[P2P-F] Fwd: [Networkedlabour] <nettime> Consensus within the Bay Area elites?

Mon May 26 22:11:54 CEST 2014

Dear Brian,

many thanks for your answer. Never i wanted to devalue you. It was only 
my reaction to this part of your text.

We have to create our local technical infrastructure, that the people 
can design and construct localy, what they need. We do it on the base: 
"global thinking, local doing".

The first step is our communication system, the InterNet, "the 
inter-connection of local networks". It is our most important instrument 
for the free flowing of knowledge, ideas and methods.

We know, that all people on our planet have the potential to understand 
the laws of the nature. We have to open the environment for a free 
study. But never we can use the education systems or their principles in 
our environments.

This is the general problems of all licences like PPL, GPL or any other. 
Knowledge is always World-Heritage and we have to accept it. It is a 
rational process to understand and not a reaction process to the occupy 
of community ressources.

Knowledge is part of the basic community ressources like land, water and 
frequencies. Of course, we have more. But this are the basics. And with 
our communication system it is the same. It is always a community 
instrument. The lifelines of societies.

The communication system is the immaterial part of our transport system. 
And like all living systems our society have also two transport systems: 
material and immaterial.

This jointly developed transport systems are our basic instruments for 
the development of the independent local economy, based on the local 
technical infrastructure. And only on this basis we can speak from 
political independence. Without the independence in the economy, not the 
distribution system, all speaking of independence and autonomy is a 
cheap theater.

Dear Brian, this are some basics from me. I've invited some friends to 
read. Or to comment on.

I send you my proposal to the www.1net.org and NetMundial in Brasil. 
But, of course, it is a more technical theme.

many greetings, willi
Jinotepe, Nicaragua

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [P2P-F] Fwd: [Networkedlabour] <nettime> Consensus within 
the Bay Area elites?
Datum: Sun, 25 May 2014 01:06:20 -0500
Von: Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com>
Antwort an: bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com
An: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>,  P2P Foundation mailing 
list <p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org>
Kopie (CC): Kevin Flanagan <kev.flanagan at gmail.com>,  Michel Bauwens 
<michel at p2pfoundation.net>

Hello Willi,

Greetings, thanks for your mail. I find myself here amidst a very
interesting set of people and projects of which I am quite ignorant. But 
I am glad to be learning something. Hopefully some day in the future I 
will be able to really enage in the debates that occupy you all so 
passionately.

 > You wrote:
 > "What has typically been lacking, among the sectors oriented
 > toward p2p and the commons, is a real understanding of how important
 > state institutions and industrial development still is. If we want to
 > influence the responses to the crisis, we have to be aware of these
 > things and actively deal with them."
 >
 > This is the core of your thinking. You look like the rabbit at the
 > snake. But if you go more and more inside in the economy, then you
 > understand, that state institutions and industry are not important. We
 > don't need it.

Well, I can understand why you would say that, though I can only imagine 
what kinds of thoughts and efforts may lie behind your words. However, I 
think you do misjudge me, at least a little bit.

I write as one who is quite deeply involved in autonomous productive
activity. However, I think there is a strong tendency for those engaged
in these types of activities to overestimate their own potentials, and
severely underestimate that complex set of interlocking social relations 
which, in a kind of shorthand, is called "the state." in my view, we do 
so at the peril of becoming simply insignificant. We think we can do 
everything, that our way is the only way; yet our antagonist most often 
seems to be the one with the decisive influence on history.

Of course there is also a very strong and widespread tendency to
overestimate the powers of the capitalist state, and you rightly
denounce that. Life is a kind of balancing act between contradictory
truths. And at times it is vital to tip that balance in a new direction.

Believe me, I am for it! But we do have to know when and where and how
to push.

Good luck in your efforts, Brian

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [P2P-F] Fwd: [Networkedlabour] <nettime> Consensus within 
the Bay Area elites?
Datum: Sat, 24 May 2014 20:18:26 -0600
Von: willi uebelherr <willi.uebelherr at gmail.com>
An: P2P Foundation mailing list <p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org>
Kopie (CC): Kevin Flanagan <kev.flanagan at gmail.com>,  Michel Bauwens 
<michel at p2pfoundation.net>, Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com>

Dear Brian,

we don't know us. I read your texts in the maillist from P2P Foundation.

Never you find a way for any transition from your point of view. You
look to the top and not to the base.

You wrote:
"What has typically been lacking, among the sectors oriented
toward p2p and the commons, is a real understanding of how important
state institutions and industrial development still is. If we want to
influence the responses to the crisis, we have to be aware of these
things and actively deal with them."

This is the core of your thinking. You look like the rabbit at the
snake. But if you go more and more inside in the economy, then you
understand, that state institutions and industry are not important. We
don't need it.

And the actors in this areas know it very clear. The result is the
construction of more and more regulation and the propaganda for this
instances.

In the economy we don't find money. Only in the distribution system. And 
all, about what you wrote, have only his roots in the distribution system.

You have to totally disolve all the dogmas, which you torment.

Also the FLOK project in Ecuador can never be effective. This, because
the state institutions are the destinations. But this are primarly
parasitic institutions. They exist basicly on the extractivism, against
the people in Ecuador, against the Indigenas.

All this people in the state institutions and FLOK project are hoping
for a good income without any working. The only way to change the world
are the independent Comunas. Based on a independendent local economy and 
this is always based on local technical infrastructures.

We have to search for ways to create this. It means, to help the local
people to create her independent economy. And this include all the
decision-making power. Then the states are superfluous.

A very good text to the theoretical foundations of the FLOK project and
P2P Foundations is the text from Jakob Rigi:

The Coming Revolution of Peer Production and Revolutionary Cooperatives.

A Response to Michel Bauwens, Vasilis Kostakis and Stefan Meretz.
http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/486

many greetings, willi
Jinotepe, Nicaragua

Am 24/05/2014 15:05, schrieb Michel Bauwens:
 > a mustread of Brian Holmes
 >
 > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 > From: Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift at gmail.com>
 > Date: Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:41 PM
 > Subject: Re: [Networkedlabour] <nettime> Consensus within the Bay Area
 > elites?
 > To: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>, Jaap van Till <
 > vantill at gmail.com>
 >
 > Michel, it's great to hear from you. Your ideas are often on my mind: I
 > consider you the most precise, most generous and least compromised 
exponent
 > of the cooperative economy, which is clearly the best thing to have 
emerged
 > out of the short-lived growth surge of the 1990s. It is typical of you to
 > write immediately whenever someone expresses anything like an idea or a
 > proposal. Your attentiveness is really much appreciated.
 >
 > ...