[P2P-F] is p2p akin to anarchism (does basic income require a centralized state?)

Wed Apr 13 12:06:04 CEST 2011

(michael, I'm hoping you have an opinion on the basic income query
formulated in the subject line)

Dear Sy:

yes, that was it, speenhamland, and indeed not a basic income scheme as we
envisage it today, but enough to keep labour out of the productive system
and hence inacceptable to the rising industrial class ... if I remember
Polanyi, it's the abolition of Speenhamland, and thus the full
commodification of labour, which made the first capitalist boom of the 19th
cy possible

I don't have an answer to your question, but if the basic income is
unconditional, as it should be, it would require rather minimal bureaucratic
involvement; it could say, be managed by a number of territitorial trusts:
so far, it' just a hunch that there is more than one way to organize such a
scheme, and that we should not automatically equate it with a central
disbursing mechanism. I copy Michael Opielka, a basic income advocate and
expert in Germany.

as for the broad p2p vs anarchism debate; I formulate it as follows: p2p
theory is a new emancipatory theory emerging within the era of digital
networks and in the context of the emergence of a cognitive working class
(knowledge workers) that tries to reformulate emancipatory possibilities; it
does so in an 'integral' fashion, not a 'ideological' fashion, i.e. it
sources in many previous emancipatory traditions, to see what is still
applicable today; this brings into contact with the traditions of anarchism,
socialism, marxism, and other traditions which can be useful to reformulate
emancipatory possibilities; however, it does not feel compelled to consider
itself as a continuation of such traditions and to move within the confines
of these earlier ideologies

I want to stress a few points regarding the state; first, that I think
change requires working both outside and inside institutions, that are
traversed by the same contradictions as society in general; second, that
these institutions must be profoundly transformed rom within and without;
third, that the current state forms would be fundamentally incompatible with
a commons and p2p centered society; fourth that a lot of them may become
unnecessary and obsolete if we can find p2p alternatives for them;  however,
I would insist that there is something like society and a collective
interest, which is not simply the cumulation of private or civil or p2p
interests; and that this collective field requires common institutions,
something like 'public authorities'; however, these may be quite
unrecognizable with what we today see as 'the state', once they are full
democratic and participatory; sixth, that 'withering away' is a hypothesis
but not a full certainty.  I cannot see realistic visions of society as
consisting exclusively from bottom up aggregations or private or collective
contracts and associations

Michel

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Sy <sytaffel at riseup.net> wrote:

>  I think you're referring to the Speenhamland system - which wasn't a
> universal system (it was mainly limited to southern counties in England),
> was mandated by judges - part of a centralised and hierarchical system of
> lawmaking - and was paid by local parishes - ie it was managed and
> distributed local arm of another national, centralised and hierarchical
> structure, the Church of England.
>
> I'm intrigued to hear of how you envisage a basic income system without
> some for of centralised apparatus to ensure that the income is universally
> available and equitably distributed.
>
> I'm less convinced that a substantive difference exists between P2P theory
> and anarchism in that there needs to be reform (particularly in the
> formation of voluntary networks of self-aggregation which can fulfil roles
> currently undertaken by the state/market) before revolution. While there are
> currents of anarchist thought which call for the immediate destruction of
> the state, there are others which contend that networks based on mutual aid
> need to be created beforehand (Chomsky for example has regularly ridiculed
> anarchists who argue that we could transition into a stateless society
> today).
>
> Sy
>
>
> On 12/04/2011 18:28, Michel Bauwens wrote:
>
> thanks Sy, and for the comment by Kevin as well,
>
> I think that it is indeed the case that at least some of us believe in the
> necessity of taking care of the collective field (for which  the name state
> would be a misnomer), but also that the existing state apparatus needs to be
> transformed before it can  'wither' away, and that may be taken as an
> essential difference with the anarchist tradition,
>
> however, I am  not sure that a basic income does require a centralized
> apparatus (it could be, it is not something I have thought true myself),
>
> while I personally support the basic income, it is not a central concern
> because I see it as too serious a threat to the current relations of
> production to see it as acceptable under current circumstances .. if you
> read polanyi's history of capitalism, he shows how the existing basic income
> of the late 18th cy, had to be destroyed to make capitalism possible, (book,
> Great Transformation, but I have forgotten the name of the basic income like
> support scheme that existed in the UK at that period)
>
> Michel
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Sy <sytaffel at riseup.net> wrote:
>
>>  While there are some productive similarities between anarcho-syndicalism
>> and P2P theory to say they are the same thing goes too far... While the
>> notions of voluntary self-aggregation are central to both, and both may
>> agree upon Bakhtin's claim that 'Freedom without socialism is privilege
>> and injustice, and socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality' there
>> are also substantive differences between the two systems (or the two
>> categories, as within each there exist multiple related and overlapping
>> proposals and ideals).
>>
>> As Marcos suggests the specific social and cultural context of late
>> capitalism, with not just the Internet, but also a globalised economic
>> system present a different set of affordances for modes of production, some
>> of the liberal capitalist takes on peer production from people like Yochai
>> Benkler's Wealth of Networks cover this stuff very well and explain why
>> these socio-technical structures are amenable to different types of economic
>> production. Another key difference is the envisioned role of the state -
>> many bits of P2P literature, not only some of Michel's writing, but also
>> material from people like Bernard Stiegler and Antonio Negri propose forms
>> of universal citizen's income which would enable actors to freely
>> self-aggregate within P2P networks without having to worry about being
>> unable to feed themselves, access medical care or send their kids to school.
>> Any such form of universally distributed income would tend to require some
>> form of centralised body or state apparatus to distribute this funding. The
>> existence of this type of state structure presents a differentiation from
>> most anarchist models where there exists no state.
>>
>> Its these types of difference which in my eyes make P2P theory a genuinely
>> new and exciting set of ideas rather than simply rehashing centuries old
>> ideas.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Sy
>>
>> On 12/04/2011 06:38, p2p-foundation-request at lists.ourproject.org wrote:
>>
>> Re: [P2P-F] is p2p akin to anarchism
>>
>>
>> Michel, I would offer a little counter-argument to Mr. Hardy's comment.
>> Mainly that while syndicalism does indeed advocate a style of governance
>> very much like that as hoped for in the P2pFoundation (as well as myself),
>> the scale and diversity at which the Internet **enables** is something that is
>> far beyond what could ever be managed or orchestrated by non-networked means
>> (at least in the near term within scientific materialism).   The desire for
>> trade and diversity would otherwise make primitive syndicalism fail.  Indeed
>> both communism and capitalism arose from these failures.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Marcospangaia.sf.net
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>
>>  > views very welcome,>> Michel>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------> From: Facebook <update+pjiidwm at facebookmail.com> <update+pjiidwm at facebookmail.com>> Date: Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:49 PM> Subject: Henry Edward Hardy commented on your link.> To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>>>
>> >  facebook<http://www.facebook.com/n/?mbauwens%2Fposts%2F201125386584394&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge&bcode=iNpgbV7N&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com> <http://www.facebook.com/n/?mbauwens%2Fposts%2F201125386584394&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge&bcode=iNpgbV7N&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com>> Hi Michel,> Henry Edward Hardy commented on your link.> Henry wrote: "The article, "The Political Economy of Peer Production," by> Michael Bauwens, advocates a supposedly new form of economic organization> based on peer-to-peer networking. This social-network, flat,> non-hierarchical system of production is anticipated in the political and> economic philosophy of syndicalism, dating pack to 1895. Syndicalism is a> system of organization of the means of production which seeks to replace> free enterprise capitalism (US) and state capitalism (China) with> co-operative, voluntary federations of democratically-organized and> administered trade unions. Mutual aid, self-organization, and> self-administration are among the means and goals of syndicalism. In other> words, the first three "requirements"in this article, technological> infrastructure that operates on peer-to-peer processes, alternative> information and communication systems, software infrastructure, to the> degree that they are requirements at all, in no way require computers or> computer networks! The article attempts to graft the author's (perhaps> un-self-aware) syndicalist political views onto the development process of> the Internet and Free Software projects. In fact, the most successful of> these, such as the Internet under Jon Postel, the Free Software Foundation> under Richard Stallman, One Laptop per Child under Nicholas Negroponte, and> Linux kernel maintenance under Linus Torvalds and Andrew Morton, have been> what might more accurately described as "benign dictatorships" than> syndicalist or peer-to-peer in nature. "An injury to one is an injury to> all." http://www.facebook.com/l/32423/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syndicalism> http://www.facebook.com/l/32423/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Postel> http://www.facebook.com/l/32423/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman> http://www.facebook.com/l/32423/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Negroponte> http://www.facebook.com/l/32423/www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.11/linus.html">>
>> > See the comment thread<http://www.facebook.com/n/?mbauwens%2Fposts%2F201125386584394&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge&bcode=iNpgbV7N&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com> <http://www.facebook.com/n/?mbauwens%2Fposts%2F201125386584394&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge&bcode=iNpgbV7N&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com>
>>
>> > Reply to this email to comment on this link.> Thanks,> The Facebook Team
>> >  See Comment<http://www.facebook.com/n/?mbauwens%2Fposts%2F201125386584394&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge&bcode=iNpgbV7N&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com> <http://www.facebook.com/n/?mbauwens%2Fposts%2F201125386584394&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge&bcode=iNpgbV7N&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com> The
>> > message was sent to michelsub2004 at gmail.com. If you don't want to receive> these emails from Facebook in the future or have your email address used for
>> > friend suggestions, you can unsubscribe<http://www.facebook.com/o.php?k=c05bf5&u=528245547&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge> <http://www.facebook.com/o.php?k=c05bf5&u=528245547&mid=40bce9bG1f7c632bGe441548Ge>.>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110413/d35787c1/attachment.htm 