[P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] Internet Social Forum & Climate
Michel Bauwens
michel at p2pfoundation.net
Thu Jun 18 09:30:25 CEST 2015
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:42 AM, peter waterman <
peterwaterman1936 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Michel
>
> Although, as you know, I generally agree with your posture toward ICT, I
> am not sure whether your response meets Ariel's concerns. Let me inter-leaf
> in horrible CAPS...
>
>
> 1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement:
> Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist.
> <http://snuproject.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/1987-e-reader-ed-by-peter-waterman-on-labour-social-movements-and-internationalism-the-old-internationalism-and-the-new/>http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism
> _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/
> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/> (Free).
>
> 2. 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social
> Movement Internationalisms'. (Free).
> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>
> * <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>*
> 3. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in Jai
> Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements:
> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/>Struggles
> for Other Worlds (Part I).
> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/> (10
> Euros).
> 4. 2012. EBook: Recovering Internationalism
> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A
> compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download
> formats]
> 5. 2013. EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum:
> Critical Explorations
> http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/
> 6. 2012. Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: *For
> the Global Emancipation of Labour
> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>*
> 7. 2005-?
> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf>
> Ongoing. Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.???. Needed:
> a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!)
> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf>
> 8. 2011. Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements Confront
> a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism
> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) (c.
> 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980's-90's).
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
> wrote:
>
>> dear Ariel,
>>
>> I understand the argument, and the energy costs,
>>
>> my argument is two-fold
>>
>> 1) that in a different systemic context, internet energy usage can be
>> seriously curtailed
>> (SEEMS TO BE 3-FOLD!). DEPENDENCE ON A 'DIFFERENT SYSTEMIC CONTEXT' IS A
>> LITTLE LIKE SAYING, AS WE DID IN HAMPSTEAD YCL 1951: 'AFTER THE REVOLUTION
>> THE MEN WILL HAVE THE BABIES'. MOREOVER, THIS POINT DOES NOT ADDRESS EITHER
>> THE MOMENT OF RAW-MATERIAL EXTRACTION NOR THAT OF WHAT I CALL 'INSTANT
>> OBSOLESCENCE' AND ITS POLLUTION EFFECTS.
>>
>
no, Ariel questions the internet and communications infrastructure in
general, so the argument that this is context-dependent is crucial, unless
you assume that capitalism is eternal ; obviously the internet is polluting
, and the answer there is indeed to do something about it, not wishing it
away; and lots of people are working on that; to that add the crucial
argument that the internet itself may be saving a lot more energy that it
is spending itself, through its energy efficiencies and dematerialization
effect; in short, it allows zero marginal cost economics
b creating high knowledge intensive production (zie also the arguments and
documentation on rifkin on this)
>
>> 2) that it is in any case an essential civilizational advance, like
>> writing etc, which we will want to preserve even in times of crisis
>>
> AGREED, A *CIVILISATION* ADVANCE, NOT JUST A CAPITALIST ONE (CASTELLS
> SAYS SOMETHING LIKE 'TRANS-EPOCHAL').
>
> 'EVEN'? IN SO FAR AS WE ARE LIVING A *CIVILISATIONAL *CRISIS, I WOULD
> SAY THAT ICT IS BOTH PART OF THE PROBLEM AND PART OF THE SOLUTION.
>
fully agree, so the whole meaning of our work at the p2p foundation is to
be part of the solution
>
>> 3) that it is essential to social struggle
>>
>
> INDEEDY. SOCIAL STRUGGLE IS TAKING PLACE BOTH WITH AND WITHIN ICT.
> MOREOVER, IT INCORPORATES THE PRINCIPLE OF FEEDBACK, IT HAS A HORIZONTAL
> POTENTIAL (THUS UNDERMINING, FOR EXAMPLE, THE TRADITIONAL HIERARCHY OF THE
> TRADITIONAL SOCIAL MOVEMENT ORGANISATION), AND (AS ONE OF THE DOCS ON P2P
> POINTS OUT) HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR EMPOWERING THE LOCAL AND THE SMALL-SCALE
> PRODUCTION.
>
>
yes, what i have been saying for about 10 years now
>
>> 4) that it is essential for the transformation of the economy towards
>> sustainability if we want to avoid massive loss of human life
>>
>
> AGREED, BUT NEEDS SPELLING OUT. AND THE SOURCES OF SUCH ARGUMENTS IN THE
> P2P DOCS YOU INDICATE AROUSE MY SCEPTICISM.
