Transnational and P2P Commons Transitions
The fact that following the EU elections the murdered civilians in critical conflicts like in Ukraine, Gazza, Syria, and Iraq rapidly increased, is alarming. These might be the last warnings for the approaching 'train accident', going to be caused by the elite in fight on the steering wheel. The models and systems of managing the status-Que does not work and as they are unable to deliver the new. The ruling classes leading entire world in to a catasptrohpe of yet another corrective war is inevitable. This situation is felt shared, yet not shout out. Yet it has re-flamed (again) the discussion and exchange of ideas and practises on the 'transition', with its revolutionary, reformist or synthetic (Refo-lution/REvolution) versions. To 'get it' this time is becoming more and more mortal in every second. So the question of solidarity, alliances, platforms, unity, front, blocks so on is back in almost every context without exception... It is not really clearly to some of us, where will fit the new and influential concepts like the Commons, FLOSS, P2P, collaborative, distributed networks, so on... I sincerely believe that the coincidentally overlap between the final summit of the very intriguing Free and Libre Knowledge (FLOK) Society research and policy-formation experiment in Ecuador, and the EU elections where some left wing parties did achieve relative success, yet not in comparison to the success of the radical right. This shows that currently ruling classes are losing ground. Yet does this also mean that the discourse' or 'transition' (backward) project of the right wing is more accessible and appealing to large portion of societies; then the Left currently offer in Europe? What have been learning from recent experiences, experiments, from bottom up, in the middle, from top down.... in terms of real emancipatory change, or change might help to make a real change... interventions and step forwards at all levels and from all directions, with the involvement by and engagement with actors that are potential 'peers', peer producers or collaborators, commoners of the 'commons transitions' as flos projects and processes? Are we able to vision and realise much brighter alternatives then the right-wing/conservative/fascist backward going > capitalist-revisionist > neo or post capitalist perspectives. After some re-reading and thinking through these lines,
Tribe>Community>Town>State>PartnerState>NonState>...
I realised that P2P Foundation, although there are important issues to subject to criticism or discuss about, yet one need to acknowledge the immense contribution it made by collecting resources, supporting communities from variety of levels, and ideological political perspectives: Here are those, I think very remarkable examples of communities and experiences: 1 - CIC http://cooperativa.cat/en/ and the projects they are working on, especially this one:http://www.coopfunding.net/ 2 - Las Indias: http://english.lasindias.com/ 3 - Guerilla Translation!: guerrillatranslation.com ... and there are many more of course, not listed by P2P-F wiki, and I do fail to mention here. Yet good to see that all these work, above, collaborate with and supported by p2p-foundation. the below material collected here, is quite important, for the discussion on transitions and related questions like with or without state, in and out of the state, bottom up or top-down, before and after the state, with who and how, role of the market,... so on? : http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:P2P_Transition http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:P2P_State_Approaches since these provide variety of perspectives, and community experiences, from anarchists, to communists, libertarians, to radical democrats and new movements' perspectives... it is a flos resource.. open to use and contribute, modification. It is wort to engage in deep discussion, on these materials and information, without being harmful to each other, following hacker's ethic. As it was the case for the parts of the discussion sparked after the finalisation of the FLOK project in Ecuador. I suggested that this was a living reach experiment where we can learn a lot from. During the discussions at one point, critical questions turned back to Michel by those who are on the list, including myself, on the issues like 'the partner state idea', or about 'engaging with higher level politics and state' instead of focusing totally to grassroots empowerment and bottom up change. I looked into the 3 examples of communities given above, which are closely linked to P2P foundation, they support to and collaborate with each other, and realised that these are role, prefigurative models for Michel, and all three are visioning stateless and beyond capitalism situation being dominant and they are engaged in building it up right now in the urban environment, using floss tools and inventing all sorts of freely shared ideas, projects, practises cultures. On the other hand Michel himself openly express what he believes on Partner state, transition and alliances. What he writes and tells partly can be seen [in old political lexicon] as reformist. Yet he insist on both bottom up and state level change can be engaged at the same time. and P2P processes can play a key role in linking these to each other. These these are valuable for me to understand the role of advanced collaborative culture and tools in realising simultaneity and multi- levelness of political subjectivity, its logic, and its action. Those example communities are working in different languages, taking to broader communities, and are open to collaborations from variety of ideological or analytical perspectives on transition beyond-capitalism, and thinking-imagining stateless societies. Orsan
On Jul 26, 2014, at 6:45 PM, Örsan Şenalp <[email protected]> wrote:
The fact that following the EU elections the murdered civilians in critical conflicts like in Ukraine, Gazza, Syria, and Iraq rapidly increased, is alarming. These might be the last warnings for the approaching 'train accident', going to be caused by the elite in fight on the steering wheel. The models and systems of managing the status-Que does not work and as they are unable to deliver the new. The ruling classes leading entire world in to a catasptrohpe of yet another corrective war is inevitable. This situation is felt shared, yet not shout out. Yet it has re-flamed (again) the discussion and exchange of ideas and practises on the 'transition', with its revolutionary, reformist or synthetic (Refo-lution/REvolution) versions. To 'get it' this time is becoming more and more mortal in every second.
