate economic democracy in action. Garden cities were on the right road as they sought to unite urban and rural life in ecological resilient ways.
The guild socialist ideas of GDH Cole in the early 1920s are worth revisiting. As Danny Dorling shows in his book on the 1%, between 1918 and1978 social and economic inequality reduced across developing countries and indeed as forms of socialism advanced stage by stage.
Today socialism needs to be planned and re-implemented with deeper democracy methods and on a co-operative and ecological economics foundations to produce commonwealth via a commons mode of production. I look forward to reading your book Alex.
Thanks to you both for the joint inspiration.
Pat
On 26 January 2018 at 12:38 Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
hi alex,
very happy to engage, and I fully understand the legitimacy of your strategic choices, though your vision of a successful new new deal is also a sign of optimism in itself .... I agree we have to fight for it
this is a very good overiview of the other polarity, I think at the p2p foundation, we are somewhere in between, even as we are very liberally cited in this overview of commons-based relocalization: https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Networked_Cities_as_Resilient _Platforms_for_Post-Capitalist_Transition#Excerpt
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Alex Foti <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Michel, Dear Friends,
a trillion thanks for this thoughtful and appreciative review. i look forward to co-developing a veritable post-capitalist strategy by embodying the commons-based approach and i find your criticism of an excessive capitalist realism justified (lost a few nights' sleep about it, but i am very fearful of cryptofascist reaction, and think we can force liberal capitalism into a social compromise - which you're right would make funding and reclaiming the commons a central feature of society - and also i guess i wanted to avoid excessive utopianism given that current historical reality is so dystopian). again thanks for taking the time to read and engage with the book's arguments.
best milanese ciaos,
lx
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
see also link here at https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net /General_Theory_of_the_Precariat#Evaluation
"This book is essential reading for all commoners that want to think through the right strategy for social change. It squarely places itself from the point of few of the new social groups (or class in formation, as Foti would have it) that have grown under the conditions of neoliberalism and its decline, or in other words under the emergence of cognitive capitalism or 'informationalism'. This key group are the various constituent parts of the precariat, all the people who can no longer work with dependable classic labor contracts and the steady income and protection deriving from it.
This book should be read through its end, i.e. chapter five, because its first four chapters on the precariat are only set in a more complex geopolitical context in that last chapter. To be honest, I was quite reactive at times during the reading of the first four chapters, because two very important structural elements were missing in his analysis. First is the commons itself, the other side of the antagonistic struggles of the precariat; and second is the ecological crisis, the very material conditions under which this struggle must occur today. Foti indeed calls for economic and monetary growth, and sounds like an unabashed neo-Keynesian but only in the last chapter stresses that this growth should be thermodynamically sound (i.e. he calls for monetary growth, but not growth in material services). Foti also almost completely ignores the role of the commons and 'commonalism' in the first four chapters, only acknowledging in a few parts of chapter 5, that it is a vital constituent part of the precarious condition. If you don't read chapter 5, you could be mistaken for seeing Foti's analysis as an exercise in re-imagining the class dynamics and compromises of the New Deal and post-WWII european welfare states, and has simply replaced working class with precariat, working class parties with social populism, and the New Deal with a social compact for green capitalism.
So, the fact that this is a remarkably thought out book about contemporary strategy for social change, should be tempered by a few paradoxes that the author has not completely resolved.
Indeed at the heart of the book lies also an enduring paradox: Foti calls for the most radical forms of conflict, and identifies with the more radical cultural minorities, acknowledging their anticapitalist and anarchist ethos, yet calls for mere reformism as a focus and outcome. This is therefore not a book about transforming our societies to post-capitalist logics, this is a book about a new reformism. This is a book against neoliberalism, not against capitalism. At times, it is plain 'capitalist realism', as Foti explicitly acknowledges he sees no dynamic value creation outside of capitalism. For Foti, it is clear, if sufficient conflict and precariat self-organisation can occur, then a new regulation of capitalism can occur. He justifies this by a detailed analysis of the different regulatory modes of capitalism (smith-ism, fordism, jobs-ism) and how they relate to the kondratieff economic cycles, drawing on the insights of Carlota Perez and others. Foti distinguishes crises of demand, where there is too much accumulation of capital, and not enough distribution. These crises he says, are essentially reformist crises, as people mobilize to restore balance in the redistribution, but not against the system per se. The crisis of the 30's and the crisis after 2008, are such crises, he in my view convincingly shows. Other crises are caused by a failing supply, due to over-regulation of capital and falling profit rates, such as the crisis of the 70s, and these crises, which are inflationary, are revolutionary. This distinction between crises of accumulation and crises of regulation, is in my opinion very insightful, and true. This recognition may of course be troubling, but if true, we have to take serious stock of it. We are simply not in revolutionary times, right now, but rather in a struggle between national populism and social populism. From this analysis, Foti then argues that the first priority is for the precariat to re-regulate for a distribution of wealth, much like the old working class achieved after WWII.
But even if we acknowledge this conjuncture, I would argue that Foti insufficiently balances his outlook between reforming capitalism and constructing post-capitalism, beween antagonistic conflict and positive construction of the new. He argues that without income, there can be no such construction. This is very likely true, so we need to rebalance redistribution, in a way that income growth can lead to immaterial growth that is compatible with the ecological limits of our planet, and use these surpluses to transform societal structures. Foti calls for social (or 'eco' populist movements and coalitions as the political means to that end, pointing to Podemos and En Comu, and perhaps Sanders and Corbyn, as such forces, supported by to be created Precariat Syndicates. He also puts forward the thesis that the enemy is national populism, an alliance between retrograde fossil fuel capitalism and the salariat, with on the other side a possible alliance of green capitalism (a real effort not a marketing ploy) with the precariat, with the former fighting for top-down coalition and the second for bottom-up regulation. This division of the working class is in my view way too stark, and perhaps even defeatist. I would very strongly argue to seek alliances and develop policies that can give hope to the salariat. The thrust of our work for the Commons Transition aims at precisely that. (elsewhere in the book, Foti does call for an alliance with progressive middle classes, but if these are not the workers with jobs, where are these then ?)
