[p2p-research] Wikipedia, Citizendium, Eduzendium, ...
Samuel Rose
samuel.rose at gmail.com
Tue Feb 5 04:20:20 CET 2008
On Feb 4, 2008 9:03 AM, Athina Karatzogianni <athina.k at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I just had a chance now to read this discussion and by coincidence I have
> been discussing with my students, while teaching a course on New Media and
> Politics, the issues of participation, democracy and power in relation to
> online projects. So it seems quite topical to me right at this moment.
>
> I think a big problem comes from the fact that political and particularly
> western democratic theory has dealt with participation in a very bizarre
> way. Sadly, it seems what has prevailed regarding theories of participation
> in maintream political theory is that the more it increases, the more it
> 'lowers' the quality of democracy, as the lower classes participate more and
> this elitist view inevitably has costs for our understanding of
> participation and the internet. The current figures of political
> participation in western democracies, according to some, have to stay low
> for democracy to work......(blame it all to the Greeks I do!!)
>
> This idea has dictated odd and downright exlusive/binary political
> practices, on a micro-level, such as those you referring to in the case of
> wikipedia. Moreover, in my view you can't get credit for 2 out of 3, you
> need all three things identified by Jon earlier to be there to talk of
> peer-to-peer, and perhaps some more, otherwise you end up with good
> intentions, espoused ideals and organizational philosophies, which when
> translated in reality, in real actions, they are not really charactiristics
> of p2p practicing communities. Simply then, you can't have your pie and eat
> it too, pretending to be revolutionary/transformative or whatever and all
> that while you just apply a selection of these processes (thats more like
> some of the NGOs!). Or I will do my 'hobby' (the word MIchel hates) get
> credit for it, create reputational capital for myself and hope that I ll be
> a little bit revolutionary as well if it turns out that way..........like a
> collateral damage kind of thing
>
> It is also funny that one of you mentioned the Soviets.There is a feeling
> I am getting some times that perhaps we are in a way running again on a
> more global level, a much more sophisticated early 21st century
> understanding of social tranformation resembling the early 20th century
> international communist ideas, which of course resembles sth else before
> that (Anarchist theorists and before that bourgeois revolutions), if we look
> at this from world-systemic perspective. I think the bigger question is
> right now is whether the explosion of new political ideas due to new
> technologies is there to conserve the status quo or transform it. I am
> getting mixed signals, which maybe signifies the creation of country-blocks
> again in the future.
>
I think also that you see these mixed signals, because some of the
6.5billion people in this world are not yet ready for the kind of
radical
change implied.
It is human nature, that when confronted with change that a human is not yet
ready for, those humans will either:
- "circle the wagons" and try to conserve the status quo ways of
solving problems of existence
- "regress" back to earlier ways of solving problems of existence
Yet, we all live together in one global system, so you get the mixed
signals.
Radical revolution will only ever happen where the majority of humans are
"ready" for the type of change in question.
But what does that mean, being "ready for a type of change"?
American Psychology professor Clare W. Graves
http://www.clarewgraves.com/home.html identified six conditions in his
researchwhich must be present for change to occur. Those six conditions are
(these were later repeated in the Spiral Dynamics book):
1. Potential
2. Solutions
3. Dissonance
4. Insight
5. Barriers (or thresholds) identified and overcome
6. Consolidation and support
These can be described this way (from http://www.vmacgill.net/paper.htm):
1. The basic potential for change must exist. Chimpanzees are
*physically* unable to speak. No amount of learning will change this.
2. Solutions must exist for present or previously unresolved problems.
If we do not yet have an adequate grasp of the existing world view or a
critical situation takes all our energy, we cannot move to the next "world
view". We would not expect to see a bold new vision for the education of
English children appearing in 1944. All energy was channeled into defeating
Hitler.
3. There must be a level of dissonance. If we are perfectly happy
where we are, nothing moves us to change. Something must feel uncomfortable
or out of balance.
4. Insight into the situation is required with some idea of what the
better future might be. There must be some prospect of a better life, a
sense that there is hope in continuing.
5. The Barriers to change must be identified and overcome. Correctly
identifying the barriers is crucial. Most individuals initially will see the
barriers as external (economy, social norms, tyrant boss, etc), but they are
often internal (lack of planning, wasted energy, misplaced effort,
self-sabotage, etc.). Once the barriers are identified, they must be (a)
eliminated, (b) bypassed, (c) neutralized, or (d) reframed into something
else. (quoted from
http://integral-options.blogspot.com/2006/10/six-conditions-needed-for-change.htmla
great explanation)
6. Consolidation and support. The tender new shoot is vulnerable in a
way it will never be as a large tree. When a leap forward is made, it must
be reinforced and encouraged, to avoid slipping back to the previous state.
