I'm not seeking comfort, but rather the fleshing out of arguments for collective learning; and I feel that arguments and information do the trick better than hypothizing personal failures ... I want to know what is faulty in the proposals of people like Thomas, Ellen etc ... and what are the better proposals .. and it must be possible to make the argument without recourse to an a priori knowledge of a whole body of specialized knowledge ... it's through the detailed and 'local' arguments that interest for the further body of work can be generated ....<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:35 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net">ideasinc@ee.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Short response, maybe more later. The core issue is the choice between<br>
ideology and real world functionality. Emulating or operating to seem to<br>
validate fictions, is really little different than the neo-classical<br>
theology. Pop-economics is all about persuasion and political posturing<br>
minus a serious regard for the related history or real time practices to<br>
identify the source of the problems. It is the substitution of persuasion<br>
for real time and praxis. In terms of Greco's rush to criticize he really<br>
provided nothing substantial, and then "Oh by the way... He happens to<br>
believe that he has the solid answers and when those issues are tracked he<br>
ends up in a whole different universe of self congratulatory ignorance.<br>
Again, when seeking out real information the divide shows up as to who<br>
actually understands the context and principles, and who is trying to<br>
literally sell tooth fairy economics. Greco's material is largely based<br>
upon a recitation of factoids that generally don't knit together very well<br>
unless the value being added is mostly at the level buzz words. The<br>
libertarianism that posits that all government is bad by its simple<br>
premise, does not generally go to the effort to validate the. Using the<br>
example of "reserve accounting" which is actually how the privatized<br>
central banks operate, the profound absence of any awareness of the real<br>
practice under cuts the credibility of these non-solutions. If Economics<br>
was conducted as a science with methodology appropriate to domain, we<br>
would have less of a tendency to accept the theology being dispensed by<br>
the neo classical courtiers. It isn't and this results in a massive level<br>
of fear and willingness to accept carte blanche assumptions that seem oh<br>
so very comforting and familiar. It is all about the actual science behind<br>
pop-economics and its continuing positing of fictions, versus history,<br>
present practice, and actual functionality. I am only calling out these<br>
patterns of dys-education and dys-function. In an open discourse of course<br>
people can make their decisions based upon what seem familiar and<br>
comforting, but it has no additional certainty that is predictive as<br>
having a positive contribution. Perhaps the lack of interest in the LETS<br>
1.0 is another reason to support alternative discourse. Why is it that<br>
when the absence of an appropriate stock of knowledge is apparent, by<br>
someone such as myself, people beg to preserve their illusion of comfort<br>
and the appearance of a lack of dissent.<br>
<br>
Tadit<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:36:12 -0400, Michel Bauwens<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><<a href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> hi Tadit,<br>
><br>
> thanks for the explanations,<br>
><br>
> just wondering what you mean by Matthew forcing a debt-based process?<br>
><br>
> just to make sure I don't misunderstand: was �it that he rerquesting<br>
> 'regular' monetary payment, and that you proposed another arrangement?<br>
><br>
> I think it would also be useful to present in general the idea of<br>
> debt-free<br>
> arrangements or debt-free money.<br>
><br>
> I understand that you are convinced you have with MMT a complex and<br>
> correct<br>
> understanding of monetary economics, but can this really be a requirement<br>
> for dialogue? As tiring as it may be to explain again and again, isn't<br>
> that<br>
> really the only way.<br>
><br>
> Now perhaps I should be reading Wray, but also I should be reading Nikos<br>
> Salingaros, perhaps even people I really don't want to read such as<br>
> Lacan or<br>
> Derrida, but I can't possible read everything that I should or asked to,<br>
> and<br>
> I think a lot of people would be in the same situation. Possibly these<br>
> are<br>
> very compelling propositions, but convincing people must start with<br>
> micro-dialogues ...<br>
><br>
> I know Thomas quite well since he visits me regularly here in Chiangmai,<br>
> while I disagree with the libertarian bent, again, here is a person who<br>
> has<br>
> sincerely studied a complex subject for several decades, has a proposal<br>
> for<br>
> mutual credit commons that is well respected amongst the grassroots,<br>
> that is<br>
