No subject
Tue Dec 30 18:11:19 CET 2014
essed and lived through the introduction, not just of a new bunch of techno=
logies, but of a fundamentally new form of labor organization, that is, a n=
ew mode of production, which is informationalism in the way that Fuchs (or =
Castells, or myself, or any number of people) describes it. That's *net=
worked labor*, by the way! Like mass manufacturing in the 10s and 20s, this=
new mode of production has been very poorly governed, and that's what =
we call neoliberalism. The big difference is, neoliberalism is a transnatio=
nal form of government (or of regulation, if you prefer). It began under Tr=
ilateral auspices, and if you go back and read the public record of the Tri=
lateral Commission you will find that the members, drawn from North America=
, Western Europe and Japan, got together at the behest of the US Council on=
Foreign Relations in order to deal with systemic dynamics of the global ec=
onomy which, as they very explicitly say, the US could no longer manage and=
regulate on its own. Essentially, those dynamics came down to two things: =
borderless finance and what was then called "the new international div=
ision of labor." The regulation of the national welfare states was dir=
ectly threatened by those two things.<br>
<br>
Well, they did govern them in the end, because the world economy did not co=
llapse in the 1970's as many feared it would after the end of Bretton W=
oods and the oil shocks. Instead, the new monetary regime of floating excha=
nge rate and free cross-border investment=C2=A0 was worked out, and global =
supply chains using container ships were set up between the Western countri=
es and Asia. The welfare state apparatuses were partially dismantled and pe=
ople were educated for a new kind of global economic citizenship. Then in t=
he 1990s, after the the Fall of the Wall and the first Gulf War, when finan=
ce was finally ready to sink a bunch of capital in cables and routers and c=
omputer technologies, practically all of Asia could be exploited as a place=
to manufacture that stuff and everything else too. Only in the mid-1990s d=
id the techno*political* paradigm of Neoliberal Informationalism finally cr=
ystallize, definitively replacing the old Keynesian-Fordist paradigm.<br>
<br>
Now, we all agree that the development of a technological and organizationa=
l paradigm is never uncontested, which is also why it is technopolitical an=
d not just technoeconomic. Therefore we have been able to participate in p2=
p cooperativism, which has built its positive alternatives on multiple crit=
iques and refusals of the previous mass-manufacturing order, including ecol=
ogy movements as well as solidarity movements. Pat, your references to Mart=
in Luther King, Schumacher and Meidner are all very evocative of the way th=
at struggles from the Sixties and Seventies have continued evolving in para=
llel to neoliberalism. Now we are at a crisis point, where these alternativ=
es could really bear fruit, on the condition that we, too, are able to add =
new layers to our own thinking. And that's what's so interesting ab=
out all of you on this list, you're doing that. The question is, what i=
s this crisis all about? That's the question that I really have for all=
of you. How do we characterize the present crisis, and what possibilities =
does it offer for the creation of a far more just and ecologically coherent=
social order?<br>
<br>
In my view, this crisis is not just the result of an increasingly precariou=
s labor regime, where individuals and families in the developed countries c=
an no longer pay for their consumption through their wages and are forced i=
nto dependence on credit markets. That is happening, for sure, and it was t=
he trigger of the crisis. What that has triggered, however, is a relative d=
ecline of US hegemony and the attempt of China to break away from its subor=
dinate position under Neoliberal Informationalism and set up a new hegemony=
in Asia and throughout the Global South. Therefore, as in every major cris=
is, the whole geopolitical order is threatened and is in the course of prof=
ound mutation. A stake is the global financial and monetary regime, includi=
ng the big banks (at the center of the mesmerizing informational system) al=
ong with the role of transnational institutions such as the EU and the WTO.=
And these things bear directly on everyone's daily lives, though of co=
urse in a differential way, depending on where in the world system you are =
located and what kind of class position you occupy.<br>
<br>
In short, we are in for big changes over the upcoming years, on the scale o=
f those in the 1970s or even WWII, along with an ecological crisis that is =
unprecedented. However, big changes also mean the potential for alternative=
s to be enacted and actualized. The rise of Neoliberal Informationalism was=
predicated on the offshoring of manufacturing work from the so-called core=
countries to the so-called peripheries, in order to escape both labor and =
environmental regulation. It was also dependent on the expansion of petrole=
um production and the recycling of petrodollars through the global financia=
l system. If Western capitalist elites can no longer exploit the former Thi=
rd World in the way they have for the past forty years, and if the global m=
onetary system is no longer completely controlled by New York, London and T=
okyo, then the possibility for a new kind of more localized ecosocial indus=
trialism arises, and with it, the possibility for a healthier mode of urban=
ization incorporating permaculture practices. Clearly it no longer just abo=
ut free software anymore. We are talking about changing the mode of product=
ion!<br>
<br>
With the Dow at the inflated height of 18,000, the Greeks about to elect Sy=
riza, the British about to pull out of the EU, and China forging a whole ne=
w military and economic posture in the world, I think we will clearly have =
another systemic shock pretty soon. It's urgent to project comprehensiv=
e and practicable alternative views that can be implemented in real social =
relations, because in their absences the elites have a free hand. I think i=
t's much more about practical ideas than any kind of revolution - or ra=
ther, that's the real revolution, the one that can give substance and m=
eaning to all the demands and desires expressed in the multiple uprisings w=
e have been seeing over the last few years, all of which have been justifie=
d and necessary.<br>
<br>
Practical ideas matter. Michel and Vasilis see this from their position of =
grassroots/global engagement, and so does Rifkin at his more technocratic l=
evel. I am wondering who else with a long-wave perspective does? A full ana=
lysis of a paradigm shift appears dauntingly complex, but a vision of the w=
ays that society could really change over the next decade or two definitely=
helps people a great deal, when it comes to coordinating their actions in =
view of systemically positive outcomes.<br>
<br>
In any event, it's great to have these conversations,<br>
<br>
All the best for the New Year, Brian<span class=3D""><br>
<br>
<br>
On 01/02/2015 03:47 AM, Michel Bauwens wrote:<br>
</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-=
left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">
I am sharing your interesting response with Brian himself.<br>
<br>
Brian: this is part of a ongoing conversation with key cooperative<br>
activists in the UK and Canada mostly,<br>
<br>
Stacco/Kevin: have we made any progress in adding Pat's text on land an=
d<br></span>
money as a commons to <a href=3D"http://commonstransition.org" target=3D"_b=
lank">commonstransition.org</a> <<a href=3D"http://commonstransition.org=
" target=3D"_blank">http://commonstransition.org</a>> ?<span class=3D"">=
<br>
<br>
Michel<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Pat Conaty<br>
<<a href=3D"mailto:pat.commonfutures at phonecoop.coop" target=3D"_blank">p=
at.commonfutures at phonecoop.<u></u>coop</a><br></span><div><div class=3D"h5"=
>
<mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:pat.commonfutures at phonecoop.coop" target=3D"_b=
lank">pat.commonfutures@<u></u>phonecoop.coop</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Happy New Year Michel and everybody<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Michel this is a fascinating exchange between you and Brian H=
olmes<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 in relation to the review he has done of your book with Vasil=
is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Kostakis. Thanks for sharing this. Does Orsan share his analy=
sis? He<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 makes good points at the beginning of this exchange below.<br=
>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Brian makes very precise and detailed comments that we need t=
o<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capture and especially in relation to monopoly capitalism and=
TEPS<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 theory.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Robin has been teaching over the past six months with Carlota=
Perez<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 at the LSE about the technological shifts underway, TEPS and =
what<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 these mean. So Robin may want to comment on the questions and=
points<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Brian makes about long K-waves and the nature of the current =
shifts.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The directions of travel Holmes points to from the current<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 conjuncture we are moving through are crucially important to =
analyse<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 for all the correct reasons he cites.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Between Rifkin, Piketty and Naomi Klein=E2=80=99s latest book=
, we can see<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the changing aspects of this K-wave, but Holmes helps us fill=
out<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the picture.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 At the end of Naomi Klein=E2=80=99s book she compares the cur=
rent challenge<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 as akin to the need to abolish slavery as the problem we face=
is an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 economic cost one. Here she cites the last book and wrings of=
Martin<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Luther King when he noted that civil rights could be conceded=
as a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 legal handover to people of colour as it was not hugely costl=
y<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 economically. But as in the USA and more recently South Afric=
a,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 massive investment in=C2=A0 affordable housing and jobs would=
take away<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 from surplus value allocation and had to be denied.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Naomi Klein then talks about the climate change challenge as =
both<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 tackling the dual needs to cut carbon and to end poverty. She=
makes<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 this case so well and links it to current movements since 200=
8 to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 resist and build in Greece, in Germany, in South America and =
in the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Blockadia campaigns against the tar sands pipelines. Where I =
think<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 she=C2=A0 misses the fuller analysis that you and Brian Holme=
s are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 talking about is that she does not situate fully and properly=
her<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 solid analysis of the current crisis as being similar to the<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 abolition of slavery. She talks about Martin Luther King=E2=
=80=99s 1967 book<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 on Where do we go from here? but overlooks the point he was m=
aking<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 about pursuing Economic democracy ownership transfer mechanis=
m as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the next stage of the struggle. This was why his thinking in =
1967<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 was so powerfully important and on to the list of what needed=
to be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 done.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 If this had been pursued in relation to bringing land and cap=
ital<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and people out of the market through focused struggle on thes=
e new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 economy building block, we would be today creating a new mode=
of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 steady state economic production. Schumacher saw this clearly=
in the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 last chapter of Small is Beautiful where he shows how to soci=
alise<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 wealth. The Meidner plan in Sweden indeed was focused on achi=
eving<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 this before it was curtailed in the early 1990s. See the anal=
ysis by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Robin Blackburn below of Meidner=E2=80=99s legacy for us all.=
Robin and I<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 have been having a conversation with Richard Wilkinson (autho=