>
>
that argument can be returned since it seems most of the arguments on
energy cost can be traced back to the coal industry
>
>> Of course, we are having this conversation of the network as well,
>>
>
> ALL OF WHICH IS NOT TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH ARIEL'S POSTURE, AS YOU MAY
> HAVE NOTICED IN PREVIOUS POSTINGS IN THIS EXCHANGE!
>
k
>
> Best,
>
> Peter
>
>
>>
>> see also: http://p2pfoundation.net/Internet_is_NOT_an_Energy_Hog
>>
>> eventually http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Ecology#Green_Computing /
>> http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Ecology#Specifics:_Green_Computing
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Ariel Salleh <arielsalleh7 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Michel
>>> Thanks. There are a number of interesting political economy questions in
>>> this outline of P2P commoning but let's keep focus on the environmental
>>> costs of ICT -
>>> like the massive contradiction faced by WSF activists between dependency
>>> on the Internet, on one hand, and Climate Change, on the other.
>>>
>>> Internet Cloud data centers or server farms are giant warehouses stacked
>>> with computers covering a denuded land area of hundreds of acres across a
>>> given state.
>>> They draw electricity to function as info-distributors and email
>>> storehouses, but day and night, generate so much heat that half as much
>>> power again must be used to cool the machines by air-conditioning.
>>> Google Corp alone is said to have over 20 ‘farms', housing some half
>>> million servers - each with a power consumption measured in triple digit
>>> megawatts.
>>> To gauge scale, we can compare domestic use where one megawatt would on
>>> average supply 1000 homes.
>>> Computing is seen as clean technology, but only because its ecological
>>> footprint - mining, global warming - is externalized on to nature and less
>>> privileged others to deal with.
>>> Ariel
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15 Jun 2015, at 9:18 pm, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> the solution to me seems obviously not to leave the communication power
>>> in the hands of the elite only, but to democratize it and make it
>>> sustainable.
>>>
>>> I would guess that the change in mode of production, using globally
>>> networked distributed production (light is global, heavy is local) would
>>> have the following effects, first in terms of redistribution of value:
>>>
>>> * interest-free money would remove 38-48 percent of production costs
>>> that now go directly to the elite
>>>
>>> * abolisning IP taxes as well would also have a huge redistributional
>>> effect, both these first measures would redirect massive amounts of capital
>>> for making production sustainable
>>>
>>> * creatomg commons-producing open cooperative models would keep the
>>> surplus value within the hands of primary producers as well, causing the
>>> same re-investment potential
>>>
>>>
>>> The direct effects of networked local production models would be:
>>>
>>> * local production would remove 75% of production costs by eliminating
>>> transport
>>>
>>> * local production 'on demand' would eliminate overproduction but also
>>> the massive need for promoting consumption through mass advertising and
>>> communication
>>>
>>> * open supply chains would make the transformation possible towards a
>>> massive adoption of circular economy principles and cradle to cradle design
>>>
>>> * together with open book accounting this would ensure also a massive
>>> ethical shift towards fair distribution of value
>>>
>>> Of course, none of these is an automatic result of technology alone, but
>>> of a techno-social appropriation of technology by struggling populations,
>>> and in the meantime, by prefigurative productive communities.
>>>
>>> None of this can be done without the mutualization of knowledge and
>>> physical infrastructures.
>>>
>>> Without networked technology, this can only be done by massive loss of
>>> human life. For example, without technology, the renewable transition would
>>> be catastrophic since people would revert to wood burning and other
>>> destructive practices, while solar and wind technology would ensure a much
>>> smoother transition path.
>>>
>>> The answer can never be anti-technology, since the use of technology is
>>> what defines being human, but 'what technology and for whom'. The internet
>>> has to be re-appropriated, made sustainable, and put to use for a massive
>>> transition of our industrial and agricultural basis, not left into the
>>> hands of the enemies of mankind.
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Ariel Salleh <arielsalleh7 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter - of course, we both love a good wrestle of ideas. But I don’t
>>>> see you engaging below with either - commodification - or - global warming.
>>>> The first topic we can save for another day, because I have work to get
>>>> on with here.