This page
http://integral-options.blogspot.com/2006/10/six-conditions-needed-for-change.htmlalso
gives a good description of the Potential for change
("Open/Arrested/Closed" to change) which are also directly from Graves's
original research.
When a new way of solving the problems of human existence emerges, these
dynamics above influence the way that many different people deal with that
emergence. Some people are currently focused on personal physical survival,
some on "getting rich", and some are focused on improving social equity, and
some are focused on preserving the traditions of the past, to give a few
examples, all living in the same interconnected world system, at the same
time.
So, the question that I am thinking about is "what type of change are
significant amounts of people really ready for, right now?"
What kinds of change can meet the conditions above? What types of change can
likely be sustained, and can be expected to realistically see uptake among
large amounts of people?
One type of change that I think people are now ready for is to start seeing
resources as co-governed "commons" instead of "commodities" upon which
people should stake individual claims. I think that there is substantial
Potential, "dissonance", and insight emerging among people about the
conditions of environment, depletable resources, and imminent destruction as
a result of the present course. People are ready for this type of change,
right now, today. This is where I think that people like us can have a
substantial impact upon the world and the non-destructive evolution of
humans over the course of the next 30+ years. Helping people understand how
to govern depletable resources of many kinds as a commons, and how to
transition existing socio-economic infrastructure away from commodity-driven
markets without having to lobby governments and hope they will listen and
respond to you in time.
> Yours
> Athina
> --
> Dr Athina Karatzogianni
> Lecturer in Media, Culture and Society
> The University of Hull
> United Kingdom
> HU6 7RX
>
> Check out Athina's work:
>
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyberconflict-Routledge-Research-Information-Technology/dp/0415396840/
>
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Power-Resistance-Conflict-Contemporary-World/dp/0415452988/
>
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-conflict-Politics-Contemporary-Security-Studies/dp/0415459702/
>
> http://vectors.usc.edu/thoughtmesh/publish/135.php
>
> Press interviews:
>
> France:http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0,36-924253,0.html
>
> http://www.20minutes.fr/article/180599/Monde-La-Chine-a-soif-d-informations.php
> Greece:http://www.enet.gr/online/online_text/c=112,id=78490200
>
>
> On Feb 4, 2008 1:46 PM, Jon Awbrey <jawbrey at att.net> wrote:
>
> > o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> >
> > JA = Jon Awbrey
> > MB = Michel Bauwens
> >
> > Michel,
> >
> > I will make some attempt to work through your initial comments
> > before moving on to the newer responses. Old stuff is tagged
> > and indented, my current comments are unindented.
> >
> > JA: It may take me several passes to work through your text below.
> >
> > JA: Let me begin with your definition of peer production,
> > even though I remain a little troubled by a nagging
> > sense that some essential element of equality is
> > missing from the mix.
> >
> > MB: | Peer production has three aspects:
> > | 1) voluntary contributions;
> > | 2) participatory processes;
> > | 3) commons oriented output.
> >
> > JA: You have stated your opinion that Wikipedia exemplifies
> > or exhibits the characters of 1 and 3, lacking only 2.
> >
> > JA: There are several questions that I would have to ask at the outset:
> >
> > JA: A. Is peer production like "fire production", where missing any side
> > of the "fire triangle" -- fuel, heat, oxygen -- breaks the chain
> > of necessary causes? Or does one get partial credit for 2/3?
> >
> > JA: B. What is the output? What is the product of ultimate interest?
> > Is it the content of documents and files, the content of minds,
> > or is it the conditional general resolution of people to act in
> > certain ways, in short, beliefs? [beliefs or habits (Peirce)].
> >
> > JA: C. What does it say about the level of voluntary contribution
> > when there is a very high level of involuntary exclusion?
> >
> > Re:
> > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/from-citizendium-to-eduzendium/2008/01/29#comment-182719
> >
> > MB: Very clear reply ... though I'm still unsatisfied, and the reason
> > is of course, that, despite the failing of enacting values in the
> > participatory process, it still has 2 of the 3 functions of peer
> > production,
> >
> > MB: let's say that for me peer production is an objective mode
> > that potentially expresses an 'espoused ideal', and to
> > different degrees, it will have discrepancies with
> > how these ideals are espoused.
> >
> > Just to be clear, we know the espoused ideals by their "espousals",
> > that is, from their announcement in the advertisements, prospecti,
> > and other public representations collectively known as "PR". But
> > whether there is any objective mode of production that actualizes
> > these espousals within a given project or range of activities, ay,
> > there's the rubber that seeks to gain traction on the road of good
> > intentions.
> >
> > Though advertisements may turn our attention to a particular area
> > of activity in the world, we must gather our impressions about the
> > objective mode of it through actual experience interacting with it.
> >
> > Discrepancies between preaching and practice can be symptoms of many
> > different states of affairs, anything from a moment's inattention to
> > chronic incapacities to reprobate mendacity on the part of preachers.
> >
> > When we speak of "governance" in the system-theoretic sense of
> > "regulation",
> > then we become very interested in the "differential dynamics" engendered
> > by
> > these differences. Indeed, you can usually tell a person who wants to
> > fix
> > the problem and who knows at least how to begin fixing the problem from
> > a person who wants nothing more than to deny the problem and hide the
> > very existence of the problem from others by that person's attitude
> > toward these discrepancies.
> >
> > But I already know the tribal attitude of Wikipediots toward solving any
> > problem.
> > It is summarized in the Chapter & Verse of WP:BEANS, which amounts to
> > the advice:
> > "Ignore it and maybe it will go away."
> >
> > Have to break here ... will continue from this point next time ...
> >
> > Jon Awbrey
> >
> > MB: The other thing though, is how to establish a kind of cutting off
> > point,
> > when it really becomes something else.
> >
> > MB: Take Russia, at what point did it become something altogether
> > different
> > than the originally espoused ideals of socialism? How real where the
> > original soviets? how significant was it that competing
> > interpretations
> > where suppressed from the very start; and what did it really become
> > when
> > stalinism was fully consolidated as a new system: was it state
> > socialism,
> > state capitalism ?? extremely difficult questions
> >
> > MB: and here we are at the very beginning of peer production,
> > witnessing a degradation ... at what point does it really
> > turn into something altogether different??
> >
> > MB: So my question to you is:
> >
> > MB: what then, has it become?
> >
> > MB: If not peer production and governance, you would then have
> > to explain to me how to 'explain away the input and output
> > feature, as being also part of another system? and then
> > explain that other system, which in my eyes, is not
> > a market, nor a command and control system ...
> >
> > MB: So my problem is:
> >
> > MB: 1) to see it as a degeneration of peer production and governance,
> > but
> > still exemplying this new mode of production; and we can then
> > discuss
> > the various degrees of degeneration and perhaps indicate cut-off
> > points
> > (by analogy, when did the perhaps original council system become a
> > top down
> > but different system, only retaining public property, but embedding
> > it in a
> > new extremely totalitarian and unequal hierarchy system);
> >
> > MB: 2) to see it as something different than peer production, yet
> > another mode?
> >
> > MB: Please explain how you see this.
> >
> > p2presearch mailing list
> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
> >
> > o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> > inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
> > mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
> > mathweb: http://www.mathweb.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
> > getwiki: http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbrey
> > p2p <http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbreyp2p> wiki:
> > http://www.p2pfoundation.net/User:JonAwbrey
> > zhongwen wp: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
> > ontolog: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?JonAwbrey
> > http://www.altheim.com/ceryle/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JonAwbrey
> > wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=398
> > o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > p2presearch mailing list
> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dr Athina Karatzogianni
> Lecturer in Media, Culture and Society
> The University of Hull
> United Kingdom
> HU6 7RX
>
> Check out Athina's work:
>
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyberconflict-Routledge-Research-Information-Technology/dp/0415396840/
>
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Power-Resistance-Conflict-Contemporary-World/dp/0415452988/
>
>
> http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cyber-conflict-Politics-Contemporary-Security-Studies/dp/0415459702/
>
> http://vectors.usc.edu/thoughtmesh/publish/135.php
>
> Press interviews:
>
> France:http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0,36-924253,0.html
>
> http://www.20minutes.fr/article/180599/Monde-La-Chine-a-soif-d-informations.php
> Greece:http://www.enet.gr/online/online_text/c=112,id=78490200
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
--
Sam Rose
Social Synergy
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
AIM: Str9960
Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
http://socialsynergyweb.com/services
http://blog.socialsynergyweb.com
Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
OpenBusinessModels: http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/FrontPage
http://p2pfoundation.net
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
http://www.cooperationcommons.com
http://barcampbank.org
http://bfwatch.barcampbank.org
http://communitywiki.org
http://extinctionlevelevent.com
Information Filtering:
http://ma.gnolia.com/people/srose/bookmarks
http://del.icio.us/srose
http://twitter.com/SamRose
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080204/b2a1ecba/attachment-0001.html
More information about the p2presearch
mailing list