[P2P-F] [WSF-Discuss] Bogdanov’s Organisational Science, the Commons and Sustainability by Fabian Tompsett

Wed Jul 29 11:29:23 CEST 2015

Dear Tord,

Here is an 2013 article and links of three practical projects hope
that gives a broader perspective:

Another World, Now! Coming of the Transnational Revolutions and the
Networked Prince:
http://www.academia.edu/5179504/Another_World_Now_Coming_of_the_Transnational_Revolutions_and_the_Networked_Prince

This is [CoDe]Proletkult: http://www.networkedlabour.net/   - CoDe
stands for cooperative and collaborative development of the self- co-
learning platform in order to produce and expand de-proletarian
culture of the classless society, as much as possible.

And this is an counter 'operational research' unit to build and
strengthen operational work for change:
http://www.networkedlabour.net/ networkedlabour list is the currently
most active aspect feeding in generative exchange.

Finally the GNUnion as a global networked labour union:
https://gnunion.wordpress.com/ it is designed as an organisational
tool for those enslaved by global IT companies like Google, Facebook,
Amazon, gameing companies and call centers.

so these are where and how I see Bogdanov's work and vision be more
than helpful.

best,
Orsan

On 28 July 2015 at 17:07, Tord Björk <tord.bjork at gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting perspectives both in terms of practical organizing of a
> movement, proletkult, and theoretically. There seems to be quite much
> underbenteath the surface produced by the institutionalized left and their
> state-centric tendencies.
>
> Yet some smaller notions can be added in relation to both the text and in
> general the way the left discuss societal matters at the moment.
>
> 1. The comments made by Tompsett putting Bogdanovs ideas into historical
> perspective by placing it in relation to the English revolution lacks one
> fundamental example emerging out of this revolution somewhat later. Tompsett
> sees the company, the commando based army and local commons (or if I
> understand the text correctly - local communities digging up commons stolen
> by the rich and sow corns" as the primary examples of organizational
> differenciations during the revolution.
>
> This fits well into a dominant strand today focusing upon local change
> either in terms of subcommandant Marcos talking about pockets of
> resistanceand change, the theory or ideology of horizontalism or Anglo
> American transition town concepts. Change as something occurring locally and
> then connecting to each other.
>
> I have not been reading Bogdanov so I do not know if this fits well with his
> theories, he himself was referring to the Paris Commune according to the
> text which can be claimed to be none of the examples given by Tompsett as 8
> hours working Day and electoral rights were included among the demands pout
> forward, very much in line with the global demands carried forward first by
> Australian workers in 1856 if I remember right and then spread globally with
> such methods as global actions Days on May 1st.
>
> My claim is that "Commons based Exemplary Laboratory" is not compareable  to
> the innovation of the company or the commando based army. Thus we still
> become helpless by using Bogdanov this way.
>
> More to the point I would say is the notion of the association and the mass
> organization of commoners which was also an innovation, first in England and
> then in Ireland. This social innovation scared those in power as it was not
> built on personal relationships in terms of being excepted in person by
> someone above but in terms of personal commitment to a common cause. In
> principle the association could with other words become a new society once
> it is able to fulfil most or all peoples needs. The emergence of
> associations has mainly been seen in the light of benevolent associations to
> stop slave trade and similar causes, somewhat racist and imperialistic way
> of placing history in the hands of nations in power rather than the
> simultaneous slave rebellions and pirate communities that spearheaded much
> of the popular movement social change in later centuries. Still the
> association is of importance, especially when the Irish turns it into a mass
> mobilizing tool in the early 19th century against the British and after this
> such movements as trade unions, peasant organization or lets say Proletkult.
> Today we have such movements as Via Campesina while many have been absorbed
> by state centrism or the project funding market more accountable to the
> state or funders than to the members.
>
> 2. There seems to me to that many intellectuals are looking at hot spots in
> history or geographically rather than trying to look at more general trends.
> My point of view in Sweden which is not a country were much is going on at