>>>>
>>>> But re global warming, as I wrote yesterday:
>>>>
>>>> A globally just technology would not damage the planetary ecosystem
>>>>> that we all depend on for our very existence. The Internet has massive
>>>>> costs in terms of toxifying water - just as we approach “peak water”.
>>>>>
>>>> It’s global warming impacts alone should be enough to stop WSF
>>>>> activists in their tracks.
>>>>> Then there are the medical effects of electromagnetic radiation on
>>>>> human bodies.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will be really grateful if you can point me to a serious
>>>> consideration of climate impacts among any of the cyber scholars you list
>>>> below.
>>>> Ariel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 13 Jun 2015, at 7:45 pm, peter waterman <peterwaterman1936 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ariel:
>>>>
>>>> It is a pleasure to dialogue with you. But to avoid us going round in
>>>> circles, rather than in a constructive spiral, I should really leave a
>>>> defence of - no a positive, eco-sensitive, gender-aware - the emancipatory
>>>> implications of the internet/the web/cyberspace to those better qualified
>>>> than I.
>>>>
>>>> So I will take issue with one one para of yours:
>>>>
>>>> 'No I think you are not quite grasping the full meanings of
>>>> ‘commodification' and 'colonisation' as materially and culturally embodied
>>>> in this manufactured instrument the Internet. That reflects perhaps your
>>>> marxist schooling, which tradition has leaned towards an assumption that
>>>> technologies are neutral.
>>>> Here it seems important to emphasise the difference between a
>>>> technology and a tool. The latter is a relatively simple object. The former
>>>> brings - and commits us to - a whole fandangle of social relations.'
>>>>
>>>> My Marxist schooling: A touch, a touch, I do confess. But it was,
>>>> rather, a Communist schooling, to which your strictures, here and
>>>> elsewhere, do certainly apply. I have been struggling with both, however,
>>>> since - let's say - my first experience of living with and under Communism,
>>>> in Czechoslovakia, 1955-8.
>>>>
>>>> Commodification and colonisation: the first of these is pretty much
>>>> associated with Marxism. The second was taken over and reworked in
>>>> Marxist/Leninist theories of imperialism.
>>>>
>>>> Technology: I think we have to recognise this as marked by profound
>>>> internal contradictions.
>>>>
>>>> It was not the intention of the railway to make it possible for French
>>>> workers to take a cheap trip to London, to meet up with those of other
>>>> countries, 1851 (I seem to recall).
>>>>
>>>> No more was it the intention of the German Empire that their sealed
>>>> train, with Lenin inside, should lead to the Bolshevik Revolution (they
>>>> only wanted him to screw up the Russian Empire's war effort).
>>>>
>>>> I go with the spirit of Hans Magnus Enzensberger, commenting on the
>>>> Paris 1968 activists' failure to occupy the TV rather than the Opera, and
>>>> to depend on wall slogans and hand-lithographed posters. He said, of the
>>>> highest capitalist communication technology of that era, 'A distaste for
>>>> handling shit is something sewer workers can hardly afford'.
>>>>
>>>> Well, the latest capitalist technology is, in comparison, dramatically
>>>> different from the shit of 1968. It has created a new universe, which I
>>>> call Cyberia, of an extremely contradictory nature. It is, of course, both
>>>> surrounded by shit, full of shit and productive of shit. You have stressed
>>>> the ecology-destructive effects of the technology involved. These are known
>>>> to those concerned with emancipation and the commons. As, also, of course,
>>>> its capacity for surveillance, control and punishment. The moment of
>>>> left-ish cyber-utopianism was the 1980s-90s. What I today see is a wide,
>>>> varied, complex and - yes - contradictory wave of radical-democratic
>>>> efforts on this novel terrain. I mention a few names: Snowden, Castells,
>>>> Bauwens, Laura Agustin, Gerbaudi, Sally Burch, Dyer-Witheford, Jodi Dean.
>>>>
>>>> You will be considering yourself lucky that I didn't respond to ALL the
>>>> paragraphs?
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> PeterW
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement:
>>>> Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist.
>>>> <http://snuproject.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/1987-e-reader-ed-by-peter-waterman-on-labour-social-movements-and-internationalism-the-old-internationalism-and-the-new/>http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism
>>>> _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/
>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/> (Free).
>>>>
>>>> 2. 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social
>>>> Movement Internationalisms'. (Free).
