[P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] New models of leadership

Tue Aug 2 10:22:14 CEST 2016

The thing is after reading Madron's critic of usual leaders and then reading Lilian Greenwood's speech, one (or I) thinks immediately that Lillan shows almost all skills of self-branding, her masculine tone in her self-marketing as natural born labour leader in Madron's sharp critics... I don't know why but somehow one gains more sympathy for Corbyn to be honest after reading this stuff. On the other hand I am highly critical about Madron's references like Koku and Kurzweil, they are similar to Rifkin; imagining perfect capitalism.

I think Michel's critical integral perspective which sounds more close to Tektological thinking is more useful to envision a genuine radical change; Pat you are supposed to be supporting from a left-socialist point of view. I have been wondering for a while about your ideas and views on Fabianism and Fabian society, if I may ask with this opportunity? And if you find Corbyn too left, of radical, or simply not as a good leader, and in what sense? Those points would make more sense since it sounds to me that those who are leaving Corbyn's 'experts team were close to your networks, around 'new economy'; so can that be the reason of your reserves on Corbyn? 

Best, 
Orsan 

> On 01 Aug 2016, at 18:52, Pat Conaty <pat.commonfutures at phonecoop.coop> wrote:
> 
> Hi Anna
> 
> Michel and I are discussing these matters with other colleagues. A close colleague, Henry Tam, who was a senior civil servant
> under Labour before 2010 and set up a creative Empowerment Fund for grassroots projects. This did lots of good work. 
> 
> He has been hopeful about Corbyn. But having seen at first hand politicians at their worst and best he now has his concerns.
> 
> He shared this speech a few days ago from a Labour MP and active trade unionist. She highlights some things that Gary Younge raised his worries about.
> 
> http://www.liliangreenwood.co.uk/lilian_s_speech_to_nottingham_south_labour_party_members
> 
> Pat
> 
> 
>> On 1 Aug 2016, at 17:44, Anna Harris <anna at shsh.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for these links Pat, and any others you think would be helpful.
>> 
>> Anna
>> 
>>> On 1 Aug 2016, at 17:32, Pat Conaty <pat.commonfutures at phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Michel
>>> 
>>> Not sure about the internal politics within the team. A number left in the team are good experts.
>>> 
>>> But my point is that several elements have to be aligned. A new accountable leadership style for sure as the article you shared makes clear.
>>> Then a creative use of complexity theory in practice.
>>> 
>>> But also if the theory of new economics is not sound then this impacts on the programmes. Not due to leadership but because of a faulty understanding and analysis.
>>> 
>>> For example Richard Murphy from the UK Tax Justice Network was not selected to be in the Corbyn advice team whereas last summer he was guiding Corbyn
>>> on Peoples QE that was popular with people in the Labour party who voted for Corbyn. Since then these ideas have been not on the agenda and what Ingham calls for
>>> is not far removed from Murphy’s thinking and guidance.
>>> 
>>> All the best
>>> 
>>> Pat
>>> 
>>>> On 1 Aug 2016, at 17:20, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> thanks for the details Pat,
>>>> 
>>>> I remember critiques that Jeremy was not a good listener and did not work well with his advisory team,
>>>> 
>>>> Michel
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 11:07 PM, Pat Conaty <pat.commonfutures at phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Michel
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is a good piece on complexity theory and participative politics that Anna Harris has shared. As I have mentioned, this way forward is great and also the
>>>>> work of Stafford Beer on viable systems theory for intensifying co-operative forms of democracy. But I only wish Corbyn was moving in this
>>>>> direction. Not questioning his good will to do so and his integrity of course but little evidence of this yet emerging. See the relatively recent Gary Younge article below when there
>>>>> were three leaders in the race for Labour party leader, now just Smith and Corbyn.
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/13/corbyn-critics-destroying-labour-party-members
>>>>> 
>>>>> But in addition to complexity management and new forms of leadership, there is the need for a deeper understanding of economics and what is money. This question is the
>>>>> Elephant in the room as Geoffrey Ingham explained and that all socialists need to get to grips with. The Economic Advisory Committee advising
>>>>> Corbyn are all left of centre economists but even Piketty and Stiglitz have a poor analysis of What is money as Ingham highlights below. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/geoffrey-ingham/whose-money-is-it
>>>>> 
>>>>> Corbyn and other anti-austerity politicians thus lacks guidance on this question that is crucial for developing alternative economic strategies.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ingham is a professor at Cambridge. He is a socialist and in his book, The Nature of Money, he shows that unfortunately Marx got the money question wrong. Despite some great insights, fundamentally Marx concluded that money was a commodity. He took this from Aristotle. The real truth is that it is not a commodity but a social technology as David Graeber has shown.
>>>>> 
>>>>> However as Ingham observes, this errant view of Marx has sent most of the left down the wrong road to understand money and hence most of the left is blind on this question. From a theoretical perspective this is a fatal flaw. Ingham argues so well that we need to revisit the What is money debates from the 1920s and folk like Gesell and also Douglas and social credit ideas as these show where the real answers are.  Ingham calls for a public social partnership on monetary and banking reform to replace the oppressive and toxic public private partnership destroying both society and ecology and leading us in to relentless wars defending geopolitical turf over oil and other resources.
>>>>> 
>>>>> All the best
>>>>> 
>>>>> Pat
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 1 Aug 2016, at 09:16, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> dear Pat, has anything been written on the contrary view that was reported on in that other discussion ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Michel
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Anna Harris <anna at shsh.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> The Corbyn Model of Leadership
>>>>>>> Of all the people currently in leadership positions in a major political party anywhere in the world, Jeremy Corbyn is the only one who shows the potential of being a leader who could begin to manage successfully the complex problems that all of our societies have to face in the coming decades.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Brilliant article, first I've seen really understanding what Corbyn is trying to do.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://medium.com/@ROY_MADRON/the-corbyn-model-of-leadership-a7a006405f27#.hyj8ckaw2
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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 
>>>> 
>>>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20160802/349fc774/attachment.html>