Now Foti correctly critiques in my view, people like Mason and Rifkin for failing to problematize the post-capitalist transition, they make it seem like an inexorable process if not affirming that we are already post-capitalist, as some others do, but in my view then in his turn he fails to pay proper attention to it. What if the re-regulation of capitalism doesn't work for example ? Then at some point, say in about 30 years, as Kondratieff cycles would indicate, we would still face a crisis of over-regulation, and a more revolutionary moment. For Foti, we have to take it on faith that green capitalism will be a successful new regulatory mode of capitalism. What if it turns out to be a unworkable compromise and that more drastic action is needed. But Foti has no faith in alternatives to capitalism, which means that the only alternatives would then be eco-fascism as a new feudalism with only consumption for the rich, lifeboat eco-hacking, a situation akin to that of medieval communes, or dictatorial eco-maoism, say Cuba on a global scale.
Contra this 'capitalist realism', our contention at the P2P Foundation is that post-capitalism is both necessary and possible, even if we recognize that today is a possible reformist moment in that evolution/transformation. In that context, the construction of seed forms, the recognition of other forms of value creation (which can be monetized!), of other forms of self-organization is absolutely a vital side of the coin in the dialectic of construction and conflict. Foti seems to forget that the traditional working class did not simply 'fight', but constructed cooperatives (both consumer coosp and producer coops), unions, parties, mutualities and many fraternal/sororal organizations. The very generalization of the welfare system was an extension by means of the state, of the solidarity mechanism of the working class, which had taken decades to develop. Also vitally, the identity itself of the working class was not just as a part of capitalism, but as a movement for another type of society, whether that was expressed through socialism, social-democracy, anarchism, and other variants. When that hope was lost terminally, that was also the end of the strength and identify of working class movements. There can be no offensive social strategy without a strong social imaginary, and mere reformist designs won’t do. So commonalism is not just something that we do when we come home from work, or tired from our conflictual organizing against an enemy from whom we want mere redistribution. On the contrary, it is vital part of the class formation and identity, this is why we stress our identity not just as precariat, which is a negative formulation that characterizes us as the weaker victims of the capitalist class, but as commoners, the multitude of co-constructors of viable futures that correspond to contemporary emancipatory desires. We cannot just trust green capitalism, we vitally need to build thermodynamically sound and mutualized provisioning systems as commons even if we have to compromise with capitalism. Post-capitalism should not be essentialized as something occuring 'after the revolution', but as an ongoing process, dynamically inter-linked with political self-organizing and conflict. Foti in this book, is only really good at conflict. Even if we look at conflict, I would argue that the strength of the reformist compromise after WWII was very much linked to the fear of the however flawed alternative that existed, and that the forms of compromise were the result of decades of invention of new forms.
If we take that view, then I believe the contradiction in Foti's book can be resolved. Indeed in that case we do not have to ask the radical precariat to give up it's values for a reformist compromise, but to productively combine radically transformative post-capitalist practice.
There is another issue with Foti's book. He very much stresses the superdiversity of the precariat, and the key role of gender and race/migration unity in their struggles. He also mentions en passant the need for a potential eurasian alignment between Europe and China , now that the Atlantic unity has been broken by Trump. But , at the same time, this is really a very eurocentric book, calling for a new compromise in Europe and 'advanced western states'. Obviously, since in the Global South it is the salariat and proletariat which is growing, there is a theoretical difficulty here. But what if a thermo-dynamically sound economy would require a cosmo-localization of our global economy, as we contend at the P2P Foundation, combining global sharing of knowledge with substantial relocalization of physical production (as even big bank reports now recognize) ? Only if we recognize this, can we actually have a new global view of solidarity, as both elements benefit workers, salaried and precarious, in the whole world.
So, in conclusion, I find Foti's book to be an excellent first half of a book, which would have been much better and sound, if it had more extensively struggled with the commons equation of the precariat. The commons is not something we do 'afterwards' , after a successful New Green Deal, it is is something that is as ongoing and vital. Theoretically, in a few paragraphs at the end of the book, Foti seems to recognize it, but it is not integrated in his strategic vision, or only marginally.
Readers who miss this aspect, could look at the ten years of research and analysis we have conducted on that other half of the equation, at the P2P Foundation. We may have the other weakness though, and in fact we purposely have focused not on the conflict part, which is the natural inclination of the left and needs no help, but in pointing out how any self-organization, and construction of the commons, which inevitable comes with conflict, is just an essential part of the programmatic alternatives of the precariat. Not just as proposals of electoral parties and syndicates, but as expressions of actual practice. Our orientation is to try to achieve a greater understanding by emancipatory forces, of both the salariat, the precariat, and progressive entrepreneurial groups, of the importance of integrating the commons as a programmatic element in their struggles, and their proposals. We will probably stick to this bias towards the constructive side of the equation, tempered by a full awareness that this is by itself insuffient, and requires the kind of understanding of struggle, and its attendant strategies, as provided by Foti.
In conclusion, Foti's enduring quality is to have worked out systematically, what the conflict part of the equation entails, and that is a very important achievement. Bearing in mind what we think is missing in this book, there is much to be learned, and I believe the different perspectives and different weaknesses in the approaches of people like Foti and the P2P Foundation (and other) commons-centric approaches, there is room for a lot of convergence and mutual enrichment."
-- 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/