>>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>
>>>> * <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>*
>>>> 3. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in
>>>> Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements:
>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/>Struggles
>>>> for Other Worlds (Part I).
>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/> (10
>>>> Euros).
>>>> 4. 2012. EBook: Recovering Internationalism
>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A
>>>> compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download
>>>> formats]
>>>> 5. 2013. EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum:
>>>> Critical Explorations
>>>> http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/
>>>> 6. 2012. Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: *For
>>>> the Global Emancipation of Labour
>>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>*
>>>> 7. 2005-?
>>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf>
>>>> Ongoing. Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.???. Needed:
>>>> a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!)
>>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf>
>>>> 8. 2011. Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements
>>>> Confront a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism
>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) (c.
>>>> 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980's-90's).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Ariel Salleh <arielsalleh7 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:27 am, peter waterman <
>>>>> peterwaterman1936 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ariel, hola!
>>>>> I am wondering whether or not you received a message I sent in
>>>>> response to you, dated c. May 29.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter dear friend, I did reply - to you and Jai and Mikel all together
>>>>> - but it evaporated in the ether - which may well be a sign of things to
>>>>> come.
>>>>>
>>>>> It might have got lost in space. I will not repeat it. But I do want
>>>>> to respond to what you say below (re-pasted by me so that it fits my
>>>>> screen).
>>>>> I know it is a pain on the eye, but I will do this para by para and in
>>>>> CAPS.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *While considering security aspects of the 2016 WSF in Canada,
>>>>> remember that the more we embed our activities in capitalist technologies
>>>>> like ICT the more we give up our autonomy and make our politics transparent
>>>>> and vulnerable to unsympathetic powers. *
>>>>> I AM WONDERING WHETHER THERE ARE ANY EMANCIPATORY TECHNOLOGIES AROUND,
>>>>> EITHER PRE- OR POST-CAPITALIST. WE ALL USE TRAINS, MOST OF US USE PLANES,
>>>>> WE WATCH OR PRODUCE MOVIES, VIDEOS, PHOTOS, PRINT. OF THESE THE ONLY ONE
>>>>> THAT IS NOT CAPITALIST MIGHT BE PRINT - WHICH PROVIDED A MAJOR MEANS FOR
>>>>> THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM.
>>>>> ICT IS THE MOST CONTRADICTORY TECHNOLOGY CAPITALISM HAS PRODUCED. ALL
>>>>> SERIOUS LEFT WRITERS ON IT EITHER RECOGNISE OR EVEN SEARCH OUT ITS PRESENT
>>>>> AND IMMINENT DANGERS. THEY THEN, HOWEVER, GO ON TO CONSIDER ITS AMBIGUOUS
>>>>> OR EMANCIPATORY POTENTIALS (AND CURRENT USES). CHECK THE NICK
>>>>> DYER-WITHEFORD CHAPTER I POSTED THIS VERY DAY - EVEN IF HE DOES NOT HERE
>>>>> SHOW ANY GENDER SENSITIVITY.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed
>>>>>
>>>>> *But the idea of an Internet Social Forum carries much deeper
>>>>> political contradictions than this.*
>>>>> *Technologies are never culturally neutral but embody value systems
>>>>> within them. Recent List discussions in favour of an Internet Social Forum
>>>>> overlook this by embracing wholesale a form of colonisation by the
>>>>> commodity society, fully opposed to the alter-global social critique that
>>>>> WSF is building on.*
>>>>> COLONISATION AND COMMODIFICATION ARE FULLY RECOGNISED BY EMANCIPATORY
>>>>> ACTIVISTS AND THEORISTS. SO THERE IS HERE NO WHOLESALE EMBRACE BUT A
>>>>> SELECTIVE USE INTENDED TO SUBVERT AND SURPASS COLONISATION AND
>>>>> COMMODIFICATION.
>>>>>
>>>>> No I think you are not quite grasping the full meanings of
>>>>> ‘commodification' and 'colonisation' as materially and culturally embodied
>>>>> in this manufactured instrument the Internet. That reflects perhaps your
>>>>> marxist schooling, which tradition has leaned towards an assumption that
>>>>> technologies are neutral.
>>>>> Here it seems important to emphasise the difference between a
>>>>> technology and a tool. The latter is a relatively simple object. The former
>>>>> brings - and commits us to - a whole fandangle of social relations.
