[P2P-F] ConFLOKt resolution

[Orsan Senalp]

Dear willi and all, 

First of all apologies, I realized that there was a mistake, i meant NOT:
> This of course is NOT separate 
> from the role of classes, class formations and struggles, capitalist or ruling class strategies, and counter class strategies, the workers', farmers, hackers, commoners position in all these experimental relations, like the role and position of workers - knowledge producers 
> in a mixed collaborative horizontal and vertical relationship to state 
> and capital goes on."

So if classes, state, production. Value so on, are set of social relationships between social and historical individuals, collective agencies as well as structures then there can be different approaches about the possible -how / at which level / to what degree which class alliances so on / fundemental change towards emancipation will we are going to make of.. Here i find important to see that p2p advancement has broght about qualitativ and quantative differences. For instance the amount of intellectual worker is one of the radical qualitative differences, or the forms and intensity of Connectivity, which has brought about a possibility of global working class self-formation, this is qualitatively different situation. Other is possibility of p2pnisation of any kind if given social structure, because of the networkisation process underly many if those structures. On the contrary ruling classes and their capacity to counter p2pisation is massively increased via surveillance, intelligence, meta-data so on. So the fight beteen Local, national, regional and global classes is given via compleat multilayered and hierarchical networks. That's why, similar to GNU GPL- PPL or in general what it aims is a core to this equation. Which is the need for locally defined social protocols and real adoption of those social protocols -with real time check balance by the nodes- in the network structures. In this regard such present conflict and experiences are very valuable for us to identify, learn about, strengthen, such protocols for distributed social networks. 
From this vantage point I think we may be in a historically different situation or conjuncture where worries about state, capital, reformism can be rethought, and overcome. Will try to open this thought a bit more tomorrow..
Orsan 


> On 11 Jul 2014, at 22:16, willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear Orsan,
> 
> i thank you very much for this statement. It is realy important that we 
> bring the people of the different laguage spaces together.
> 
> you wrote.
> "I agree with previous comments and counter comments, on that one of the 
> most important political lesson that one can get from such a debate 
> would be about the state - p2p encounter. This of course is separate 
> from the role of classes, class formations and struggles, capitalist or 
> ruling class strategies, and counter class strategies, the workers', 
> farmers, hackers, commoners position in all these experimental 
> relations, like the role and position of workers - knowledge producers 
> in a mixed collaborative horizontal and vertical relationship to state 
> and capital goes on."
> 
> I think also, that this question is the center of our trouble in the 
> discussion. And the lines don't go between FLOK management and Michel 
> and his friends. In this question i have a big conflict with Gordon. The 
> result was, he never want to get a mail from me.
> 
> But for our commom future we have to discuss our relation to the state 
> in general. For me, if i read the papers from Flok, immediatly i know 
> that never it can work. Our discussion trouble come from some illusions 
> of transformation a real society with state institutions.
> 
> You can see it in our europe and asia history, also in Cuba, Venezuela 
> and Nicaragua.
> 
> many greetings, willi
> 
> 
> 
> Am 7/11/2014 7:56 AM, schrieb Orsan:
>> First of all, I have serious doubts about we are all making disaster out of problems raising out of practicalities could have been avoided such a conflict. It is sad because seems like sides are open to debate so we could also learn more, but some practical difficulties makes things worse. Therefore I have below modest and humble suggestions to all the sides involved in this conflict, (would appreciate if any one on both lists could pass it to the Es list as well);
>> 
>> i. putting all the stones out from your pockets, but first allow all the sides to get on the same conversation(s), so that people like me, the audience can get a complete overview, and get less confused. The first email of Michel, was to this EN list, Spanish list and may be one other. Then some people responded in the Spanish list  -I am guessing because I am not on that list, and cant read Es- and some to EN list, but all without CC.ing to the other two lists. Then disussion got devided and as far as I understand Xabier, Daniel, Bernardo, and some others involved and mentioned are not in the EN list. I think this would only put oil on the fire and we don't want that. This might be the reson behind many confusions, like Gordon asking why people from Ecuador not responding, may be they are/were on the Es list.
>> 
>> ii. Of course this is an importat debate and will go out public, and should go. But again how will it be possible to carry the context of this scattered discussion out?
>> 
>> iii. All sides need to stop accusing each other based on intuitions or weak evidence. either on the list or in the private emails sending to each other. The scattered-ness of the debate can create a worsening escalation and more damage on all sides.
>> 
>> There are lots of political, practical, cultural and most importantly economical grounds we can learn from such conflicts at every level from micro (personality) to macro culture ad cosmos. If we could manage to turn this entire discussion from the very self-destructive point we are at now, then may be we could manage to turn it into a rich learning experience.
>> 
>> I agree with previous comments and counter comments, on that one of the most important political lesson that one can get from such a debate would be about the state - p2p encounter. This of course is separate from the role of classes, class formations and struggles, capitalist or ruling class strategies, and counter class strategies, the workers', farmers, hackers, commoners position in all these experimental relations, like the role and position of workers - knowledge producers in a mixed collaborative horizontal and vertical relationship to state and capital goes on.
>> 
>> There are again of course very juicy and serious areas like CIA involvement. neocons' infiltration, so on so fort. But if any one personally or publicly going to do that, he or she had better to do it with delivering as perfect as possible theoretical and hard framework and evidence, other wise whoever does it can only damages his / herself in the age of networks.
>> 
>> I have my own arguments and analysis in process of formation, which I would like to deliver into the exchange; but would be possible and useful if we could unite this confusing exchanges on one EN and one ES, so two lists, and cc all the relevant emails to both lists. Otherwise I don't see how would it be useful and wonder if it would worth to effort for that.
>> 
>> For a short while the tone and accusation were going down, hope we can manage it and start generating positive energies again.
>> 
>> Orsan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
> 
> _______________________________________________
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation