[p2p-research] what to think of the market

[Michel Bauwens]

Hi Ryan,

I would separate the commons from the abundance discussion.

I think that indeed the commons is poised to become much more meaningful in
the future, as some kind of rallying cry against the domination of
neoliberalism, for all those that do not wish to use, for serious or
opportunistic reasons, older political language ... I seen signs that the
commons may be significant for the most advanced sectors of society ... but
of course, 'emergent', 'growing' not dominant for several decades ...

As for abundance, that is indeed a strand on this list, with charles collis,
nathan cravens, and many on the open manufacturing list ... it's not a
perspective that I share. On the contrary, I think we will experience a
powerdown and a return to more moderate material wealth, for a host of
reasons to do with global warming, resource crises, etc... My perspective is
immaterial abundance combined with a steady state economy that grows
sustainably. Yes, this sounds utopian, but is there any other choice beyond
dislocation of the infinite growth engine?

I think that p2p grows out of the current market economy, from its abundance
if you like (I completely agree with you there), but also that the market
economy needs p2p to continue to exist and thrive, i.e. exactly like the
relation of feudalism and capitalism from the 16th to the 18th century. But
where I differ is though I recognize that neoliberalism is still in power,
its economic model is in tatter, and that after the meltdown, a different
social compact and form of market economy will emerge. 2008 signalled the
objective death of successfull neoliberalism, because all its constituent
elements are exhausted, but barring political struggle, this elite is still
entrenched, as can be seen by Obama carrying out Hooverite policies ...

East Asia is a little different. Whereas the U.S. has exhausted its
financial reserves and is over-extented, here people have excess savings,
and a good chance to experience another period of substantial growth,
although here also, Asian leaders do no longer really trust the neoliberal
model .. they have seen how the U.S. has done the opposite of what it
recommended to them when they were in crisis, and they are extremely
resentful of this. It has effectively destroyed the moral authority of the
U.S.. in that regard. They will increasingly start to follow their own
models of capitalism ... P2P will emerge here later, but at some point,
especially because they are 'behind', they will use it to leapfrog and
inaugurate new models ... They have so much more to gain from distributed
manufacturing, relocalization of smart manufacturing, and open design.

But as you suggest, the cultural aspect is essential .. it takes several
post-material and cultural creative generations, enabled by the new
infrastructures, for p2p to grow as a practice and mentality ... The U.S.
and the countries you mention, are culturally most advanced in that regard,

Michel



>>
> Michel,
>
> What you say above is not what I hear so often in these lists.  I hear of a
> tipping point we are approaching where the commons becomes hyper-meaningful,
> and abundance (etc.) flows like milk and honey.
>
> To me it sounds like the worst sort of utopianism--detached from the messy
> reality of politics, the dignity of human choice, and the difficulty of
> making a case to those who might have very different perspectives.  If that
> is not egomania, I know not how to define it.  Isn't it always the case that
> ego-maniacs simply know better than the rest of us?
>
> Instead, perhaps what may be emerging is that P2P and the commons REQUIRE
> neo-liberalism and its excess cash, high education level surpluses and
> technology prowess to exist in the modern world.  Poor countries are simply
> to busy coping with corruption, disease, low productivity and hate to every
> rise to a level of sharing and the commons on any meaningful levels.
>
> And the only alternatives to the co-existance of neo-liberalism and P2P is
> a reversion to primitive states or neo-feudalism--both of which are highly
> unappealing to the great vast numbers of humans who enjoy their cable TV,
> Google with ads and private properties.
>
> There are truly no emergeant P2P states and the most neoliberal states--the
> US, Northern Europe, Australia, India...seem to also be those that are most
> P2P.
>
> Is it perhaps the narcissism of having a symbol of (social) wealth as the
> capacity to share and have abundance that has replaced the simpler
> narcissism of the 1980s where one simply flashed overt symbols of material
> wealth.  The new symbolism is the egotistical desire to prove one is more
> more, more selfless, more sharing than anyone else can be and is therefore a
> "commons leader."
>
> Ryan
>



-- 
Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research:
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090730/7e75c636/attachment.html>