The 'commons' is now seen as more than a piece of land which was used as shared grazing. The air we breathe is, or should be regarded as a 'commons', which needs to be protected for this and future generations, as is a long list such as water, seeds, oceans, the internet, etc. Many elements which have become commodified, ie in private hands, and used for profit, should be available freely. Land too should come into this category. For many indigenous peoples the idea of land belonging to someone is ludicrous. However that does not mean that they can be used to the point of extinction as is happening now with private ownership. They do often require management, as in air pollution, so the recognition of status as a commons implies stewardship, international agreements to protect for this and future generations. Such agreements may be difficult, but they are essential for a sustainable society. On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi, I happen to have read the original article The Tragedy of the Commons by Garrett Hardin (Science, 13 december 1968) the other night (you'll find it on the net) and it argues that the commons is only a good idea as long as the community is small and everybody knows each other, so ca. 150 people (the Dunbar number). Once it gets bigger, problems arise which just can't be solved.

Best regards, Edu Braat, founder of Workpatch, member of Share.nl, the Dutch P2P foundation

Quoting Michel Bauwens <[email protected]>:

...

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jon Wheatley <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:35 PM Subject: New From Pluto Press - Nature for Sale: The Commons versus Commodities To: Jon Wheatley <[email protected]>

*

**

P R E S S R E L E A S E

**

-- Traces the erosion of the commons from the Industrial Revolution to today?s neo-liberalism, arguing that a new commons is needed today. --

*

* *

*Nature for Sale: The Commons versus Commodities*

* *

*Giovanna Ricoveri*

*Foreword by** Vandana Shiva*

**

*Out Now*

PB / £14.99 / 9780745333700 / 215mm x 135mm / June 13

*This book fills a gap, as it allows to understand the foundations for waging a survival struggle against an encroaching climate. It will help readers to penetrate the systematic nature of the war against Nature and it can be a very useful tool in strengthening the movements to stop the assault.*

*Saul Landau, Vice Chair of the Institute for Policy Studies, Berkeley*

**

*An historical-philosophical inquiry into an alternative route to the current devastating economic and social order. Written by one of the leading intellectuals of the Italian left, among the first in Europe to deal with political ecology issues.*

*Grazia Francescato, leading environmentalist and previous leader of the Italian Green Party*

**

Nature for Sale uncovers the rich heritage of common ownership which existed before the dominance of capitalist property relations. Giovanna Ricoveri argues that the subsistence commons of the past can be reinvented today to provide an alternative to the current destructive economic order.

Ricoveri outlines the distinct features of common ownership as it has existed in history: cooperation, sustainable use of natural resources and decision-making through direct democracy. In doing so, she shows how it is possible to provide goods and services which are not commodities exchanged on the capitalistic market, something still demonstrated today in village communities across the global South.

Tracing the erosion of the commons from the European enclosures at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution to the new enclosures of modern capitalism, the book concludes by arguing that a new commons is needed today. It will be essential reading for activists as well as students and academics in history, politics, economics and development studies.

*Giovanna Ricoveri is a writer and activist. She is the author of a book on the commons in Italian, Beni comuni vs Merci (2010) and editor of Beni comuni tra tradizione e futuro (2005). She is the founding editor of Capitalismo Natura Socialismo, which is part of the international network Capitalism Nature Socialism.*

* *

**

*For further information, to request a review copy or to speak to the author please contact Jon Wheatley at [email protected] or on 0208 374 6424* * *

* *

-- 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/

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Hi Edu, I gave the example of air to show that considering scale in looking after a given element really does not make sense. We have to find a way to protect what is essential for the benefit of all. If that involves some private property there would be no harm as long as the element was cared for in the interests of humanity as a whole, - what you refer to as 'lmanaging their property quite well'. I presume you don't mean just in their own interests to the exclusion of the interests of humanity as a whole. I believe that is the level which we have to consider. As long as that is priority I would agree with you that public or private is less relevant. Your point about survival being the primary motive force of evolution is also debatable. See eg Jeremy Rifkin 'The Empathic Civilisation, and Lynne McTaggart 'The Bond'. It is less a question of imposing a new moral regime, as allowing what is inherent to emerge. Anna On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:26 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Anna,

There is a saying that we won't have peace untill the last king is strangled with the innards of the last priest. If you update this to the last capitalist strangled with the innards of the last bureaucrat, we still will not be safe, I'm afraid.

Although I agree that lots of problems come from private ownership, there have always been many private owners who managed their properties quite well, just as there have been many stewards who didn't take care too well of what was trusted to them. I think the point Hardin made was that it's foremost a matter of scale. And there is a lot of evidence (from Jared Diamond and others) that so called indigenous tribes didn't care about their surroundings (and neighbours) at all.