in general i agree with you Orsan. I believe that Michel is one of the most importunity resources the world has in avoiding the on rushing disaster you describe. But I am also quite alarmed that as of my last contact with him just about a week ago he appears to have capitulated to the attacks of the ecuadorian spaniards who don't like that he would dare to assert that he has a right to write is own assessment of what happened.. He has publicly promised such an assessment. I have two drafts of an intermediate version and yet apparently because of issues in spain on the part of those who want to see ecuador swept under the carpet he has decided to capitulate and fall silent in the face of their threats. In my opinion this is setting up the biggest disaster of all and is why I shall publish lengthy open letter to michel on july 31. you say
To 'get it' this time is becoming more and more mortal in every second.
you are absolutely correct. And this is why I will be publishing why i hope will be my final installment on the ecaudor fiasco on the 31 of july under the general header of an open letter to Michel. Michel has made himself through much personal sacrifice the major world leader in this field. In doing so he has achieved a high profile that has painted a target on his back. The critical question has now become, can he be trusted. Because his WORD should be firm and solemn at this point. He has sworn that he will deliver a final report yet as of july 18th at a p2p foundation meeting the collective apparently took a decision that doing so will stand in the way of projects with things like they would like to achieve with CIC so he will not do so. http://cooperativa.cat/en/come-back-a-story-which-we-made-together/ michel it is up to you. you have given your word that you will act. you now pear to be withdrawing that word. If you do so why should any of us in the future trust you?
Gordon thanks for agreeing! Yet, I should admit that although I recognise Michel's and all P2P-F teams great contribution, I can not consider anybody or any one organisation as the world leader or something like this, especially when we are discussing about p2p, commons, floss related issues -it contradicts 100% with the content. I feel that your personal conflict with FLOK team was kind of a last drop bringing all the internal tensions and clashes out, so appreciate for that! So that we could heard and learn much more about the details, of the project's practical side. There is a certain amount of juicy rumour material for sure, for those who are into it. Yet the importance of the real substance with regard to theory and practise of transition goes much beyond that as you may agree as well. After rereading your, Michel's, and FLOK people's reactions my humble conclusion with respect to your case, it may be a problem came purely out of communication-and practical arrangements, then turns partly low level or nasty accusations -I have the feeling that it was more of personality-ego..etc driven kind of process. The way I read is that; Michel did the right and virtuous thing by standing up for you both defending you and his decision to bring you in, and took the risk by bringing his criticisms on overall process into public. And after both said harsh things to each other, like in every fight some times without meaning it, and later on it gets calm down. Since escalation do not really help anyone to go deep in the content and valuable aspects in the experience. Orsan On 27 July 2014 04:18, Gordon Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
On Jul 26, 2014, at 6:45 PM, Örsan Şenalp <[email protected]> wrote:
The fact that following the EU elections the murdered civilians in critical conflicts like in Ukraine, Gazza, Syria, and Iraq rapidly increased, is alarming. These might be the last warnings for the approaching 'train accident', going to be caused by the elite in fight on the steering wheel. The models and systems of managing the status-Que does not work and as they are unable to deliver the new. The ruling classes leading entire world in to a catasptrohpe of yet another corrective war is inevitable. This situation is felt shared, yet not shout out. Yet it has re-flamed (again) the discussion and exchange of ideas and practises on the 'transition', with its revolutionary, reformist or synthetic (Refo-lution/REvolution) versions. To 'get it' this time is becoming more and more mortal in every second.
in general i agree with you Orsan. I believe that Michel is one of the most importunity resources the world has in avoiding the on rushing disaster you describe. But I am also quite alarmed that as of my last contact with him just about a week ago he appears to have capitulated to the attacks of the ecuadorian spaniards who don't like that he would dare to assert that he has a right to write is own assessment of what happened.. He has publicly promised such an assessment. I have two drafts of an intermediate version and yet apparently because of issues in spain on the part of those who want to see ecuador swept under the carpet he has decided to capitulate and fall silent in the face of their threats.
In my opinion this is setting up the biggest disaster of all and is why I shall publish lengthy open letter to michel on july 31.
you say
To 'get it' this time is becoming more and more mortal in every second.
you are absolutely correct. And this is why I will be publishing why i hope will be my final installment on the ecaudor fiasco on the 31 of july under the general header of an open letter to Michel.
Michel has made himself through much personal sacrifice the major world leader in this field. In doing so he has achieved a high profile that has painted a target on his back. The critical question has now become, can he be trusted. Because his WORD should be firm and solemn at this point. He has sworn that he will deliver a final report yet as of july 18th at a p2p foundation meeting the collective apparently took a decision that doing so will stand in the way of projects with things like they would like to achieve with CIC so he will not do so. http://cooperativa.cat/en/come-back-a-story-which-we-made-together/
michel it is up to you. you have given your word that you will act. you now pear to be withdrawing that word. If you do so why should any of us in the future trust you?
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
participants (2)
-
Gordon Cook -
Örsan Şenalp