r of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the Spirit Level with Kate Pickett) about ways to revive and =
reframe<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the Meidner Plan to address the changed nature of late capita=
lism.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/12/22/a-visonary-=
pragmatist/" target=3D"_blank">http://www.counterpunch.org/<u></u>2005/12/2=
2/a-visonary-<u></u>pragmatist/</a><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The commons thinking must be united to this theoretical persp=
ective<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 that King and Schumacher were focusing upon a decade before t=
he<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 K-Wave shifted to what we know as globalisation and finaciali=
sation<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 all linked since 1989 to informatizaion and networkisation of=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 societies.=C2=A0 of course if it can be framed in the ways yo=
u and Brian<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Holmes are exchanging thoughts about.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Brian Holmes may find of interest ways to connect a Meidner p=
lan on<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ownership transfer tools for economic democracy making with n=
ext<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 steps ideas in the Open Co-operativism paper and the Deep Div=
e one<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 once these are commented upon by our colleagues and then publ=
ished.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 We are getting close to a transformative and practical vision=
I<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 sense. Well done Michel in helping us all to move steadily cl=
oser to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 20;20 vision!<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Pat<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 On 30 Dec 2014, at 06:21, Michel Bauwens <<a href=3D"mailt=
o:michel at p2pfoundation.net" target=3D"_blank">michel at p2pfoundation.net</a><=
br></div></div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:michel at p2pfoundation.net" target=
=3D"_blank">michel at p2pfoundation.<u></u>net</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 This is I believe an interesting exchange,<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 if you want to make the voice heard of the cooperative<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 commonwealth, for the sophisticated audience of nettime, plea=
se<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 intervene and copy all the email addresses below in your resp=
onse<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br></span><span class=
=3D"">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 From: *Michel Bauwens* <<a href=3D"mailto:michel at p2pfounda=
tion.net" target=3D"_blank">michel at p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:michel at p2pfoundation.net" target=
=3D"_blank">michel at p2pfoundation.<u></u>net</a>>><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Date: Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 1:18 PM<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Subject: Re: [Networkedlabour] Future Scenarios for a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Collaborative Economy<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 To: Brian Holmes <<a href=3D"mailto:bhcontinentaldrift at gma=
il.com" target=3D"_blank">bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com</a><br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">bhcontinentaldrift@<u></u>gmail.com</a>>>, p2p-founda=
tion<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"mailto:p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">p2p-foundation at lists.<u></u>ourproject.org</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.=
org" target=3D"_blank">p2p-foundation at lists.<u></u>ourproject.org</a>>&g=
t;, Vasilis Kostakis<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"mailto:kostakis.b at gmail.com" target=3D"_blank"=
>kostakis.b at gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:kostakis.b at gmail.com=
" target=3D"_blank">kostakis.b at gmail.com</a>>><u></u>, lista net<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 time <<a href=3D"mailto:nettime-l at kein.org" target=3D"_bla=
nk">nettime-l at kein.org</a> <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:nettime-l at kein.org"=
target=3D"_blank">nettime-l at kein.org</a>>>, Guy<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Staniforth <<a href=3D"mailto:guy at wild.cat" target=3D"_bla=
nk">guy at wild.cat</a> <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:guy at wild.cat" target=3D"_=
blank">guy at wild.cat</a>>><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Cc: "<a href=3D"mailto:networkedlabour at lists.contrast.or=
g" target=3D"_blank">networkedlabour at lists.<u></u>contrast.org</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:networkedlabour at lists.contrast.o=
rg" target=3D"_blank">networkedlabour at lists.<u></u>contrast.org</a>>&quo=
t;<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"mailto:networkedlabour at lists.contrast.org" tar=
get=3D"_blank">networkedlabour at lists.<u></u>contrast.org</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:networkedlabour at lists.contrast.o=
rg" target=3D"_blank">networkedlabour at lists.<u></u>contrast.org</a>>>=
<span class=3D""><br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Dear Brian,<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 it's a great honour to have your considered response here=
, I may<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 later respond in a flowing text, but I will start by reacting=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 inline to some of your comments and critique, which I take in=
an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 entirely constructive manner.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Brian Holmes<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"mailto:bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com" target=3D=
"_blank">bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com</a><br></span><div><div class=3D"h5">
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">bhcontinentaldrift@<u></u>gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 *Orsan wrote:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 global political economy theory s=
tarted with Cox, and p2p<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 theory would<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 benefit from a fruitful exchange.=
Potentially a p2p update<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 on the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 understanding of the 'transna=
tionalization of production',<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 which as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 process overlaps with the informa=
tization of economy,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 networkisation of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 societies, and neoliberal globali=
sation offensive, or vice<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 versa; a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 global political economy upgrade =
for p2p theory, in my<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 opinion is necessary.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I totally agree, and that's the thrust of a=
response I just<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 wrote on Nettime to the book by Michel Bauwens =
and Vasilis<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Kostakis (I'll paste that response below). =
One of Cox's<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 followers, Stephen Gill, showed long ago that n=
eoliberalism<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 has from the outset been a fundamentally trilat=
eral hegemony<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (US-Western Europe-Japan). Now that all three p=
oles of the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 hegemony are arguably in decline, it would be u=
seful to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 analyze the weak points where an amplified and =
generalized p2p<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 strategy could begin changing the common sense =
of citizenship,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 business and government, and of dissent and rev=
olution too. I<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 don't do that here - far from it - but the =
strong proposals at<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the end of the Future Scenarios book did seem t=
o call out for<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 exactly that kind of analysis, which would grou=
nd them in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 reality without invalidating them by any means.=
So I hope my<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 critiques of the book do appear as constructive=
, because they<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 were intended that way. - best, BH<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 * * *<br>
<br></div></div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/__Network_S=
ociety_and_Future___Scenarios_for_a_Collaborative___Economy" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://p2pfoundation.net/__<u></u>Network_Society_and_Future___<u></u>S=
cenarios_for_a_Collaborative_<u></u>__Economy</a><div><div class=3D"h5"><br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Network=
_Society_and_Future_Scenarios_for_a_Collaborative_Economy" target=3D"_blank=
">http://p2pfoundation.net/<u></u>Network_Society_and_Future_<u></u>Scenari=
os_for_a_Collaborative_<u></u>Economy</a>><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Thanks for this book, Michel and Vasilis. "=
;Future Scenarios for a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Collaborative Economy" is exceedingly time=
ly and I would<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 recommend it to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 anyone interested in the Commons specifically, =
or in political<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 economy<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 more generally. In response, I've written s=
omething in between<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 a review<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and a letter to the authors. I address Michel b=
ecause he<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 posted it.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Hopefully he will respond to a few of my commen=
ts!<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I like the book, Michel, but I must also say, I=
'm somewhat<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mystified by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 it. I like the very sophisticated strategy that=
it sets out at<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the end<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 for a possible transition to a society of commo=
ns-based<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 production. I'm<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mystified by the rather simplistic presentation=
of contemporary<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism at the beginning. What explains the =
gap?<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 First of all, I would like to explain a few caveats. This boo=
k<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 explicitely says at the beginning it doesn't want to be y=
et<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 another critique of capitalism. There are two reasons for thi=
s,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 first that I am probably not up to that task. I am far from b=
eing<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the classic intellectual who would have the time to keep up w=
ith<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 all that necessary reading; I am more of a digital curator ,<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 playing a role as a networker and catalyst, from a certain an=
d<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 very specific angle: that of someone who believes that the co=
re<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 condition for change is structural first, i.e. a focus on=C2=
=A0 the new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 mode of production that is emerging, and that is mostly embed=
ded<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 in the present political economy, but also starts to show ear=
ly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 sings of an 'organic system', i.e. that it can eventu=
ally find the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 way to self-reproduce itself, and to create an accumulation o=
f the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 commons, to replace the system of accumulation of capital. Wh=
at<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 interests us, me and Vasilis, are the specific parts of capit=
alism<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 that 'react' to this emergence, i.e. the systemic log=
