[P2P-F] an evaluation of the flok

[John Baxter]

Thank you for continuing to share the rough bits Michel

I always looked to FLOK as an 'ambitious' research project that would
produce much value but couldn't imagine that it would really lead to the
sort of change on Ecuador that was hoped.  Though I shared the hopes.

Looking at what you have done (the transition proposal) makes me think of
Holmgren's take on present cultural proliferation— that whilst mostly
wasteful, exactly that wasteful diversity makes the amazing things possible
that will really be of ongoing value as we steward challenging transitions
on this planet (especially as resource constraints will likely soon make
such rich cultural production impossible).

Looking over the transition proposal for the first time recently was
incredibly inspiring.  I think you have produced (more accurately, are
producing) one of the few great gems that will continue to be meaningful
and valuable regardless of how quickly its initial motivation is forgotten.

I write to make sure everyone has an eye on FLOK from this angle.


*John Baxter*
jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au>
0405 447 829
@jsbaxter_ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>

*note my reclamation policy means I process my inbox once daily, if that.*
*happy to hear about anything urgent via phone or Twitter*

*"Reclaiming quality of life one hack at a time"*


On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
wrote:

> Here is a nice ecuadorian and in my view balanced evaluation of the flok,
>
> in order to avoid inflaming, I removed the name of the author and most of
> the persons cited
>
> Since I have been repeatedly threatened and intimidated in an attempt to
> avoid any independent political evaluation of the flok, I don't see any
> point in continuing to be careful about some of its unfortunately realities:
>
> from an ecuadorian person who participated in the flok process
>
> <<
>
> It's sad but the failure of something like FLOK is just another part of
> life. Big picture, what mattered in Ecuador was introducing revolutionary
> ideas to the population, and I think the way your team decided to carry out
> research did impact many key people and foment important connections
> in-country. What mattered for the P2P movement worldwide is learning from
> failures, and you're more in tune with how that is going to move forward.
> The case of Bernardo is very sad ... the case of Daniel V. somewhat sadder.
>
> I do understand Ecuador much more than Bernardo or Daniel V. do, and I can
> predict what FLOK is going to mean in the political landscape: the word
> FLOK will eventually mean nothing. The papers it produced will mean
> nothing. What will last will be the connections between people that it left
> behind. This is why it saddens me that within the category of the people
> who met via FLOK, some of them don't see the value of the others, and the
> strength that the organism that coalesced in Quito could have. I'm sorry
> that they're treating you the way they are. It's despicable. I think that
> people that know you will see through the vitriol and judge you for your
> actions rather than the words of others.
>
>  I don't think "FLOK" as it was imagined in Ecuador can be rescued. I
> think if there's a power struggle over the idea or the papers produced at
> the summit, that will just sink it faster. My opinion (and keep in mind
> that I don't know much about what happened at the summit) is that you would
> benefit from even more distance between yourself and Daniel V's project,
> that you should continue to be open to the public and continue to process
> the "whys" of your split and critique of the project, but move on without
> the label "FLOK" on what you do. There's a measure of pride and ownership
> in not wanting something that you loved, i.e. the idea of FLOK, to be
> completely taken over by people whose ideas you hate, but that's how open
> source stuff works, I suppose :) I don't think the way Daniel V. and co. do
> things is going to conquer Ecuador. Actually, I'm positive that he will
> continue to fail. Ecuadorians are not fond of being ruled by centralized
> power, especially not from abroad. He's successful when he operates in the
> shadows and when he uses Ecuadorians like Andres or Isabel as puppets to
> speak to the locals, and foreigners with more cache, like yourself, to
> speak to the international community. On his own, operating in Ecuador,
> he's pretty harmless. And since he continually alienates people, I think
> he'll always end up alone.
>
> So, take heart, I suppose? "
>
> --
> *Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no
> record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..*
>
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
>
> _______________________________________________
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20140705/2ec75a86/attachment.htm