> perhaps limited to local and regional projects but immediately usage,<br>
> and is<br>
> all but a hack, living very modestly. That he writes a review of a book<br>
> he<br>
> disagrees with, and points to his own different tack, I don't see<br>
> anything<br>
> illegitimate in that, especially when it is open and transparent.<br>
><br>
> From my point of view, it's always more interesting to learn why a<br>
> person is<br>
> wrong in ideas or practices through arguments, rather than presuming the<br>
> differences arise from fraud or any other personal quality.<br>
><br>
> People like Thomas and Matthew can certainly not rely on any public<br>
> relations, they are just presenting their own point of view, however<br>
> flawed<br>
> or right it might be.<br>
><br>
> Michel<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:42 PM, <<a href="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net">ideasinc@ee.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Here's the nub of it. Yes, the Community Forge may be working their<br>
>> collective asses off, perhaps. And two points stand out for me. First,<br>
>> we,<br>
>> locally, went through an extensive process of attempting to work with<br>
>> him<br>
>> and his crew toward adapting the programming from their utility. A piece<br>
>> of our intent being that we have been working to establish an MMT/FF<br>
>> based<br>
>> community exchange utility. My major complaint with the model being used<br>
>> to define the Community Forge is that it is a debt based process, and<br>
>> thereby a version of the same sort of relationships as being exploited<br>
>> by<br>
>> the banksters. I provided links to the summaries of the economic model<br>
>> we<br>
>> wanted to use, and basically we were brushed off. The ere were basic<br>
>> elements of the process which could have been reused, and we are intent<br>
>> on<br>
>> putting together was substantially different from the libertarian lite<br>
>> variety of Thomas Greco's "Free Banking" advocacy. We were prepared to<br>
>> adapt their system into a debt-free exchange system. At the bare minimum<br>
>> there is a value to having multiple alternatives.<br>
>><br>
>> So, if you have a plumbing problem, who do you call? A programmer? Aside<br>
>> �from the unwillingness to work out a constructive solution mutually<br>
>> beneficial to all, we were presented with the sole option of using the<br>
>> debt based model and paying for remote hosting. The side point is that<br>
>> pop-level economics persists primarily by its self righteousness, and<br>
>> that<br>
>> most of the advocates remain steadfastly unwilling to do the homework<br>
>> obliged to actually judge the value of an informed economic/monetary<br>
>> model.<br>
>><br>
>> In this case the assumption that "hard Work" entitles anyone to just<br>
>> compensation, when the core information/principles reproduce the same<br>
>> problems and at a level of no regulation or standards at all Much like<br>
>> hiring a contractor that makes it a habit to ignore building codes and<br>
>> standards. How does the abuse of the adjective "Protest" in any validate<br>
>> the content and principles of the economic model, except to exploit good<br>
>> will whenever possible? It is primarily a branding strategy, selling<br>
>> substantively second rate economics. This is a disjunction between<br>
>> appearances and functionality.<br>
>><br>
>> A further bit of nonsense from Matthew Slater came from him posting upon<br>
>> the major MMT/FF blog in the US, New Economic Perspectives, critical of<br>
>> Randall Wray's explanation of a piece of banking practices and monetary<br>
>> theory. Wray was much too reserved to bother taking Slater's (signed as<br>
>> Matslat) comment to task. I posted an entry describing Slater's level of<br>
>> interest and investment, and alerted the person there who monitors that<br>
>> blog. The audacity to flame a group involved in a serious discussion for<br>
>> no good reason, is a form of trolling<br>
>><br>
>> Add another piece and tactic, this one is on Thomas Greco. Go to the US<br>
>> Amazon.com page, search The Lost Science of Money BY Stephen Zarlenga.<br>
>> Go<br>
>> into the comments/reviews and one of the earliest reviews was from<br>
>> Thomas<br>
>> Greco who gave a highly critical review. Ordinarily that would not be an<br>
>> issue, BUT because Greco used that context to also promote his own<br>
>> material, this became a major conflict of interest favoring self<br>
>> interest.<br>
>> If you are familiar with Zarlenga's book it may have a few flaws, but he<br>
>> did a massive job of putting a lot of monetary history in one place.<br>
>><br>
>> On another level I am short of patience of what I see as fraud, either<br>
>> intentionally or even unintentionally by a lack of interest in the<br>
>> details<br>
>> between here and an entitlement based upon dys-education. There has<br>
>> been a<br>
>> lot of technology which has been replaced by something potentially<br>
>> better,<br>
>> and it becomes a simple monopoly sustained by public relations rhetoric<br>