>>>>>
>>>>> SECONDLY, IT IS QUITE UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT TECHNOLOGY WOULD, FOR YOU, BE
>>>>> COMPATIBLE WITH 'ALTER-G' (A TERM I NEVER USE BECAUSE OF ITS DEPENDENCE ON
>>>>> THE G-WORD. I PREFER 'GLOBAL JUSTICE AND SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT').
>>>>>
>>>>> A globally just technology would not damage the planetary ecosystem
>>>>> that we all depend on for our very existence. The Internet has massive
>>>>> costs in terms of toxifying water - just as we approach “peak water”. It’s
>>>>> global warming impacts alone should be enough to stop WSF activists in
>>>>> their tracks.
>>>>> Then there are the medical effects of electromagnetic radiation on
>>>>> human bodies.
>>>>>
>>>>> WOULD THIS IMPLY A RETURN TO THE CHASQUIHUASI SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION
>>>>> USED IN THE ANDES BEFORE THE SPANISH INTRODUCED THE HORSE.
>>>>>
>>>>> WELL THAT QUITE REMARKABLE SYSTEM (OR RUNNERS AND STAGEING POSTS)
>>>>> ENABLED COMMUNICATION OVER 5,000 KM. BUT IT WAS AN IMPERIAL SYSTEM, USING A
>>>>> PRE-ALPHABETIC MESSAGING UNDERSTOOD ONLY BY THE RULERS.
>>>>> FURTHER IT MUST BE POINTED OUT - AND HAS BEEN IN THIS AND OTHER
>>>>> EXCHANGES - THAT WSF INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS HAVE BEEN THE
>>>>> MOST UNDEVELOPED ASPECT OF ITS ACTIVITIES.
>>>>>
>>>>> Important to avoid lapsing into ideological assumptions, like the
>>>>> Social Darwinist notions of “development” or “going backwards”. It is part
>>>>> of the capitalist mythos that history is linear and upwards, whereas in
>>>>> fact ever new forms of idiocy and barbarism arise all around us as we speak.
>>>>>
>>>>> *It is ironic that a Canadian hosted WSF emphasising indigenous
>>>>> knowing and being, as well as economic models based on de-growth, should
>>>>> tie itself to an instrument of global military domination and social
>>>>> homogenisation.*
>>>>> NO IT IS NOT IRONIC. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WOULD HAVE NO INTERNATIONAL,
>>>>> POSSIBLY NO INTERCOMMUNAL NETWORKING IF NOT FOR ICT.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not so sure that this is true, Peter. Peoples have travelled
>>>>> across land and sea and made cultural exchanges for centuries.
>>>>>
>>>>> THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH 'DE-GROWTH' (ANOTHER NEGATIVE TERM I DO NOT
>>>>> CARE FOR, THO I AGREE WITH THE GENERAL ARGUMENT IT EXPRESSES). THAT IS
>>>>> THOSE ASPECTS OF PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION AND DUMPING WELL PORTRAYED IN THE
>>>>> ITEM YOU ATTACHED. ANY HOLISTIC EMANCIPATORY ITC STRATEGY HAS TO PRIORITISE
>>>>> THIS INCREASINGLY BURNING ISSUE. MY GUESS IS THAT SOMEONE IS DOING SO.
>>>>> ANYONE BETTER INFORMED THAN ME ABOUT THIS?
>>>>>
>>>>> We share these reservations about the de-growth movement. It is a very
>>>>> tentative step towards eco-sufficiency and global justice on the part of
>>>>> folks in the global North.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Yes, we are already using the internet here for our communications,
>>>>> but that should not imply some kind of historical inevitability. For
>>>>> example, I drove a car for 3 decades, then decided to refuse the technology
>>>>> - one small step towards eco-sufficiency.*
>>>>> I ALSO GAVE UP MY CAR, ARIEL. AND I HAVE ARGUED THAT THE STANDARD WSF
>>>>> MODEL IS ANTI-ECOLOGICAL IN REQUIRING AIR TRAVEL OVER LONG DISTANCES. AND
>>>>> WITHOUT RECOGNISING ANY CONTRADICTION HERE. BUT ARE YOU ALSO GOING TO GIVE
>>>>> UP AIR TRAVEL?
>>>>>
>>>>> The environmental costs of jet-setting to WSFs should be eased
>>>>> somewhat by the Polycentric WSF model.
