new text: Proposed_Strategy_for_the_Commons_Movement_in_2015
thanks for considering these proposals: also via http://p2pfoundation.net/Proposed_Strategy_for_the_Commons_Movement_in_2015 and next week on the blog: Michel Bauwens, Galway, August 31, 2015: "What do we need to work on NOW ? We are definitely going to a period of dislocation in 2015. The Greek debacle has shown the difficulty of any strategy based on national sovereignty and the end of political democracy for European nations ; the difficulties in China , Brazil and elswhere show the period of high growth for emerging economies has come to an end; and the success of candidates like Donald Trump, which obtains 40% approval rating by promising to deport fifteen million people, shows the potential return of barbarism in the heart of the over-developed world. Do we have any realistic perspective at change right now ? In the current conjuncture, there are still mass political mobilizations that seem to have potential, and we are thinking here about the emergence of social justice candidates in Spain (En Comu, Podemos), Corbyn in the UK and Sanders in the U.S. Our CommonsTransition.org initiative, led by Stacco Troncoso, aims at bringing commons and peer production alternatives to these movements, so as to avoid too strong focuses on statist solutions. However, the evolution in Greece should of course caution to any overt optimism, for example at the level of the real openness of such movements for commons and civic alternatives, as well as their true willingness to challenge the status quo. But I think the more long-term focus is to work on the civic-economic front, i.e. building alternative new modes of productions, new relations of production, and new property and governance models, right now, i.e. to 'hurry slowly' in rebuilding a true alternative base for different political and civic mobilizations. I have discussed elsewhere our political proposals , i.e. our proposals for the re-organization of emancipatory politics around the commons, through Assemblies and Chambers of the Commons, and our wish to see Commons Transition Circles. Here I would like to focus on the economic proposals. How do we create a new commons-oriented social fabric around the creation of livelihoods ? Three strategies come to mind: - a first level is the work that we need to do to create commons-centric entrepreneurial models, based or inspired by open cooperativism, i.e. models in which the commoners co-own and co-govern entrepreneurial forms that co-create commons. Come to mind the work of lasindias.com, a more collectivist form; the work of Enspiral, a coalition of 250+ social entrepreneurs working with the Loomio open source platform for democratic decision-making and the co-budget enterpreneurial commons for re-investement; and the Ethos Foundation led by Robert Pye, who is experimenting with fair forms of equity - the second level of work is to work on territirial economic eco-systems in which the flows of commons-created value becomes more integrated ; indeed, even as we are now able to return to more crafts-like form of ownership of the means of production, thanks to distributed manufacturing, the power of control still lies in the broader systems, not just in the mere ownership of 3D printing machines and microfactories; so the efforts like the one of Stephanie Rearick and team in the Mutual Aid Network in Madison, Wisconsin; mapping efforts like encommuns.org in Lille, and initiative like SolidarityNYC are very important at this state ; virtual efforts at more global organizing like the FairCoop project are also important. - the third level of work, where we still see very little happening, as far as I know, is at the level of platforms that would challenge the ownership, control and value extraction models of netarchical capitalism (Uber, AirBnB, Facebook) ; this is the necessary work of the creation of platform cooperatives, and the conference organized by Trebor Scholz and Nathan Schneider in New York in November, will be a good start to evaluate the state of the art. None of these three strategies, all of which have started but are very emergent, will solve urgent crisis, but they will set the stage for a more broader transition later on. I am personally convinced that progressive strategies for resistance and change, like the ones we saw in Greece, that have no serious commons component, are in a great danger of failure ; and we know that neoliberal forces will use nominal commons strategies in their strategy to destroy the solidarity mechanisms of the welfare state In our vision, i.e. the integration of the economic work of peer production, outlined just above, and the broader work of social and political re-organization around commons-centric institutions, which will set the stage for a rebirth of an offensive social and political movement that will have a good chance to promote a phase transition to a commons-centric political, social and economic society." -- 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/
Unless willi, I do share almost all the analysis put forward in general lines by Michel, but since there is a rigorous lack in power and class based global analysis behind it, especially about the below suggestion I do have serious doubts:
On 31 aug. 2015, at 13:59, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
this is the necessary work of the creation of platform cooperatives, and the conference organized by Trebor Scholz and Nathan Schneider in New York in November, will be a good start to evaluate the state of the art.
First of all, the relationships and networks surrounding the new school is very counter productive, in terms of power structures you are talking about it is an obviously wrong place and actors to start. It would be working in the opposite direction we already have been going. For instance, Carnegie Mellon Design from Carnegie Mellon University, founded by those who heavily involved in and linked to creation of Operation Research units located in Silicon Valley it is beyond my senses to get the objective here. Given Andrew Carnegie himself has been a top 1%er, the founder of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace think thank ranking top third in 2014 in the most influential think thanks list (not as a civil NGO of course); it is not so hard to see dangers. Other organizers of the event The Free Lancers' union is a creating of the usual suspects, as Rockefeller, Ford and others all funded the project, and Horowicth has shown as most promising business women by Forbes with this invention called 'union'. The other guy, Google's head of research is being invited every event with such critical content. This all may sound like a contradiction, since the new school is also known as a sort of capital of systemic academic critic, at the empire side of the atlantic; one would argue that would be pretty strange if these giant 1% funders, top elite, give away crucial support to most critical work targeting the very foundations of the system they try to save, and critically looking beyond capitalism. Are they desperate, stupid, or up to something, can we benefit from them? What for the god's sake, and who, with what logic brings Carnegie Mellon design, head of google's research, free lancers union, with left institutions like rosa Luxembourg, and others on the same page? this is not converging systemic differentiation, in my opinion to avoid the worse coming. This is quite an opposite stage to be built to move towards what you MIchel suggest or propose in order to counter the structural dynamics leading all of us to a systemic collapse or catastrophe. To converge resistances that can create a new harmony for a peaceful or non-cathastorphic transition the address is a parallel wsf in Monteal, not i=even the wsf itself. With this regard, I believe there is an urgent practical need to start laying down a global 'state-of-the-power' map, to provide a guidance, base, in form of an interactive net to be developed and analyzed collectively, that would include ties and nodes interlocking personalities and organizations, especially from activism, struggles to ruling class - elite networks (such as mont Pellerin society, carnegie, national endowment. Brooklyn institute, Rockefeller, Ford, Club of Rome so on. Since trusting and believing naively that it would help to influence ruling class networks from progressive side with string hold ideas is one thing, giving most valuable systemic data and analysis to enemy-hands is another. To me, one of the most urgent tasks for the win is getting clarity, in terms of real obstacles and real strengths we oppressed people has. With this regard, although every one knows or thinks about infiltration and manipulation strategies of the rulers, it is always good to realize that the network of some most radical looking academics and activists has been willingly or unwillingly serving to the other-side, with or without good wil. Today there is a highest need to scientifically and systemically analyze and clarify what serves whose and what purpose without allowing anarco-liberal-right-wing tasted (shared by all these) conspiracy kind of scholastic accusations destructing any chance of real convergence amongst really naive and good forces of radical change aiming to move beyond capitalism, and the worst alternative to it. Believing you Michel, as Willi, and many on the list is from this camp, I would add on top of all the items you count Michel, a strong, sharp, clear, power-network-complexity analysis of the commons movements. Best, Orsan
participants (2)
-
Michel Bauwens -
Orsan