ic of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 cognitive capitalism (living off rents) that is now in part<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 morphing to netarchical capitalism, i.e. forms of capitalism =
which<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 are entirely geared, not to destroy the emergent commons, but=
to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 subsume it and profit from it. So I see it that way, there ar=
e<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 many scholars, who have studied in depth the current evolutio=
n of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism in its complexity, but they are missing an evoluti=
on of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 major import if they ignore the emergence of peer production,=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 which I feel they do. If you know of any, let me know, but I<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 haven't seen them yet. We have plenty of "social-dem=
ocratic" or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "social-liberal" approaches (Benkler, Tapscott, Rif=
kin), but I<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 have not seen any thinker of the left. Yes , Michael Hardt an=
d<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Toni Negri speak about the common, but it is a very 'meta=
physical'<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 approach, that is not concretely linked to the actual emergen=
ce of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 peer production and its institutions.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 On the other hand, we are more closer observers of the emerge=
nce<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the commons, and that part of capitalism that reacts and a=
dapts<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 to it. Thus, as Orsan suggests, p2p theory does need an upgra=
de,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 but it may not be us that are able to carry out such a necess=
ary<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 integration. But the book hope at leasts to jumpstart that<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 process, which is why I really rejoice in your critique. I ho=
pe<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 that it may wake up more classic thinkers of the left to take=
the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 challenge of peer production into account.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 In Part I you adopt the theoretical framework o=
f "long waves of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist development" as put forth by Ko=
ndratiev and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Schumpeter, and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 more recently, by Freeman and Perez (Trotsky an=
d Mandel aren't<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mentioned). In its most general form, the long-=
wave idea is that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist society periodically goes through ma=
jor<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 depressions, during<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 which investment is withdrawn from production. =
Meanwhile<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 inventions<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 accumulate until such time as conditions look g=
ood, and a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 massive wave<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of technological investment lays the foundation=
s for a new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 growth cycle.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Right now we're in such a depression. There=
fore you try to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 analyze the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 possible futures of the current "techno-ec=
onomic paradigm."<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 There is some ambiguity here, but that's OK=
. On the one hand<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the book<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 follows Carlota Perez, explaining that the info=
rmation technology<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm has run up against a set of internal c=
ontradictions<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and that a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mature phase of sustained growth can only come =
under new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 political and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 institutional arrangements. On the other hand i=
t hints in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 certain places<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 at the emergence, in the upcoming years or deca=
des, of an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 entirely new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm (which, according to Schumpeter or Fre=
eman, implies a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 distinct<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 set of technologies and organizational forms). =
And then near<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the end it<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 quite strongly claims, with Marx, that capitali=
sm must now be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 overcome<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 in favor of a different system. The upshot seem=
s to be that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 society will emerge from the old, perhaps not e=
ntirely<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 smoothly, but not<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 through an apocalyptic rupture either. That'=
;s realistic and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 desirable,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 in my view.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I agree with that assessment, but I think the situation is<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 complicated by very real ecological and structural challenges=
. In<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 my reading, the emergence of peer production is too fresh to =
be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 able to affirm that we are 'right now' in a pre-revol=
utionary or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 revolutionary situation. So we had the 'sudden systemic c=
risis' of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 2008, and the Depression that followed it, but nowhere near e=
nough<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the political and institutional changes that would be nece=
ssary<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 to launch a new successful kondratieff wave. So the wave will=
come<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 (though probably after another 'aftershock'), it will=
incorporate<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 'green' and 'p2p-commons' aspects subsumed in=
a new capitalist<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 compact, but it will be weak and messy as it will lack a new<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 'social compact'. On the plus side, it also gives the=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 counterforces time. The aim for me is that, by the time the n=
ext<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 mid-term Kondratieff wave hits, the counter-economy of the co=
mmons<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 will have sufficient force to have achieved at least 'par=
ity'. It<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 is only once parity is achieved, that a true phase transition=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 process will be on the agenda.=C2=A0 So the priorities right =
now, are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 to develop those type of practices of governance and property=
, and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 those types of politics and policy with the social movements<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 aligned with it. What is to be done right now is nothing less=
than<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 a grand reconstruction of emancipatory politics, aligned arou=
nd<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the structural changes brought about by both 'subsumed=
9; and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 'organic' forms of peer production. This is why our p=
roposals are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 dual, on the one hand our proposals for 'open cooperativi=
sm', i.e.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 a set of interventions to create an organic counter-economy; =
and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 on the other hand, the 'Commons Transition Plan', a s=
et of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 proposals to renew the transformative politics and policies o=
f<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 emancipatory social forces.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I too think some kind of new growth wave is alm=
ost inevitable,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 within a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 decade or so - and though it will probably not =
be on anywhere<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 near so<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 intensive as the postwar growth wave that so ma=
ny theorists<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 take as a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 norm, it could well be more extensive, reaching=
far more<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 people on our<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 densely populated planet. I also think such a n=
ew long wave<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 does imply<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 distinctly new technologies capable of attracti=
ng new<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 investment; but in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the absence of radical breakthroughs, the big d=
ifference is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 most likely<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 to be in the political and institutional struct=
ures that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 govern those<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 technologies. In other words, the current techn=
ology set is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 more likely<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 to be augmented and institutionally inflected (=
as early mass<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 manufacturing was by postwar Keynesian Fordism)=
than it is to be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 radically transformed (as Keynesian Fordism was=
radiclly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 transformed by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the IT revolution). In other words, we are like=
ly to get an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 extension<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and amplification of the certain aspects of the=
current<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm, but<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 under new institutional arrangements.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The problem is, Michel, you never really discus=
s the current<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 techno-economic paradigm in any serious way. Wh=
at you and your<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 co-author<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 are talking about, in Parts I and II, is a smal=
l though<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 important field<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of activity, the one that can be identified wit=
h keywords such<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 as P2P,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 social media, crowd-sourcing, sharing economy, =
etc. The best<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 parts of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the book contain significant insight into these=
activities, as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 one would<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 expect. However, by claiming to discuss the fut=
ure of the entire<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist system and then not really doing so,=
you blur the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 issue and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 diminish the potential value of your work.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I have explained why we have done so above, both by choice an=
d<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 because of our real limitations. Nevertheless, we are unapolo=
getic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 in the sense that though emergent, this is really in our opin=
ion,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the key to the transformation of our economies and societies.=
Yes,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 there is plenty going on, but the key lever today, that is ou=
r<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 thesis, is the emergence of peer production, of the commoners=
