[P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] a short response to queries about the p2p'f workings in WSF

[Kevin Flanagan]

Hello Orsan and Michel,

My response is inline.

On 8 August 2016 at 09:09, Orsan <orsan1234 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Kevin, by no means to criticize you or Michel, and I know it is just too
> busy to reply for you at the moment, I just wanted to return this thread
> since:
>

Yes we have had busy week and it went well. Thanks for asking.


> 1. Michel confirmed in his response that you asked for funding to go WSF
> about to work on these things you initiated.
>

Who are you working for again? Why do I have to answer any of these
question?

In 2015 when I was working for the P2P Foundation yes my participation in
Tunis was supported by P2PF.
In 2016 I did not ask Michel to fund my participation in the WSF. Remix
were keen to have someone from the P2PF participate in the Commons Space.
Seeing as I no longer work for the foundation and my involvement as an
organiser of the Commons Space was an independent initiative I felt I would
be too busy and that it would not be appropriate that I represent the P2PF.
For these reasons I preferred that someone else could have attended the
forum on behalf of the P2PF. The only persons employed by the P2PF that I
invited were Michel and Stacco but they were not available. I also invited
other participants in the P2PF network including Rachel O Dwyer and Penny
Travlou to participate but they were not available either. John Restakis
who lives in Vancouver also previously worked with P2PF and is connected
with Social Solidarity Economy networks in Canada and I invited him to
represent the P2PF in the session Cooperatives and Commons. I did ask
Michel if the P2PF would fund Johns travel expenses (This is the funding
request I believe Michel is referring to and which you enquire about ) but
this funding was not possible and in the end it was not possible for John
to participate. We did not know John would not be able to participate in
the Commons Space until 2 weeks before the WSF. So at the last minute
seeing as no one I invited could attend I agreed to Michel's earlier
proposal that I could if necessary represent the P2PF in some sessions
during the WSF.

2. You created the e-list with p2p-foundation domain name to follow up on
> the process, and all was okay with it, me too. Yet although you have
> claimed not representing or working for the foundation, if it is not you,
> how do you explain the existing of P2p foundation's name as co-organizer of
> the commons space activities? I asked the same question to Michel, since he
> was also claiming no involvement personally or as foundation.
>

It is not a claim it is a statement of fact that I do not work for P2PF
anymore. It was a mistake on the Commons Space program to say that the
Commons Space was an initiative of P2PF. The P2P Foundation is a
'supporter' in the sense that they provided the mailing list, and gave me
access to the blog and social media to promote the Commons Space. So more
accurately the P2PF was a supporter but not an 'initiator' of the Commons
Space. As I mentioned above, in the end I agreed that I could represent
P2PF at the forum. In practical terms this amounted to my participation in
a video interview with Alain Ambrosi who asked if I would present the Post
Capitalist Transition strategy of the P2PF, while I presented the ideas the
P2PF advocates, I made no claims to represent the foundation officially and
make it clear in the video that I 'previously' worked with the P2PF.

3. In relation to this, just to clarify, are you just using some
> independent funding to voluntarily contribute these organizational efforts,
> which I find it very useful and productive, yet limited and constrained
> only with NGO sort of activities, very similar to what we have saw in the
> history of the WSF.
>

There was no funding to support our organising activities when we began
last year and this was the case until Remix got involved. In May 2016
Frederic Sultan submitted a proposal to FPH and they agreed to support the
initiative making it possible for me and others to fly to Montreal and
participate in the WSF. Otherwise I have no money and no regular income.
Please remind me how you support your activities? And since you did not
attend or participate in any of the organising activities I find your
uninformed dismissal and NGO characterizing of so many peoples activities
in the Commons Space patronising and insulting so say the least.

A question comes to minds then, to direct commons space event organizers,
> how do you assure and guarantee to reflect not your personal and
> organizational interest or views,crashed then commoners that are not able
> to or has no time or interest in participating such events, like new
> movements often being addressed or talked about?
>

Do you think you or I or anyone who attends the forum should try to
represent those that are not able to attend or have no time or interest in
participating? People are not talked about. The people who participate
speak for themselves or for their organisations. All that we can do as
organisers is make an open call for participation and to encourage and
invite diverse people and initiatives to participate. We sent that invite
to the P2PF list and others many times over the past year. We did not have
the money or technical capacity to do live streaming of video but some
people did participate in sessions via Skype. Orsan you were also invited
many times and you planned some activities in the Commons Space on Global
Commons Charters which you were unfortunately unable to attend as a result
of problems with your flight.