I do believe we are making some progress but it's a long haul as humans did not evolve as moral animals but as very adaptable survivors and opportunists. Perhaps we have to wait for the Singularity ;+)

Best Regards, Edu

Quoting Anna Harris <[email protected]>:

...

The 'commons' is now seen as more than a piece of land which was used as shared grazing. The air we breathe is, or should be regarded as a 'commons', which needs to be protected for this and future generations, as is a long list such as water, seeds, oceans, the internet, etc. Many elements which have become commodified, ie in private hands, and used for profit, should be available freely. Land too should come into this category. For many indigenous peoples the idea of land belonging to someone is ludicrous.

However that does not mean that they can be used to the point of extinction as is happening now with private ownership. They do often require management, as in air pollution, so the recognition of status as a commons implies stewardship, international agreements to protect for this and future generations. Such agreements may be difficult, but they are essential for a sustainable society.

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi, I happen to have read the original article The Tragedy of the Commons by Garrett Hardin (Science, 13 december 1968) the other night (you'll find it on the net) and it argues that the commons is only a good idea as long as the community is small and everybody knows each other, so ca. 150 people (the Dunbar number). Once it gets bigger, problems arise which just can't be solved.

Best regards, Edu Braat, founder of Workpatch, member of Share.nl, the Dutch P2P foundation

Quoting Michel Bauwens <[email protected]>:

...

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jon Wheatley <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 5:35 PM Subject: New From Pluto Press - Nature for Sale: The Commons versus Commodities To: Jon Wheatley <[email protected]>

*

**

P R E S S R E L E A S E

**

-- Traces the erosion of the commons from the Industrial Revolution to today?s neo-liberalism, arguing that a new commons is needed today. --

*

* *

*Nature for Sale: The Commons versus Commodities*

* *

*Giovanna Ricoveri*

*Foreword by** Vandana Shiva*

**

*Out Now*

PB / £14.99 / 9780745333700 / 215mm x 135mm / June 13

*This book fills a gap, as it allows to understand the foundations for waging a survival struggle against an encroaching climate. It will help readers to penetrate the systematic nature of the war against Nature and it can be a very useful tool in strengthening the movements to stop the assault.*

*Saul Landau, Vice Chair of the Institute for Policy Studies, Berkeley*

**

*An historical-philosophical inquiry into an alternative route to the current devastating economic and social order. Written by one of the leading intellectuals of the Italian left, among the first in Europe to deal with political ecology issues.*

*Grazia Francescato, leading environmentalist and previous leader of the Italian Green Party*

**

Nature for Sale uncovers the rich heritage of common ownership which existed before the dominance of capitalist property relations. Giovanna Ricoveri argues that the subsistence commons of the past can be reinvented today to provide an alternative to the current destructive economic order.

Ricoveri outlines the distinct features of common ownership as it has existed in history: cooperation, sustainable use of natural resources and decision-making through direct democracy. In doing so, she shows how it is possible to provide goods and services which are not commodities exchanged on the capitalistic market, something still demonstrated today in village communities across the global South.

Tracing the erosion of the commons from the European enclosures at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution to the new enclosures of modern capitalism, the book concludes by arguing that a new commons is needed today. It will be essential reading for activists as well as students and academics in history, politics, economics and development studies.

*Giovanna Ricoveri is a writer and activist. She is the author of a book on the commons in Italian, Beni comuni vs Merci (2010) and editor of Beni comuni tra tradizione e futuro (2005). She is the founding editor of Capitalismo Natura Socialismo, which is part of the international network Capitalism Nature Socialism.*

* *

**

*For further information, to request a review copy or to speak to the author please contact Jon Wheatley at [email protected] or on 0208 374 6424* * *

* *

-- 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/

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

And caring about something like air pollution is simply not in the reach of most people, I think.

This reminds me of how people make choices in their own lives that they eventually regret because they cannot or do not see the consequences. For example, none of us eat candy all day long because we have learned it is bad for our health. If we can get people to see the long-term results of their actions they may begin to do the right thing for *selfish* reasons. But I think the time-delay between our actions and the reactions of nature reduces our care makes us believe what we do doesn't matter.

I agree. Edu Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone Op 19 jul 2013 om 19:24 heeft Patrick Anderson <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:\

I think the tragedy of the commons is also partly caused by a feeling of helplessness combined with the (partially true) belief that things are already so bad and the amount we each add, individually, is so small, that it hardly matters whether each of us adds to the problem or not and so we choose the short-term benefits over the long-term benefits because it seems (it feels as though) no matter what we do, the end result will be the same.