and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 peer producers, and of netarchical capital. Living in age, I =
see<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the move to middle class realities, I see the popular mobiliz=
ation<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 to share more of the proceeds, and this is important, but it =
is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 not crucial. What is crucial is the change in the mode of pro=
duction.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 One can follow Manuel Castells and call the cur=
rent<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 techno-economic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm "Informationalism" - or bett=
er, "Neoliberal<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Informationalism,"<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 to give some idea of how this mode of productio=
n is governed. But<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Informationalism does not mean that the only si=
gnificant<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 commodity on<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the contemporary market is information. Nor doe=
s it signal an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 eclipse of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 industry, as you suggest in chapter 1.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I don't think we are suggesting this anywhere in chapter =
1, so<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 this is either in my view a misinterpretation, or a lack of p=
roper<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 explanation on our part. What we call for is in fact a new ty=
pe of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 industrialization, ie. open, distributed and solidary forms o=
f<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 production, where 'what is heavy is local and what is lig=
ht is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 global'. In fact, we don't believe at all that "=
the only<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 significant commodity on the contemporary market is informati=
on";<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 we believe that information is being de-commodified.We believ=
e<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 that in the new emergence commons-driven economy, market<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 activities develop around this decommodified core, either in<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist formats, as in the current free software economy, =
or as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 we propose and is starting to happen, in post-capitalist form=
s<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 (market and non-market). We don't believe that at this st=
age,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 these organic counter-forms of peer production can be dominan=
t,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 but we believe they can be significantly build and strengthen=
ed,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and form the basis of a new politics, just as the cooperative=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 movement formed the basis of emergent labour in the 19th cent=
ury.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Instead, Neoliberal<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Informationalism has been based on a "lead=
technology" which<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 is new kind<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of producer goods, namely IT in all its facets =
(computers,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 software,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 cables, mobile telephony, communications satell=
ites, etc).<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 These goods<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 in combination with networked organizational fo=
rms are used to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 create<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 transnational supply chains, constituting what =
is generally called<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "just-in-time production" or "th=
e global factory." The<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 characteristic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 companies of neoliberal informationalism are no=
t Facebook and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Google, as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 one would gather from your book, nor even less,=
recent<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 start-ups like<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 AirBnB or Uber. They are giant networked firms =
like WalMart<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and Apple,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 which have their products manufactured in China=
, coordinate<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 their work<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 forces and supply chains through sophisticated =
IT systems, and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sell<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 their wares on the web as well as in the store.=
Or they are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 specialized<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 corporations like Cisco, Verizon and IBM, which=
furnish the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 hardware and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 software for the new mode of production, distri=
bution and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sales. All<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 these corporations have evolved under the anti-=
welfare policy<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mix of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 neoliberalism, and with the resources allocated=
by speculative<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 finance,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 which has largely replaced the central planning=
of national<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 governments.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Not coincidentally, finance itself is crucially=
enabled by IT.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Computers, cable and satellite networks, transn=
ationalism and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 financial<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 governance are key aspects of the current techn=
o-economic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I agree that this is the case, at the same time, I would stro=
ngly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 argue that the rapidly accelerating ecological, climate and<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 resource crisis will severely weaken this paradigm. These<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 transnational supply chains are extremely unsustainable and s=
o it<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 becomes a necessity for progressive politics for focus on sma=
rt<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 re-industrialisation and re-localisation of production. The t=
riple<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 internets of knowledge resources, energy and manufacturing gi=
ve a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 potential basis for a entire new vision of production and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 industrialization. The de-industrialization that neoliberalis=
m<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 wrought in the West is no fatality, and a very fragile constr=
uct<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 in ecological terms. We can't know if we succeed, but we =
can't<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 afford not to try, as the alternative is a chaotic desintegra=
tion<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the world system.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Now, it's necessary to add that older secto=
rs, such as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 petroleum, steel,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 chemicals, automobiles, engineering, grain prod=
uction, etc, remain<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 tremendously significant for the global economy=
. They are not<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 just going<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 to disappear in the next ten or twenty years. H=
owever, the way<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 these<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sectors are articulated, both internally and be=
tween each<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 other, has<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 effectively been transformed by IT, and that=
9;s why we can speak of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Neoliberal Informationalism as a distinct techn=
o-economic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm. As<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 you and Vasilis point out, this paradigm has be=
en predicated<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 on low-wage<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 precarious labor, and it has called on finance =
to furnish the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 means of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 consumption through the extension of credit to =
individuals.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The debt<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 burden of the working and middle classes has ri=
sen<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 tremendously and now,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 in the overdeveloped world at least, these clas=
ses can no<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 longer consume<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 enough to prop up economic growth. So the syste=
m is in a deep<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 crisis,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 one which cannot be resolved by simply pumping =
money into<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 asset markets<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 as various governments have been doing. That cr=
isis is further<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 intensified by geopolitical factors (rise of As=
ia) and by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 climate change<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (which has been made a lot worse by the rise of=
Asia). How<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 will the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 global political economy reconfigure itself und=
er these<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 circumstances?<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 And what can civil society do to influence the =
next<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 redeployment of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capital? That's what we need to know.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Agreed, and we believe our proposals are part of this mix of =
what<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 is needed, albeit not the whole story, as you correctly sugge=
st,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 but it will be a crucial part of that new story.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 In Part II, it's really interesting how you=
present a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 diagrammatic field<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of four distinct yet neighboring scenarios, div=
ided on the one<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 hand<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 between distributed and centralized organizatio=
n (or local and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 global<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 scales), and on the other hand, between capital=
ist and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 commons-based<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 development paths (or "for profit" an=
d "for benefit"<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 activities, as you<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 also say). However, for the reasons already sta=
ted, the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 for-profit side of the diagram is not very conv=
incing. In<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 chapters 4 and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 5 we are introduced to two supposedly emergent =
categories.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 First, a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 corporate-scale "netarchical capitalism&qu=
ot; where sharing and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 cooperative<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 production are enabled by interfaces with close=
d, privately<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 controlled<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 backends that facilitate the harvesting of mone=
tary value from<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 social<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 interaction. And second, an individual-scale &q=
uot;distributed<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism"<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 where everyone is asked to become a networked e=
ntrepreneur of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 him- or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 herself, creating their own backends for profit=
. Now, without<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 a doubt<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 these are already both realities. The first has=
already undergone<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 significant expansion, partially wiping out the=
old media<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sphere with<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 some inroads on the hobby, transport, in-person=
service and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 vacation<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sectors. The second has all the reality of neol=
iberal<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ideology: it is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the computerized version of the entrepreneurial=
ideal, where<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 everyone<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 freely competes in an open, unregulated economi=
c realm. But<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the claim<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 that these figures represent the capitalism of =
tomorrow could<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 only hold<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 true if "we are not talking about monopoly=
capitalism" - which<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 is a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 crucial caveat that you supply early on.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 But Brian, the fact that capitalism has other more complex<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 realities, does not at all invalidate that these are importan=
t<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 emegent realities. The exponential growth of netarchical<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism is a fact, not conjecture; and the very rapid grow=
th of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 precarious cognitive workers is also a fact (along with other=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 facts such as service workers growth and the growth of indust=
rial<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 working classes in the Global South). In the Netherlands, the=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 so-called independent zzp workers (estimated to count for hal=
f of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 precarious workers only), and reaching 25% of the workforce i=
f I'm<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 not mistaken, are the most rapidly pauperising sector of the<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 economy. Again what we are saying is that these are crucial<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 trends, because they are the ones that are aligned with the<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 tranformation towards commons driven developments. Netarchica=
l<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capital is based on the direct exploitation of human cooperat=
ion,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and networked structures, and attendant commons, are absolute=
ly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 crucial for the survival and self-organisation of precarious<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 knowledge workers. The existence of complex other forms of<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism does absolutely not invalidate that.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The problem is that we are talking about exactl=
y that, Michel,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 just look<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 around you. The great oligopolies that corral m=
ajor sectors of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the world<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 economy, fixing prices and blocking the entry o=
f smaller<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 actors, are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 alive and despicably well in every major econom=
ic sector,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 including IT;<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and they are supported by very solid forces of =
the national and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 transnational state. To suggest that monopoly c=
apitalism is on<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the way<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 out through some force of networked nature is j=
ust plain<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mystifying, and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 that's the principal argument I have with t=
his book.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 But we are nowhere suggesting that. In fact, netarchical<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism is a new form of monopoly capitalism; and distribu=
ted<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist networks are rapidly monopolizing as well. Already=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 bitcoin mining is in the hands of one dominant player and the=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ownership of the coins is more concentrated than that of sove=
reign<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 money! This is true for all distributed sectors, such as soci=
al<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 lending, crowdfunding, crowdsourcing, etc ...<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The reason we stress this, is historical, since it is precise=
ly a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 shift within the managerial classes, towards new systems of<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 production that it could subsume, that prepared the ground fo=
r<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 later phase transitions. It is the Roman emperors and landed<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 gentry that moved from slavery to the 'coloni' system=
, and it is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 forces within feudalism that financed the growth of the capit=
alist<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 sector.=C2=A0 But the new feudal and capitalist sectors that =
were first<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 subsumed and served the maintenance and survival of the old<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 system, at the same time created new social forces and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 contradictions that prepared the ground for more fundamental<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 change. So that is our argument, that the emergence of netarc=
hical<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and distributed capitalism show a shift from the managerial<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 classes towards the new modality of value creation and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 distribution. Given the understanding that this is precisely =
how<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the two other phase transitions that we now occured, rather t=
han<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 just deplore and critique this, our suggestion is to learn fr=
om<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 it. This means: how can commoners and peer producers render t=
he<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 seeds of the new system into a 'organic' system that =
can reproduce<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 it. This is therefore the meaning of the two other quadrants,=
they<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 represent the organic alternatives to that netarchical captur=
e.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 What we are doing is not denying the old class struggle betwe=
en<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 capital and labor, which continues to exist and operate, but =
to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 say that a new type of class struggle is emerging, that betwe=
en<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 commoners and netarchical capital. And we are saying, and of<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 course you could dispute this, that this new type of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 contradictions is the most pregnant for social change, becaus=
e it<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 has in itself the seedform of the new. It is the alliance bet=
ween<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the old and new emancipatory forces, which is key for social =
change.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Something else really is changing, though; and =
this is where<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the book's<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 proposals, and more generally, those collected =
by the P2P<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Foundation<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 over the last decade, are really worth one'=
s attention. What's<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 happening<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 is an impoverishment of the former "First =
World," which is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 losing out to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the newly developed countries at the same time =
as it starts being<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 subjected to the environmental stresses of clim=
ate change.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 What one can<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 see on the horizon is a gradual evening-out of =
global wages,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 leaving<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 much of the former West in decaying housing wit=
h legacy<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 appliances and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 amenities, while populations in the East and So=
uth rise up to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 a roughly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 similar level and then stagnate. That's alr=
eady happening: and the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 frustration it engenders was behind the wave of=
protests in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 2011-2013,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 whether in Egypt, Brazil, Russia and Turkey, or=
in Spain and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the US. It<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 is precisely the existence of the oligopolies a=
nd the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 financial elites<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (the famous 1%) that account for this dynamic. =
And we're<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 likely to see<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 even more intense frustration and anger as thes=
e populations<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 have to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 confront the difficulties of climate change. Un=
der these<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 conditions,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 both newly unemployed people and those who have=
gained or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 retained a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 precarious hold on middle-class status are like=
ly to find great<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 attraction in what the book calls "resilie=
nt communities" and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "global<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 commons." Additionally, intellectuals with=
a capacity to see the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 dead-end future, whatever their class, will sta=
rt to look for<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 serious<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 alternatives.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 We agree here. At the same time, I would not consider the sys=
tem<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 as static. The fundamental problem for the European populatio=
n is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 that the 'surplus value' is no longer available for p=
ositive<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 social contracts. But this is no law of nature, just as the L=
atin<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 American left showed that a revival of the progressive state =
was<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 possible (and achieved tremendous social progress in just ten=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 years, with every percent of GDP growth leading to four times=
more<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 poverty reduction than in Asia); just so a renewed progressiv=
e<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 left could set in motion, with a renewed vision of the partne=
r<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 state, re-industrialization policies that would relocate part=
of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 the surplus , available for social investments.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The discussion becomes tremendously interesting=
when the "for<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 benefit"<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 categories are discussed, in their local and gl=
obal forms.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 This is the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Marxian part of the book, where a change of the=
system itself<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 starts to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 look desirable. Both the for-benefit categories=
are based on the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 generative matrix of the Commons, and I love th=
e clarity with<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 which<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 you've expressed its basic principles: &quo=
t;It could be said that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 every<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Commons scheme basically has four interlinked c=
omponents: a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 resource<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (material and/or immaterial; replenishable and/=
or depletable); the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 community which shares it (the users, administr=
ators,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 producers and/or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 providers); the use value created through the s=
ocial<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 reproduction or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 preservation of these common goods; and the rul=
es and the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 participatory<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 property regimes that govern people's acces=
s to it."<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 At this point (Part III), the strict focus on i=
nformation<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 production is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 abandoned and what comes to the fore are the ne=
w possibilities<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 presented<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 by the maker revolution: not only 3-D printing,=
but all the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 computer-controlled tools which can use freely =
circulated<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 open-source<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 designs to create practical objects ranging fro=
m housing to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 automobiles.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 One can easily see the relevance of such produc=
tive capacities for<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 impoverished communities, especially when they =
are beset by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the stresses<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of changing climates, violent storms and soon, =
rising water<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 levels.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 What's more, to take a page from Jeremy Rif=
kin's recent books, it<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 becomes clear that with falling costs for solar=
and wind<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 generation,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 energy production itself could potentially be d=
ecentralized<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and managed<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 according to commons principles so as to build =
resilient<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 communities.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The combination of alternative energy sources w=
ith<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 micro-manufacturing<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 techniques represents a possible basis for a ne=
w form of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 economic growth<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 that could cater to very large numbers of peopl=
e despite, or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 rather<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 because of, their inability to reach Fordist an=
d Neoliberal<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 levels of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 grotesque hyperconsumption. If the development =
of capitalist<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 production<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 during the next upswing could be influenced so =
as to furnish the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 infrastructure and toolkits of decentralized en=
ergy production and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 micro-manufacturing, then the next wave of grow=
th could have many<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 positive consequences. That's the paradigm =
shift that we need,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and Part<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 III makes that quite clear, bravo. The question=
is, how to make it<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 happen? What are the "new institutional ar=
rangements" that we<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 need, and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 how to achieve them?<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Part of the answer can be found in another ebook we are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 publishing, that contains detailed proposals for a Commons<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Transition Plan, see <a href=3D"http://commonstransitions.org=
" target=3D"_blank">commonstransitions.org</a><br></div></div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://commonstransitions.org/" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://commonstransitions.<u></u>org/</a>> . Guy James (Staniforth) =
in cc<span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 can provide you with copies on request. The transition plan i=
s not<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 complete, since it only focuses on 'social knowledge'=
(but does<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 incorporate a stress on its material conditions), and we inte=
nd to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 work on this, with a focus on the material commons later on. =
Pat<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Conaty and Mike Lewis have already done brilliant work on<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 transitioning towards material commons infrastructures, and w=
e<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 hope to achieve a convergence and integration of these approa=
ches<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 later on.<br>
<br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The site <a href=3D"http://commonstransition.org" target=3D"_=
blank">commonstransition.org</a> <<a href=3D"http://commonstransition.or=
g/" target=3D"_blank">http://commonstransition.org/</a><u></u>>, is<div>=
<div class=3D"h5"><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 intended as a global platform to trash out precisely such com=
mons<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 transition experiences, practices and proposals.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Or as you and Vasilis write:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "Arguably, the issue is not to produce and=
consume less per<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 se, but to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 develop new models of production which will wor=
k on a higher<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 level than<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist models. We consider it difficult to =
challenge the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 dominant<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 system if we lack a working plan to transcend i=
t. A<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 post-capitalist<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 world is bound to entail more than a mere rever=
sal to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 pre-industrial<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 times. As the TEPS theory informs us [ie, the t=
heory of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 techno-economic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paradigm shifts], the adaptation of current ins=
titutions and the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 creation of new ones take place in the deployme=
nt phase of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 each TEP. We<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 claim that the times are, finally, mature enoug=
h to introduce<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 a radical<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 political agenda with brand new institutions, f=
ueled by the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 spirit of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the Commons and aiming to provide a viable glob=
al alternative<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 to the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist paradigm beyond degrowth or antiglob=
alization<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 rhetorics."<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Now, that's not Carlota Perez talking anymo=
re. That's a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 utopian Marxist<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 strain that has affinities with Italian Autonom=
ia, to the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 extent it<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 believes that progressive use-values slumber wi=
thin the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 technologies of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist exchange, and that these use-values =
can be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 liberated through<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the kinds of self-organization that the Interne=
t facilitates. The<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 question is, how to avoid making this a purely =
utopian<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 thinking, as<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Autonomia has proven to be so far? How can comm=
ons-based peer<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 production<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 reach deeply into daily life? And how can it ex=
pand globally,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 both as a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 philosophy and as a set of informational tools =
that can take full<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 advantage of the new decentralized energy and m=
anufacturing<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 toolkits?<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Or, to put it in strategic terms: How can civil=
-society actors<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 find the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 opportunity, in the current depression and in t=
he upswing that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 will<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 almost inevitably follow it, to push corporate =
production into<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 supplying<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the toolkits for a society that will finally es=
cape the worst<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and most<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 life-threatening consequences of the capitalist=
system?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The key thing here is to understand this is not utopian at al=
l (in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 my view, Autonomia focuses too much on resistance and struggl=
e,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and not enough on construction/creation) , but that millions =
of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 human beings are doing precisely that. The key becomes to lea=
rn<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 from each other, to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Th=
ings<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 like open value accounting, open supply chains, commons-orien=
ted<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 crowdfunding, etc .. ALREADY EXISTS. The issue is rather, how=
to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 scale, how to create social and political movements that can<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 support, expand and sustain it.<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 In chapter 8, I feel that you are groping for a=
way to bridge<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the gap<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 between two rather different things. First, the=
many specific<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 micro-examples of (mainly informational) common=
s-based<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 production that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 you do provide, in welcome detail. Second, a fu=
ll-fledged economic<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 praxis that could rival with the existing forms=
of Neoliberal<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Informationalism, which you (and the rest of us=
) can only imagine<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 somewhat fuzzily. The way you approach this pro=
blem suggests<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 that you do<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 recognize the difficulties of overcoming the no=
rms imposed by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 monopoly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalism: after all, they are exemplified by =
the trajectory<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of Free<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and Open-Source Software, which has still not b=
een broadly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 adopted even<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 though the operating systems are now perfectly =
serviceable and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 perfectly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 free. You cite two very promising projects from=
what could<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 become the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 next techno-economic paradigm, namely the Rep-R=
ap 3-D printer<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 project<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and the Wikispeed automobile project, both of w=
hich are<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 impressive and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 point the way toward a new articulation of soci=
al production.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 But it's<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 clear that without support from either large so=
cial movements, or<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 powerful economic actors, or more likely both, =
a new wave of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capitalist<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 growth will render these projects insignificant=
- or at least,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 no more<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 significant than Free Software is currently. Tr=
aditional monopoly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capital will put the breaks on Wikispeed. The c=
oming wave of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 investment<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and development has to be bent to fit collabora=
tive priorities.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Otherwise, a no-future scenario looms.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Here is a potential key: we already have a thriving nonprofit=
,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 cooperative, social and solidarity economy; and they have cap=
ital;<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 we have growing sectors of ethical finance etc ... And we hav=
e<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 rapidly growing open approaches, but that are subsumed by cap=
ital<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(such as the shared knowledge economy responsible for 1=
/6th of US<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 GDP). The key is to create a convergence between the already<=
br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 existing ethical economies, and the open economies.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 As you can see here, this has been one of the three strategic=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 priorities of our work at the P2P Foundation:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/What_the_P2P_Foundation_D=
id_in_2014" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/What_<u></u>the_P2P_=
Foundation_Did_in_2014</a><br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 It is in this context that you introduce the &q=
uot;Partner State<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Approach":<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "The PSA could be considered a cluster of =
policies and ideas whose<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 fundamental mission is to empower=C2=A0 direct =
social-value<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 creation, and to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 focus on the protection of the Commons sphere a=
s well as on the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 promotion of sustainable models of entrepreneur=
ship and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 participatory<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 politics." This is absolutely true: common=
s-based production<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 requires<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 infrastructure investments that commoners thems=
elves cannot<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 provide, at<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 least, not as individuals or a members of small=
and fractious<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 voluntary<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 networks. The implication (which I don't th=
ink is anywhere clearly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 stated in the book) is that we need collective =
investments in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 order to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 stimulate forms of growth that are very differe=
nt from those<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 seen under<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Neoliberal Informationalism. We need a governme=
nt capable of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 shaping an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 environment in which Commons-friendly investmen=
ts will be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 possible. Yet<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 so far, not a single state has emerged as a rel=
iable partner. I'm<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 curious: How do you feel about this today, Mich=
el (and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Vasilis), after<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the difficulties that the FLOK project encounte=
red in Ecuador,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 in the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 attempt to generate exactly such a Partner Stat=
e Approach?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I think it is definitely premature to have any national<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 government, to fully take up such a transformational policy a=
nd to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 transform itself for it. But that does not mean that no<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 prefigurative actions can be taken.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 In our customary annual review,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Top_Ten_P2P_Trends_of_201=
4" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/Top_<u></u>Ten_P2P_Trends_of_=
2014</a><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 we point to two trends, one is what is happening at the local=
level:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 i.e.<br>
<br></div></div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <*4. Cities and Countries of the Commons*<span class=3D"">=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The highlight for the P2P Foundation in 2014, was the invitat=
ion<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 by three Ecuadorian institutions, i.e. the FLOKSociety.org<br=
></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://FLOKSociety.org" target=3D"_blank">http=
://FLOKSociety.org</a>> project, to create transition policies<span clas=
s=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 and proposals to create a social knowledge economy in that<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 country. It resulted in a Commons Transition Plan<br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons_Transition_Pl=
an" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/<u></u>Commons_Transition_Pl=
an</a>>and more than 18<span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 separate legislative proposals. The transition plan is the fi=
rst<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ever transition plan to be focused around the commons, and<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 historically important even though the project itself seems<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 stalled at the nation-state level<br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/FLOK_Society_Project#=
Evaluation_by_Michel_Bauwens" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/<u=
></u>FLOK_Society_Project#<u></u>Evaluation_by_Michel_Bauwens</a>>.<span=
class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 But more local pilot projects, like the plan for open agricul=
tural<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 machinery in the poor district of Sigchos, under the leadersh=
ip of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 mayor Mario Andino, is progressing, with the help for example=
of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Kate Swade of Shared Assets.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 But if nation-state transitions seems premature, there is a l=
ot<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 happening at the city level.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 A breakthrough is undoubtedly the framework, co-developed by<=
br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Christian Iaione <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Chri=
stian_Iaione" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/<u></u>Christian_I=
aione</a>>,<span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 called the Bologna Regulation for the Care and Regeneration o=
f<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Urban Commons<br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Bologna_Regulation_fo=
r_the_Care_and_Regeneration_of_Urban_Commons" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pf=
oundation.net/<u></u>Bologna_Regulation_for_the_<u></u>Care_and_Regeneratio=
n_of_<u></u>Urban_Commons</a>>,<span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 which has reportedly been copied by 40 other Italian cities.<=
br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Co-Mantua <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Co-Mantua" =
target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/Co-<u></u>Mantua</a>> is one =
of the<span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 examples of such projects. Italy is generally a very mature<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 country for commons initiatives, and Michel Briand, of the<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 pioneering collaborative city of Brest in France, has calcula=
ted<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 there may be more than 100,000 urban commons projects in Fran=
ce alone.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Of great interest as well are the innovative territorial<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 strategies for distributed fabrication such as the Barcelona =
Fab<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 City project, see theBarcelona 5.0 Plan<br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Barcelona_5.0_Plan" t=
arget=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/<u></u>Barcelona_5.0_Plan</a>>=
.<span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 For more information about commons-oriented transitions, see<=
br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://commonstransitions.org" target=3D"_blank">c=
ommonstransitions.org</a> <<a href=3D"http://commonstransitions.org/" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">http://commonstransitions.<u></u>org/</a>> .<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 *Of utmost importance is of course also the experience in the=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Autonomy Region Rojava<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/Autonomy_Region_Rojav=
a" target=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net/<u></u>Autonomy_Region_Rojava=
</a>>*, as an<div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 impressive example of local and multicultural democracy, rece=
ntly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 described as a 'DIY Revolution' in Roar Magazine >=
