[P2P-F] [P2P-es] P2P dual language - en dos idiomas

Mon Jul 21 13:21:34 CEST 2014

Yes thanks Michel for the reply,

Daniel also replied to Spanish list, and Bernardo translated and sent
it to me. Since the two language and two list solution is producing
more confusion I will prefer just to concentrate on English discussion
and try to make productive contribution. The thing is, I do agree with
the fact that there were really good names from critical world, yet
people like Stiglitz, or Rifkin,..  I return these guys, organic
intellectuals of the ruling classes, at the end..

It was in my mind for a long time, yet after these discussion I
returned to read about the partner state (also other approaches like
bio regional state) approach and your interpretation of it. After
initial scanning, I have come to an agreement with Kevin that,
partner state is a kind of process and project with an objective of
dissolution of political-social power into civil society in time.
http://p2pfoundation.net/Partner_State
since it is envisaged and co-argued -with V.Kostakis- openly, and also
your argument have been openly talking about and taking into account
the class positions, when thinking of the transition(s) to happen.

In this sense, I find the findings and papers from Ecuador important
not only for and in Ecuador contest, but in the broader context of
developing perspectives on and understanding of 'transition' in
networked age. This is one thing.

And since Ecuadorian state is one of the existing forms of really
existing states, the fate of the practical implementation of this
projects does not tell essentially about the ideas towards the
envisaged (optional) transition processes themselves. this is the
second thing.

May be I was the only one, yet I think it is really important, for all
who like to contribute meaningfully to this discussion to read those
relevant texts as the ones here online:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:P2P_State_Approaches
or an earlier text:
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/the-basic-orientation-of-p2p-theory-towards-societal-reform-transforming-civil-society-the-private-and-the-state/2011/07/12

To go beyond the critics of who and how was the flok project
implemented -so getting rid of an exchange contained with rumour kind
of soft-data. Then we could elaborate a stronger debate drawing more
insights out of the Ecuadorian experience. That can be re-thought and
make impact somewhere else as well.

My problems with the framework of Partner State and 'transition'
projections, although the Michel and Kostakis' analyses takes the
different forms of state and class struggle seriously, they do not
deliver deeper perspective or elaboration (yet) on the role of intra
and inter class struggles currently taking place in the changing
complex global-geographical political economy framework, the
historical structure so to speak, that is making an ultimate impact on
the agency and politics at the moment.

People like Rifkin and Stizglitz are too close to evil, and swimming
in the wealth. Check this recent Alternet article out about the
findings of a research on a..holes:

http://www.alternet.org/culture/ahole-effect-what-wealth-does-brain?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark

may be one can insist that exceptions are there so we can get them in
broader alliance for commons.. but those who are hired by the ruling
elite, and accepting to serve them personally, or becoming the head of
an institution like IMF, can not be on the side of labour or farmers,
or good people, nor the commons. I found Mckenzie Wark's analysis on
verctoral class, very useful in this sense:
https://www.academia.edu/182789/A_Hacker_Manifesto
as well as his alternative broader alliance of workers, farmers, and hackers.

In case we think of a broader alliance at the top, that make sense to
talk to people like Rifkin and Stiglizt -even directly with Soros and
Eric Schmit.

Yet then one has to forget about the formation of a real grassroots alliance.