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Yes, Edu, even as we wake up to see how we were shaped by the system we also realise how we are trapped in it, and recreate it ourselves. But that knowledge also gives us power. Personally for me there has to be a short term payback as well as thinking of the benefit in the long term. If it was just down to imagining what it would be like *if* billions of us did the same that would not motivate me. What does it for me is connecting with the authentic voice within me, which is to do with having the courage to trust myself no matter what. On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Örsan <[email protected]> wrote:

I think this is exactly the point that brings p2p and commons together: imagining billions of us would do a little or as much as we could to produce and/or protect the commons, the results would be giant like wikipedia or similar experiences. can be good to think of various levels and translevel implications in terms of solving porblems of governance and contuniation.

On 19 jul. 2013, at 19:24, Patrick Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:

...

I think the tragedy of the commons is also partly caused by a feeling of helplessness combined with the (partially true) belief that things are already so bad and the amount we each add, individually, is so small, that it hardly matters whether each of us adds to the problem or not and so we choose the short-term benefits over the long-term benefits because it seems (it feels as though) no matter what we do, the end result will be the same.

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Hi Orsan, I think you hit the nail on the head The answer lies in the heart of the question and the solution lies in the heart of the problem The solution to our perfect storm of crisis threatening to collapse human civlization is to rouse awake the sleeping giant of the masses Is the cup half empty or half full? Most people, as Patrick and Anna have identified feel the cup is half full feel disempowered because, after all, I am only one person Yes, I add to the problem of ecocide every day by my mere existence because the system I exist within is full of producers who pollute to make the goods and services I consume in order to live and in using those goods and services I too micro-pollute in order to live each day Narratives are powerful and this cup half-empty one becomes its own self-fulfilling prophecy For in seeing the world this way I labdicate responsibility, limit my actions and resign to continuing on this personal course which contributes to mutual self destruction It's only when our awareness stirs due to our own transcendence of this narrative or through an outside agent assisting us that we see through the entire game For when we awaken to the fact that billions of people telling themselves the same story is what, in fact creates the story for our entire global community Because billions of people play this cup half-empty narrative over and over in their head and manifest in their actions (or lack thereof) we mutually co-create the world we so despise and so desperately want to change So the key to awakening is to recognize that we are sleeping I have just integrated the ideas about the commons in the introduction on one of my webpages on the Arctic Tipping Point: http://ingienous.com/?page_id=8559 On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Örsan <[email protected]> wrote:

I think this is exactly the point that brings p2p and commons together: imagining billions of us would do a little or as much as we could to produce and/or protect the commons, the results would be giant like wikipedia or similar experiences. can be good to think of various levels and translevel implications in terms of solving porblems of governance and contuniation.

On 19 jul. 2013, at 19:24, Patrick Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:

...

I think the tragedy of the commons is also partly caused by a feeling of helplessness combined with the (partially true) belief that things are already so bad and the amount we each add, individually, is so small, that it hardly matters whether each of us adds to the problem or not and so we choose the short-term benefits over the long-term benefits because it seems (it feels as though) no matter what we do, the end result will be the same.

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

-- We cannot direct the wind, but we can adjust the sails *Birtha Calloway* Web: www.ingienous.com Email: [email protected] Phone: +27 71 642 5521 (SA) Phone: (206) 973-3924 (USA) Fax: +27 86 675 9019 LinkedIn: alturl.com/mr4hc Skype: ingienous Twitter: ingienous

We are also (part of) the system. But yes, I agree. Edu Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone Op 19 jul 2013 om 20:31 heeft Anna Harris <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:\

That helplessness that you feel Patrick, is not a personal problem. It is built into the system. You have been taught, ever since you were a child, that people knew better than you, your parents knew better, your teacher knew better, your boss knew better, your doctor knew better, the government knows better. That message suits this system, disempowers you. To find your own authentic voice is not easy. But that is what P2P is about. It is sharing, it is collaboration with people on the same level. It is a new way of relating with respect and dignity for each person, friend, stranger, acknowledging we are all part of one family. Maybe what we can accomplish on the global scale is very small, but the feeling we can get from doing what we can is transformative, and can turn that helpless feeling into positive creativity.

anna

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Patrick Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: I think the tragedy of the commons is also partly caused by a feeling of helplessness combined with the (partially true) belief that things are already so bad and the amount we each add, individually, is so small, that it hardly matters whether each of us adds to the problem or not and so we choose the short-term benefits over the long-term benefits because it seems (it feels as though) no matter what we do, the end result will be the same.

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation