[P2P-F] Fwd: P2P-Foundation Digest, Vol 44, Issue 43

[willi uebelherr]

Knowledge is always Worldheritage

Dear friends,

I use the thread from Orsan for a short answer.

I will explain. If we accept, that knowlegeis always worldheritage, a 
universal Commons, then never we can demand a private property on our 
knowledge and history. No matter how we put it. If we describe our 
history and activities of our contemporaries, then it is common 
knowledge. Because the history and the activities of other people is 
always common knowledge. We contribute nothing. We only describe.

The distribution of our understanding and thinking was controled from 
private institutions. Publishing corporations. But now, we don't need 
it. We can go the way what we see at www.archive.org. But much more 
radical. We can install in any place a center for printing and 
bookbinding. Then the people, they like to read a book, thay can do it.

But never we support any closed e-pub in our live like kindle or amazon 
or any other shit.

But what Michel do, and some followers, is a very different thing. It is 
a fascistic action. "If you are not my friend, or the friend of my 
friend, then you are my enemy". Then i kill you (based on the action 
level). This process we find it everywhere in our world. It is a sign of 
inner weakness. We have this polarisation very strong in latin america 
around the state. Of course, the state or any rule institution are 
always the core of fascism, the focus of any activity.

I have many experience with exclusions. In Germany most, because i speak 
very clear about the dissolution of Israel. For a free palestine. And 
also on the P2P-lang-es list it was the startpoint for exclusion. For 
the awakening of hatred.

many greetings, willi
now: Popayan, Colombia



Am 21/08/2014 um 05:29 schrieb Orsan:
> In my humble opinion, as Kevin recalled the territory of the commons and p2p has been [as Rifkin reminds since the 90s] a highly contested class-war terrain, it becomes more and more visible now with advancments in the theorization and practices of commoning, as well as the  politics of it. so all these are taking place under increasing pressure, inflitration and critical scrutiny from people as we observe.
> I just looked into, for instance the 1Net list, to see Willi's list activity there and saw that he writes pretty decent there. So I think, there are places he behaves consciously like a troll, since may be has serious doubts, which he might be gahtered from he net, conspiracyies, or from ral critics. Then he mihgt not be able to formulate these worries or doubts in a sense making arguments.
> Anyway thie we may never be knowing, since his interventions triggers mistrust, emotional flows and tension. Which is not useful to him, to others and it only serves for confusion. Anyway when it sunds like there is technical merit in the things he says adn tried to do, wel in the things he say politically and personally destructive, for himself and his probably point making stand point, and appears injustified and injust against his targets. it is a vioance against those silent watchers on the list.
> o.
>
>
>> On 21 aug. 2014, at 10:49, Anna <anna at shsh.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> I do not find Willi's 'desperation' as inadmissible as others seem to find it. It raises a question which is seriously being addressed in other circles about how to make a living while making one's work available to as many as possible. We can focus on the principles he raises without getting offended by the personal criticism. They are important questions. By excluding him we only weaken the diversity expressed on this list, diversity which actually enriches rather than threatens our aspirations. Individuals can exclude his contributions if they wish, without restricting the traffic of the whole.
>>
>> Anna
>>
>>> On 21 Aug 2014, at 07:25, Denis Postle <d.postle at btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't doubt Willi has to go.
>>>
>>> If you are reading this Willi, your messages seem to be written from a place of distressed desperation and I suspect that with the Bollier book message you may, intentionally or not, be actually seeking rejection. Some of us can get into a psy framework where such rejection is necessary to sustain our view of the world or ourselves and eventually we may succeed in getting our wish.
>>>
>>> That said, I wonder if there is anything we need to attend to re P2P Foundation governance and its (our)  public presence? Don't Willi's provocations amount to the third such attack this year on, or resistance to, the P2P Foundation's accumulation of power? At a minimum, the power to define what matters in economic and social futures?
>>>
>>> I don't know the answer to this but having experienced a few attacks myself, I have come to see all dissent, including that coming from distress, as carrying a story that can have value for the target. What is this opposition trying to tell us?
>>>
>>> I find the Foundation hugely valuable but I still find its, (our?) governance less than transparent. The present debacle has been useful for me in opening this out a bit and also in providing an example for the parallel  discussion under 'matriarchy' which provides a very relevant context for these questions.
>>>
>>> Thanks Michel for the facebook posting of some of my remarks there.
>>>
>>> Goodbye Willi. Take care.
>>>
>>> Denis
>>>
>>>> On 20/08/2014 18:09, Michel Bauwens wrote:
>>>> I used to maintain a strong rule of no personal attacks on the list, but I must say I have gotten tired to be the only one reacting,
>>>>
>>>> Willi, who is notorious for these kinds of attacks and false accusations, is clearly making a gratuitous accusation against our friend David Bollier, whom I know as a lifelong activist for the commons, at great personal sacrifice, and the contrary of someone who uses the commons for private personal gain.
>>>>
>>>> does everyone find that normal ? do we have to the time to spend answering such provocations ?
>>>>
>>>> personally, it is here that I would give a warning to Willi, and say, this is not the place for such unsupported attacks, and please abstain or you will have to leave this forum.
>>>>
>>>> But for Willi, this is just been systematic practice, so the warnings have been repeated endlessly in various forums, and it has had no effect,
>>>>
>>>> So I'm requesting the removal of Willi from this list, as he has been removed recently from the networked labour list, exactly for the same reason,
>>>>
>>>> Kevin, as list manager, I believe this is your job?
>>>>
>>>> personal defamation is not an acceptable practice on this list,
>>>>
>>>> I am not going to get into a debate on this, but if any people would find it such practices normal, I would propose to disband this list and start a new one where this rule is made clear from the very beginning, avoiding endless discussions on it,
>>>>
>>>> Michel Bauwens
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: <p2p-foundation-request at lists.ourproject.org>
>>>> Date: Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:49 PM
>>>> Subject: P2P-Foundation Digest, Vol 44, Issue 43
>>>> To: p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Message: 2
>>>> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:49:22 -0500
>>>> From: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
>>>> Subject: [P2P-F] Fwd: Book of the Day: Think Like a Commoner
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear friends,
>>>>
>>>> i love the contributions of hartsellml. You think, David Bollier is
>>>> working for the commons?
>>>>
>>>> No. You see, he want to sell his books only. Try to find a free access
>>>> to his writing. He use the commons resource, our discussion, our
>>>> visions, our doing, our history to make a private buisness with his
>>>> description.
>>>>
>>>> many greetings, willi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
>>>> Betreff: Book of the Day: Think Like a Commoner
>>>> Datum:   Tue, 19 Aug 2014 16:35:36 PDT
>>>> Von:     hartsellml
>>>>
>>>> Book of the Day: Think Like a Commoner
>>>>
>>>> ** Book: Think Like a Commoner
>>>> <http://www.newsociety.com/Books/T/Think-Like-a-Commoner>. A Short
>>>> Introduction to the Life of the Commons by David Bollier. New Society, 2014*
>>>>