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 The second trend is the likely coming to power of Podemos and=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Syriza. Whatever the difficulties they will face, whatever<br=
>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 mistakes they will make and sabotage they will face, they wil=
l<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 shake things up. I believe there is a significant opportunity=
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 there to create a dialogue and mutual learning, between the<b=
r>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 traditional reformist and statist approaches, and the new com=
mons<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 approaches.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 One of the things I have been thinking, or rather 'dreami=
ng'<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 about, is the creation of 'Commons Transitions Circles=
9;, i.e.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 pluralistic circles of progressive commons-oriented activists=
, who<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 would act to open the minds of the more traditional statist l=
eft,<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 towards the new potential opened up by commons approaches.<br=
>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 OK, go to go for now, I'll try to the remainder separatel=
y<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 The problems that our civilization faces are va=
st. The<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 extension of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 commons-based peer production from the software=
to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 manufacturing and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 energy production does suggest a path forward. =
But support for<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 it, in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the form of something like a Partner State, can=
only be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 generated from a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 far broader civil-society movement than we have=
today. Such a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 movement<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 is being called into existence by the rising aw=
areness that<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the current<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 form of development is literally a dead end. On=
e one hand, it is<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 important to nurture this movement (and ourselv=
es, as parts of<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 it) with<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 pragmatic principles of hope, of the kind provi=
ded by<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 experiments with<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Commons-based peer production. On the other, it=
's necessary to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 cultivate<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 a very lucid of what's actually happening i=
n society, not to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 paint an<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 apocalyptic picture but just to identify the re=
ally existing<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 obstacles.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 That kind of analysis is often lacking on the p=
ostmodern left.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 You could<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 have used a little more Trotsky and Mandel, imh=
o.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I think that civil-society movements have a tre=
mendous amount<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 to learn<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 from experiments with peer production, and ther=
efore, from the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 reflections in the last third of this book. How=
ever, I don't<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 think any<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of this will go anywhere without a more realist=
ic assessment<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 of the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 forces currently in play. A broad movement need=
s to know both<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 what to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ask for and what to create, in view of pushing =
the really existing<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 political-economic system towards a fundamental=
structural<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 change. That<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 means clearly facing the structure and power of=
corporate monopoly<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 capital in its transnational form. I feel you h=
ave dispatched<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 that issue<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 too quickly and on that level, the book could d=
efinitely be<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 improved.<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Actually, a careful read of this book has left =
me with the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 desire to<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 rewrite parts of it, while keeping others intac=
t - which I<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 guess is a<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 pretty good outcome for a book that reccomends =
the use of Peer<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Production Licenses!<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Let me close this long review/letter with one m=
ore quote from<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Bauwens<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 and Kostakis, a particularly astute and admirab=
le one:<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "According to Brynjolfsson and McAfee (201=
1) 'When the changes<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 happen<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 faster than expectations and/or institutions ca=
n adjust, the<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 transition<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 can be cataclysmic.' To avoid such a catacl=
ysm, we arguably need<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 political and social mobilization on the region=
al, national and<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 transnational scale, with a political agenda th=
at would<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 transform our<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 expectations, our economy, our infrastructures =
and our<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 institutions in<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 the vein of a Commons-oriented political econom=
y."<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I could not agree more.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 best, Brian<br>
<br></div></div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ______________________________<u></u>__________=
_________<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 NetworkedLabour mailing list<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 NetworkedLabour at lists.__<a href=3D"http://contr=
ast.org" target=3D"_blank">contra<u></u>st.org</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:NetworkedLabour at li=
sts.contrast.org" target=3D"_blank">NetworkedLabour at lists.<u></u>contrast.o=
rg</a>><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://lists.contrast.org/__mailman/=
listinfo/__networkedlabour" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.contrast.org/__<=
u></u>mailman/listinfo/__<u></u>networkedlabour</a><span class=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://lists.contrast.org/mailma=
n/listinfo/networkedlabour" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.contrast.org/<u>=
</u>mailman/listinfo/<u></u>networkedlabour</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 --<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">http://en.wiki.floksociety.<u></u>org/w/Research_Plan</a><b=
r>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 P2P Foundation: <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net" target=
=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a><br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/" target=3D"_blank">h=
ttp://p2pfoundation.net/</a>>=C2=A0 - <a href=3D"http://blog.p2pfoundati=
on.net" target=3D"_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://blog.p2pfoundation.<u></u>net/</a>><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li=
stinfo/p2p-foundation" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/<u></u=
>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-<u></u>foundation</a>>Updates:<span class=
=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target=3D"_blank">htt=
p://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href=3D"http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" =
target=3D"_blank">http://www.facebook.com/<u></u>mbauwens</a><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 #82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href=3D"http://enrichlist.org/th=
e-complete-list/" target=3D"_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-<u></u>comple=
te-list/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 --<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at:<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">http://en.wiki.floksociety.<u></u>org/w/Research_Plan</a><b=
r>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 P2P Foundation: <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net" target=
=3D"_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a><br></span>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net/" target=3D"_blank">h=
ttp://p2pfoundation.net/</a>>=C2=A0 - <a href=3D"http://blog.p2pfoundati=
on.net" target=3D"_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://blog.p2pfoundation.<u></u>net/</a>><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <<a href=3D"http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li=
stinfo/p2p-foundation" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/<u></u=
>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-<u></u>foundation</a>>Updates:<span class=
=3D""><br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target=3D"_blank">htt=
p://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href=3D"http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" =
target=3D"_blank">http://www.facebook.com/<u></u>mbauwens</a><br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 #82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href=3D"http://enrichlist.org/th=
e-complete-list/" target=3D"_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-<u></u>comple=
te-list/</a><br>
</span></blockquote><span class=3D"">
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at:<br>
<a href=3D"http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan" target=3D"_blank=
">http://en.wiki.floksociety.<u></u>org/w/Research_Plan</a><br>
<br>
P2P Foundation: <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net" target=3D"_blank">http=
://p2pfoundation.net</a>=C2=A0 - <a href=3D"http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" =
target=3D"_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
<br></span>
<<a href=3D"http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-fou=
ndation" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/<u></u>cgi-bin/mailm=
an/listinfo/p2p-<u></u>foundation</a>>Updates:<span class=3D""><br>
<a href=3D"http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target=3D"_blank">http://twitter.co=
m/mbauwens</a>; <a href=3D"http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://www.facebook.com/<u></u>mbauwens</a><br>
<br>
#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href=3D"http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-lis=
t/" target=3D"_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-<u></u>complete-list/</a><b=
r>
</span></blockquote>
</div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_signa=
ture"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at:=
=C2=A0<a href=3D"http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan" target=3D"=
_blank">http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan</a>=C2=A0</div><div>=
<br></div>P2P Foundation: <a href=3D"http://p2pfoundation.net" target=3D"_b=
lank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>=C2=A0 - <a href=3D"http://blog.p2pfounda=
tion.net" target=3D"_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br><br><a hr=
ef=3D"http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" =
target=3D"_blank"></a>Updates: <a href=3D"http://twitter.com/mbauwens" targ=
et=3D"_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href=3D"http://www.facebo=
ok.com/mbauwens" target=3D"_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br>=
<br>#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href=3D"http://enrichlist.org/the-complete=
-list/" target=3D"_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/</a> <br>=
</div></div>
</div>
--001a11c25f72c97fe1050bb9c12c--
More information about the P2P-Foundation
mailing list