this is probably true martin, that there is continuation with alt.global, yet, there are also differences I think, it's a substantial remix, the way I see it (and ht to jose ramos for point to ariel salleh's work), there are 3 working classes nowadays, the meta-industrial class of the south (salleh) the traditional industrial working class (now also mostly in the emerging south) the knowledge workers, and I think ows reflects them ... we need social movements of all three, but because of the strategic place of knowledge workers in the current mode of production, they are at a crucial nexus of power and influence; they are also the probable vehicles, I think, the speed up the adoption of peer production by the meta-industrials, allowing them leapfrogging capabilities ... I'm not so clear about what it all means for the traditional working classes, perhaps Orsan has a view? On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 2:19 AM, mp <[email protected]> wrote:
when put like this, one really and clearly sees the continuum with alter-globalisation events, from counter-summit camps through No Border camps, and even before that: the free party scene, the rave scene, Reclaim the Streets etc. (all the way back into the age of camping hundreds of years ago): claiming a space, reorganising it and building a new world.
the events and organisational approaches of OWS are very similar and obviously come in extension of those experiences of globalisation protests - and in many cases, there are old familiar faces at play.
the only thing that has changed, as far as i can tell, is that the problems revealed and analysed previously have now found resonance with more people in the rich part of the world, because suddenly suffering has come home to roost (when it was predominantly children of colour in exotic countries, people were happy to buy a Save the Children badge to patch their conscience).
m
On 23/11/11 18:17, Michel Bauwens wrote:
in response to another letter:
I think ows produces a political commons and does that pretty much in a standard peer production way,
they have a commons, zuccoti park,
they have the general assembly and different substructures, but which do not command and control the movement,
for example, the finance working group, which looks for money,
they have sophisticated provisioning systems
the last three are equivalent to the for-benefit associations in open source,
finally, they have an enterpreneurial coalition, such as the ows street vendor association,
I have documented this through http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:OccupyWallStreet, in detail,
so,
ows produces 'politics', and it has governance,
it has no clear property, but the commons aspect, i.e. it can be used and remixed, would cover that
this is quite illuminating, http://p2pfoundation.net/Occupy_Wall_Street_API
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- NOT sent from a flippin' "smart"phone - 'cause I like birds...
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- 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