>>>>> As a slightly tongue in cheek suggestion: Australians and Pacific
>>>>> Islanders are both small populations and remote from other continents - so
>>>>> perhaps a principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" might
>>>>> apply in this case!
>>>>>
>>>>> *Political security and cultural homogenisation aside, reliance on the
>>>>> Internet also has neocolonial impacts, human health costs, and severe
>>>>> environmental effects - as the following article explains.*
>>>>> OK, THE ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT HERE IS THAT OF CULTURAL HOMOGENISATION.
>>>>> THIS HAS BEEN WELL UNDERWAY WITH TV OVER MAYBE A 50-YEAR PERIOD. THIS WAS A
>>>>> MAJOR ISSUE AMONGST LEFT MEDIA CRITICS/ACTIVISTS IN LATIN AMERICA. TV, LIKE
>>>>> RADIO, LIKE CINEMA IS PRIMARILY A ONE-TO-MANY MODE, AND IT WAS, INDEED,
>>>>> COMMODITISATION, THAT WIPED OUT THE INTERNATIONAL WORKER (ACTUALLY
>>>>> COMMUNIST) FILM AND RADIO MOVEMENTS.
>>>>>
>>>>> ICT IS BASED ON THE LOGIC OF FEED-BACK AND IS, INCREASINGLY A
>>>>> MANY-TO-MANY MEANS OF COMMUNICATION.
>>>>>
>>>>> Radio is very much a two-way technology, of course - as for TV, I’ve
>>>>> never had one.
>>>>>
>>>>> THE PEER TO PEER MOVEMENT IS, PRECISELY CONCERNED TO ENSURE THAT IT
>>>>> BECOMES SO, THAT IT IS DE-COMMODITISED, AND THAT P2P IS NOT CAPTURED FOR
>>>>> ITS OWN NEFARIOUS PURPOSES BY CAPITAL, STATE AND PATRIARCHY.
>>>>>
>>>>> This strikes me as illusory - and rests on a quite thin notion of
>>>>> commodification. P2P cannot possibly manufacture the global infrastructure
>>>>> itself but will needs rely on some kind of capitalised industry to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *There is a huge dilemma here for WSF - and one that cannot be
>>>>> answered simply by ensuring "democratic consultation" and “protecting human
>>>>> rights” in the digital sector. *
>>>>> IT IS NOT LIMITED TO THESE TWO AIMS OR VALUES.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well actually I think it is, as long as cultural, medical,
>>>>> environmental aspects are continually backgrounded by Left and Right alike.
>>>>> A
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *At the very least, future WSF meetings - polycentric and otherwise -
>>>>> must carefully Workshop these critical questions.*
>>>>> AGREED.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ariel
>>>>> BEST,
>>>>> P.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement:
>>>>> Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist.
>>>>> <http://snuproject.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/1987-e-reader-ed-by-peter-waterman-on-labour-social-movements-and-internationalism-the-old-internationalism-and-the-new/>http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism
>>>>> _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/
>>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/> (Free).
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social
>>>>> Movement Internationalisms'. (Free).
>>>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>
>>>>> * <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>*
>>>>> 3. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in
>>>>> Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements:
>>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/>Struggles
>>>>> for Other Worlds (Part I).
>>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/> (10
>>>>> Euros).
>>>>> 4. 2012. EBook: Recovering Internationalism
>>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A
>>>>> compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download
>>>>> formats]
>>>>> 5. 2013. EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum:
>>>>> Critical Explorations
>>>>> http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/
>>>>> 6. 2012. Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: *For
>>>>> the Global Emancipation of Labour
>>>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>*
>>>>> 7. 2005-?
>>>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf>
>>>>> Ongoing. Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.???. Needed:
>>>>> a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!)
>>>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf>
>>>>> 8. 2011. Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements
>>>>> Confront a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism
>>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) (c.
>>>>> 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980's-90's).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NetworkedLabour mailing list
>>>> NetworkedLabour at lists.contrast.org
>>>> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at:
>>> http://commonstransition.org
>>>
>>> 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/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at:
>> http://commonstransition.org
>>
>> 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/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetworkedLabour mailing list
> NetworkedLabour at lists.contrast.org
> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour
>
>
--
Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org
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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20150618/2680e1fa/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the P2P-Foundation
mailing list