> the moment although the trend to emphasize exemplatory local projects has
> been dominating since mid 1980s. What Tompsett brings forward from Mexico
> was standard procedure in Nordic countries from 1844 and onwards. Grundtvig
> started a rebellion in Denmark against what was called "black pedagogy" and
> a mass movement emerged able of establishing maybe a thousand peoples high
> schools in all Nordic countries, mainly on the country side and often linked
> to the workers, abolitionist or peasant movement being able to promote
> something in line with Proletkult. One can say somethings about the
> limitations of this mass movement that simultaneously developed huge
> cooperatives building local chapters in every corner of the Nordic
> countries. Today there are some attempts in similar direction. But my main
> point here is that the way to claim only hot spots as interesting and pull
> them out of a common history of very similar development earlier of
> simultaneously will not bring us forward. Especially problematic are at
> least two things. By lacking empirical and theoretical concept that at least
> to some degree places different experiences into a common perspective by
> only looking at hot spots it will be hard to find what is really new. The
> other aspect is the risk of romanticizing the "exemplatory project". Among
> quite a few intellectuals today is seems very popular to criticize state
> centric models, but equally important is to not fall into the trap of
> avoiding to see how project, networking an horizontalism easily becomes
> trapped in market relationships or at least non-democratic informal power
> relationships.
>
> 3. Bogdanov seems interesting as he is both ecologically, organisationally
> and social aware, something quite uncommon. Thanks for sharing the text.
>
> Tord Björk
>
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Örsan Şenalp <orsan1234 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This essay uses Bogdanov’s Tektology, or organisational science to
>> compare three forms of organisation: Bourgeois corporation, the
>> Soldier-peasant army and the Exemplary laboratory and their role as
>> competing organisational forms offering market-based, command-based
>> and commons-based approaches to social organisation. Bogdanov’s role
>> as an educational innovator is compared with that of Gustavo Esteva,
>> and both are linked to the exemplary-laboratory organisation as a way
>> of combining learning with the commons. One outcome of Bogdanov’s
>> approach which is featured is that of Vladimir Vernadsky, the
>> Ukrainian bio-geochemist who discovered the role of man and other
>> living creatures in the generation of CO
>> 2 in the atmosphere. This reflects the strengths of Bogdanov’s
>> Tektology as way of approaching sustainability, which at the same time
>> fits with a commons-based innovative approach rooted in a dynamic
>> around autonomy and mutuality.
>>
>>
>> http://www.academia.edu/10149629/Bogdanov_s_Organisational_Science_the_Commons_and_Sustainability
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ** WSFDiscuss is an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of
>> information and views on the experience, practise, and theory of the World
>> Social Forum at any level (local, national, regional, and global) and on
>> related social and political movements and issues.  Join in !**
>> _______________________________________________
>> WSFDiscuss mailing list
>> POST to LIST : Send email to WorldSocialForum-Discuss at openspaceforum.net
>> SUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to
>> worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe at openspaceforum.net
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to
>> worldsocialforum-discuss-unsubscribe at openspaceforum.net
>> LIST ARCHIVES:
>> http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/
>> LIST INFORMATION:
>> http://openspaceforum.net/mailman/listinfo/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ** WSFDiscuss is an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of
> information and views on the experience, practise, and theory of the World
> Social Forum at any level (local, national, regional, and global) and on
> related social and political movements and issues.  Join in !**
> _______________________________________________
> WSFDiscuss mailing list
> POST to LIST : Send email to WorldSocialForum-Discuss at openspaceforum.net
> SUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to
> worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe at openspaceforum.net
> UNSUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to
> worldsocialforum-discuss-unsubscribe at openspaceforum.net
> LIST ARCHIVES:
> http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/
> LIST INFORMATION:
> http://openspaceforum.net/mailman/listinfo/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net