On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Bob Haugen <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Michel,

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:44 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:

...

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Bob Haugen <[email protected]> wrote:

...

I'm thinking about Ackerman's ideas about "a form of socialized finance which would respect the autonomy of the firm." I think it might help, but I don't know how we would get it to happen. Which is the problem with a lot of "good ideas", including those of the P2PF. They would require a non-existent organization to take over from our present rulers. (P2PF is a bit more realistic than Ackerman, but still...)

I am puzzled by your point here. I think the logic is very different. The proposal of Ackerman are a proposal for a political program that needs to win power first, but the great majority of the proposals of the p2p foundation are already working (it's the rule for the wiki, it has to exist), though they may need politics to be scaled and generalize.

Of course, i have a few proposals which call for new institutions, but they are happening as well (phyles, assemblies and chambers of the commons); stigmergy and transparency between entrepreneurial coalitions is happening as well

so which proposals do you mean exactly, dear Bob ?

Partner state, in particular.

but this is probably the most realistic of all, since prefigurative experiences, like the very mature project in Brest, is already going on for ten years or more; and the new slate of co-cities in Italy are getting significant traction, especially Bologna let's not forget we are not utopians, but seek significant and realistic shifts and especially, prefigurative experimentations

I agree that many of the new institutions are starting to happen, but they are weak and often disconnected from one another. But the fact that they are happening at all makes them more realistic than Ackerman's proposal or any one-swell-foop transformation. Although once the separate threads cohere, the transformation could happen fast.

...

see above, if you give an expanded definition of stigmergy, which I think is appropriate, then yes. COULD YOU PLEASE write a full article on this !! We really need to make that argument formally as part of our mutual coordination proposals. Can you educate us about this path forward.

I'll do it in conjunction with more study in relation to that other article you are working on. I need to catch up a bit on the more recent developments.

ok super

...

ok, to help you write that article, see:

http://p2pfoundation.net/How_Current_Supply_Chains_Can_Serve_Broader_Mutual_...

I assume I can change the title, too?

I changed it following your instructions on the talk page -- 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/