>> to<br>
>> obstruct innovation in the favor of a questionable economic model.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Tadit<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:02:55 -0400, Michel Bauwens<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> > not only hasn't it made Matthew rich, it has rather made him very poor<br>
>> > ...<br>
>> > to be clear, Matthew is working his ass off for a better world, and<br>
>> fully<br>
>> > engaged through personal sacrifice.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > as much as I appreciate your technical expertise, it seems to me there<br>
>> > is an<br>
>> > underlying tendency to personalize the criticisms as flaws in the<br>
>> person<br>
>> > that is critiqued, for example assuming that Ellen Brown was financed<br>
>> by<br>
>> > the<br>
>> > banking cartel, while nothing could be further from the truth ..<br>
>> ><br>
>> > I think we can air our grievances and critiques without necessarily<br>
>> > imputing<br>
>> > ill will to those we disagree with ... (I'll make an exception for the<br>
>> > banksters myself <g>, in view of overwhelming evidence ... but I<br>
>> haven't<br>
>> > seen evidence of malfeasance in people like Ellen and Matthew)<br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Devin Balkind<br>
>> > <<a href="mailto:devin@sarapisfoundation.org">devin@sarapisfoundation.org</a>>wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> >> Tadit. �I'm surprised at your response. �First, the CommunityForge<br>
>> >> people<br>
>> >> have built a workable, free/libre/opensource tool set that makes it<br>
>> >> easy for<br>
>> >> groups to start a gifting network and LETs exchange using the popular<br>
>> >> Drupal<br>
>> >> CMS. �I don't think it's made them rich. �Second, the author's idea<br>
>> is<br>
>> >> general and is basically saying that protesters should start printing<br>
>> >> currencies and using them as a tool to create discussion around our<br>
>> >> monetary<br>
>> >> system. �Sounds good to me.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> I've read your posts on this list and recognize that you have a very<br>
>> >> thoughtful opinion about these issues so I wonder if you could dig a<br>
>> >> little<br>
>> >> deeper and explain your response to the group.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 3:04 AM, <<a href="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net">ideasinc@ee.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >>> This is to my eye a piece of massive opportunistic self promotion by<br>
>> >>> the<br>
>> >>> "Community Forge" people who operate out Geneva, Sw. They press for<br>
>> the<br>
>> >>> variety of community currencies which they run their business by<br>
>> >>> hosting<br>
>> >>> one single variety of community currency, and it is as debt based as<br>
>> >>> the<br>
>> >>> federal debt based currencies that they are promoting as "protest<br>
>> >>> currencies." If all that is available to advocate for such<br>
>> >>> non-alternatives is that there a tenuous validation by an asserted<br>
>> >>> association of "Protest" with the rising of resistance, this is a<br>
>> >>> fraud at<br>
>> >>> its core.<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> Tadit<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 00:37:49 -0400, Michel Bauwens<br>
>> >>> <<a href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
>> >>> > From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <<a href="mailto:dante.monson@gmail.com">dante.monson@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >>> > Date: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 5:31 AM<br>
>> >>> > Subject: "protest currencies" ?<br>
>> >>> > To:<br>
>> >>> ><br>
>> >>> ><br>
>> >>> > <a href="http://matslats.net/protest_currencies" target="_blank">http://matslats.net/protest_currencies</a><br>
>> >>> ><br>
>> >>> ><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>
>> >>> <a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
>> >>> <a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
>> >>><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> --<br>
>> >> Devin Balkind<br>
>> >> Director, Sarapis Foundation<br>
>> >> <a href="mailto:devin@sarapisfoundation.org">devin@sarapisfoundation.org</a><br>
>> >> @devinbalkind<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >> P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>
>> >> <a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
>> >> <a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>
>> <a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>
<a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>� - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br>
<br>Connect: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com</a>; Discuss:�<a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><div>
<br>Updates: <a href="http://del.icio.us/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://del.icio.us/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br>
</div><br>