You previously questioned my motivations as to why I was organising
activities at the WSF? So to answer that here is my little critique of
P2P/Commons activism -

I realized in Tunis that I had been living in a P2P/Commons filter bubble,
reading the nice new P2PF blog one could be forgiven for believing that
P2P/Commons as a paradigm for rethinking economy and society is taking off
everywhere but this is not quite the case. No doubt more people are
engaging with these ideas which is positive but it is more marginal than we
might like to think. Yes many people common and many lecture, give
workshops, organise/attend conferences but most ordinary people I meet
outside of these circles, lists and events don't know about Commons. There
is a long long way to go if that is to ever change.
One of my hopes in participating in the forum is that it would be an
opportunity for dialogue with people from all over the world. Discourse on
the Commons and P2P is largely among westerners. There are better
connections with Central and South America certainly but what about Africa,
Middle East, Asia, Russia? Unfortunately that kind of diversity was not
very evident at the forum this year. Another thing about new social
movements, it is not the case that we have people protesting in the streets
and making demands for the protection of Commons in most cases people are
not using this language. If you really believe that these ideas about
commons have something to offer humanity then as activists we need to start
speaking with people outside of our comfort zones and our circle of friends.

Back to the topic of funding lets consider some numbers because I also
think it is important to put things in perspective.
Here is one source on the finances of The Heritage Foundation
Total Revenue: $96,969,906, Total Expenses: $82,107,321, Net
Assets:$217,141,676
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Heritage_Foundation#cite_note-hf990-46

This is one of 1000's of Neoliberal foundations and this is what activists
and commoners are up against. Hayek and the Mont Pelerin Society built
their international network of neoliberal think tanks and foundations over
50 years. Keeping people like us down is their reason for being, it is
their business model. What percentage of $217,141,676 do you think the P2PF
annual budget is? How many full time staff does the P2PF have? 1 or 2? How
much do they earn? Having worked with the P2PF for a number of years I can
make a pretty well informed guess about the budget. From the nature of your
emails I suspect you are under some illusions about the finances and
influence of the P2PF. Michel has 12 k followers on twitter there are
teenagers doing makeup videos on youtube that outnumber him 100 to 1.

I'm a sorry but this whole conversation about the funding of P2PF and the
Commons Space is so uninteresting it feels like more talking in circles or
talking to the wall. I've known and worked with Michel for over 5 years,
like all of us he has his quirks and we might not agree on all things but
when it comes to P2P and Commons he is 100% committed in his actions. He
has integrity and I respect and trust in him. I don't expect that to be
good enough for you but it's good enough for me. As for you Orsan I do not
know you at all. So excuse me if I am not interested in entertaining these
kinds of discussion where I am expected to explain myself to someone I
don't know.
I have given you the details above accept them or reject them I don't care
but I am not spending another day reading your posts or replying on this
topic. I have better things to do with my time.

For anyone who is actually interested in what happened during the forum I
will produce some short reports over the next week but in summary -

So what will come out of this Commons Space at the WSF? We will see. The
sessions all went well. Over 150 people turned up for the Post Capitalist
convergence. The participatory methodology worked well for the short time
we had 2hrs. If I were to do it again I would invite proposals in advance
of the forum and then repeat the convergence assembly each of the 3 days to
support the dialogue and actions further. At the Agora on Sat there was a
smaller circle to review and summarize the activities of the convergence
this was also open to anyone to participate. Out of maybe 20 people who
attended I was the only person from the Commons Space organising group. I
presented the 12 initiatives and outcomes from the convergence and invited
participants to discuss and make further suggestions which they did. The
summary is both a statement of shared values and actions. I presented this
to the WSF Agora on behalf of those who participated in the convergence and
the circle. I made it clear that participants should take responsibility
for the actions they propose. I have a list of email contacts. When the
summary of initiatives is submitted to the WSF later this week I will also
send a single email inviting those participants to the wsf mailing list to
reconnect and follow up on the proposed actions. From there it is really up
to the participants to follow through on their proposals.

For me some of the more interesting initiatives are that some of us will
work together to promote commons charters, there was a convergence of
mapping initiatives to work together and a convergence of activists working
on alternative and community currencies to develop shared protocols for
international exchange. This is a learning process and as always there are
things I would like to do differently but overall both the organising team
and participants were happy with the outcomes.

Regards

Kevin Flanagan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20160816/ee6f90fe/attachment-0001.html>