Orsan

On 19 July 2014 06:29, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
> hi Orsan,
>
> not sure who exactly the original idea came from, but the high level expert
> group and the names came to me via Carlos Prieto,
>
> I do not share the qualms about working with someone like Stiglitz, because
> in the context in which we are working, high level moderate progressive
> economist do lend legitimacy to proposals and projects
>
> broad social change needs broad coalitions and stiglizs is in my view at the
> side of the labour and social movements
>
> in the end this high level group, which would also have included
> post-autonomistts like andrea fumagally etc ..,  never got funded nor
> materialized
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It May sound off the track, yet while I was checking FLOK management page,
>> I did see list of experts and advisors and who suggested them. I saw that
>> Daniel Vasquez did recommend as macro economic advisor famous ex head of
>> IMF, later it's self-critical economist!! Can anyone confirm and explain
>> what is the logic of appointing Joseph Stiglitz as an high level expert and
>> advisor to a project like this, aiming Ecuador's transition to a FLOK
>> society? For me these are kind of really problematic co-optative steps needs
>> to be avoided and criticized. I have been waiting and waiting from Bernardo,
>> Xabier and Daniel any kind of reaction or self-reflexive report, noting
>> heard anything or am not yet aware of. Than I started to get suspicious are
>> there  Conscious steps taken and are we being pulled in alternative p2p -
>> commons Keynesian project? So partner state can be sounding very nice
>> theory, yet at the end it can turn into they are state, some of us partners
>> and business goes usual for the billions, and the commons.. What kind of
>> consciousness and check and balance we will be able to build. Another
>> initiative I found about is Global Marshall Plan initiative to which some of
>> out dear friends got involved, under the UN framework promoting An idea of
>> Commons Charters instead of Millennium Goals, which was scheduled to 2015. I
>> again am not against involvement and engagement with the state to open,
>> transform, and dissolve it from bottom to up, yet with giant capitalist
>> partners like al gore, bill gates, bono, Soros, elite groups like club of
>> Rome, club of Budapest, ... A child can guess where would the game end up!
>> Do not want to judgmental but we have seen this movie many times, perfect
>> ideas and hypotheses, communism itself may easily be spoiled. P2p and
>> commons should be protected carefully...
>> Orsan
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 18 Jul 2014, at 04:23, willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > Am 7/17/2014 1:33 PM, schrieb Bernardo Gutiérrez:
>> >> Estimado Willi
>> >>
>> >> Gracias por tu aporte. El idioma de la lista p2p-es es el español, por
>> >> lo
>> >> que no es buena idea "to bring this two language spaces together"
>> >> imponiendo el inglés, como no lo es enviar el mismo mail a listas con
>> >> diferentes idiomas. Tú mismo criticaste a los que escribían en inglés a
>> >> las
>> >> listas de FLOK. Lo correcto es enviarlo a diferentes listas, cada una
>> >> con
>> >> su idioma, o escribir en todos los idiomas para todas
>> >>
>> >> Un abrazo
>> >> Bernardo
>> >>
>> >> Dear Willi
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for your comment. The commom language of p2p-es is Spanish, so I
>> >> think it is not a good idea "to bring this two language spaces
>> >> together"
>> >> imposing English, as it is not a good practice to send the same mail
>> >> with
>> >> just one language to different lists. You were  critic with those who
>> >> wrote
>> >> in English in FLOK lists. The proper could be to send the message in
>> >> different languages to different lists or to write in both languages
>> >> and
>> >> send the message
>> >>
>> >> Best
>> >> Bernardo
>> >
>> > Dear friends,
>> >
>> > this is a very clear and correct position. I think, the writers write in
>> > two languages, if they addressed the two language spaces. Normally it is
>> > enough to use google translation between english and spanish to
>> > understand. A good english we can translate and understand. A good
>> > spanish also. (not for me, because my english is very bad).
>> >
>> > The other is our interest to distribute some texts from one language
>> > space to the other. We need the support from this people, they speak
>> > both languages.
>> >
>> > many greetings, willi
>> >
>> >
>> > Querid at s amig at s,
>> >
>> > esta es una posición muy clara y correcta. Creo que, los escritores
>> > escriben en dos idiomas, si se dirigían los dos espacios lingüísticos.
>> > Normalmente es suficiente con utilizar traducción de Google entre Inglés
>> > y español para entender. Un buen Inglés podemos traducir y entender. Un
>> > buen español también. (no para mí, porque mi inglés es muy malo).
>> >
>> > El otro es nuestro interés para distribuir algunos de los textos de un
>> > espacio idioma a otro. Necesitamos el apoyo de este pueblo, hablan los
>> > dos idiomas.
>> >
>> > Muchas saludas, willi
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>> > http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>> > https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/