[p2p-research] Why Post-Capitalism is Rubbish

[Dmytri Kleiner]

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Michel Bauwens wrote:

> I could have written exactly the same thing, as indeed, this is the central
> concern, and this is exactly why I/we are so interested in finding the fit 
> between the immaterial and the material:

Which is why you need to abandon a definition of peer production that
precludes the material.


> <exactly because the common stock is immaterial it can not directly
> capture exchange value with out access to scarce inputs, physical, legal,
> and financial, and thus this is not such a significant shift as you make it
> out to be. Capital will still get it's surplus value in the main.>
> 
> Apart from that, I think that, at the same time that capital and state are 
> incorporating p2p elements, at the same time, the immaterial commons, 
> sharing practices, p2p ethos, and the revolution in the structure of desire, 
> are still continuing and expanding, at the same time.

Not sure what any of the above really means. Examples?


> So, not only do I not think that p2p is already over the top, but rather that we have
> seen nothing yet,

I hope you are right, however, we have seen nothing of corporate and
state repression of p2p yet either.


> Untold more numbers of people are now able to peer produce, than say, 10 years ago,
> despite the existence of sharing platforms (but actually also thanks to it)

It's important to note that a percentage of total users, fewer
are able to publish public information and services from their own
resrouces now than during earlier stages of the Internet.

At the same time, I agree with you that total numbers are larger, and I
believe it is in this fact that both our hopes lay.


Cheers.



-- 
Dmytri Kleiner, aspiring crank

http://www.telekommunisten.net