[P2P-F] [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: P2P and the economic calculation problem

Tue Jan 12 15:58:44 CET 2016

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Michel,
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:44 AM, Michel Bauwens
> <michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> I'm thinking about Ackerman's ideas about "a form of socialized finance
> >> which would respect the autonomy of the firm." I think it might help,
> but I
> >> don't know how we would get it to happen. Which is the problem with a
> lot of
> >> "good ideas", including those of the P2PF. They would require a
> non-existent
> >> organization to take over from our present rulers. (P2PF is a bit more
> >> realistic than Ackerman, but still...)
> >
> > I am puzzled by your point here. I think the logic is very different. The
> > proposal of Ackerman are a proposal for a political program that needs to
> > win power first, but the great majority of the proposals of the p2p
> > foundation are already working (it's the rule for the wiki, it has to
> > exist), though they may need politics to be scaled and generalize.
> >
> > Of course, i have a few proposals which call for new institutions, but
> they
> > are happening as well (phyles, assemblies and chambers of the commons);
> > stigmergy and transparency between entrepreneurial coalitions is
> happening
> > as well
> >
> > so which proposals do you mean exactly, dear Bob ?
>
> Partner state, in particular.
>

but this is probably the most realistic of all, since prefigurative
experiences, like the very mature project in Brest, is already going on for
ten years or more; and the new slate of co-cities in Italy are getting
significant traction, especially Bologna

let's not forget we are not utopians, but seek significant and realistic
shifts and especially, prefigurative experimentations

>
> I agree that many of the new institutions are starting to happen, but
> they are weak and often disconnected from one another. But the fact
> that they are happening at all makes them more realistic than
> Ackerman's proposal or any one-swell-foop transformation. Although
> once the separate threads cohere, the transformation could happen
> fast.
>
> > see above, if you give an expanded definition of stigmergy, which I
> think is
> > appropriate, then yes. COULD YOU PLEASE write a full article on this !!
> We
> > really need to make that argument formally as part of our mutual
> > coordination proposals. Can you educate us about this path forward.
>
> I'll do it in conjunction with more study in relation to that other
> article you are working on. I need to catch up a bit on the more
> recent developments.
>

ok super

>
> > ok, to help you write that article, see:
> >
> http://p2pfoundation.net/How_Current_Supply_Chains_Can_Serve_Broader_Mutual_Coordination
>
> I assume I can change the title, too?
>

I changed it following your instructions on the talk page

-- 
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/20160112/d04afa3d/attachment-0001.htm 