[p2p-research] Historical anti-materialism

Mon Jun 22 09:48:39 CEST 2009

Thanks Ryan,

Though I have been somewhat influenced by neo-marxism in my youth, I
rejected marxism and still do, but of course, some of insights remain. I use
it like I use insights from buddhism, from Freud etc ...

But then, what to do, should I excluse neo-Marxists, you used the term for
Andy I believe (given your remarks on his blogpost), from our discussion?

What if Andy or someone else asked that we exclude neoliberals from our
discussion?

I think pluralistic debate is the only way, even if some interpretations
make you/me/us uncomfortable.

I'm uncomfortable with the pro-nuclear stance, not very comfortable with the
pro-GMO stance, I wish you/Stan would reconsider such positions, but would I
demand that you refrain from defending this position?

Right now I'm am discussing on the IDC list, organized by Trebor Scholz who
lived in a 'really existing socialist country' and presumable, according to
what I understand, did not like it. Yet the list is dominated by what I
think you would call neo-marxists as far as I can understand, and most of
them are convinced that p2p is a plot by capital ... so you can understand
that this is not really my own crowd and position, yet I find it of interest
to face the test of their critical scepticism. On the other hand, those
neo-marxists that are on this list, support p2p, just as  you do, so whether
I agree with them or not, dialogue is on the order of the day.

Will such dialogue undo P2P Theory? I think not, but I'm sure some other
people will think that linking P2P Theory to nuclear waste is just as
dangerous a link.

So, we have to live with our differences, making only a boundary for people
who obviously consciously favour exploitation of  (hu)man by (hu)man.

One more point, though the kind of neo-marxism you describe undoubtedly
exists, such ideological expressions are increasingly rare, like everybody
else, the best exemplars and thinkers of that tradition are learning to
think integratively and self-critically, and I count people like Andy
amongst those,

Some others are less so and use rather harsh language and a presumption of
righteousness, but I think that as long as certain minimal principles of
civility are respected, we can live with it.

If you feel someone crosses the line, let me/us know,

Michel

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Michel,
>
> I agree with much of what you say, but I increasingly think the linkage to
> conventional Neo-Marxism may prove the undoing of P2P theory.
>
> What I see developing amongst the Neo-Marxists is not an inclusive theory.
> It is a controlling theory. It must, like a religion, be the only way.  It
> mandates and demands while being inherently judgmental.  They KNOW what
> equality is.  They KNOW what persecution is.  And they KNOW how to solve
> these problems.  It is, like so many 19th century ideals, judgment mixed
> with intolerance.
>
> I would hope pluralism could and would reign, but I fear that there are
> those who think their ideas are the only ones, and who demand that full
> accession to their ideals is a form of perfection.  That is dangerous.
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Ryan,
>>
>> There would be a lot to say about your characterisations, but if we're not
>> to picky I think it's not difficult to agree with the 3 anti-modernist
>> strands you are describing, a leftist one, a traditional one, and a
>> technocratic one.
>>
>> But to my mind, though contemporary p2p sympathisers may have links to one
>> or another, many have not, and I don't see myself fitting into any of them,
>> and I suspect most on this list would deny such a direct linkage as such.
>>
>> I see the reality much differently, p2p reflects new human possiblities of
>> organizing, some of it the reviving of old ways for sure, and a revolution
>> in the structure of desire, what you call the 'p2p ethos'. I see this as a
>> historic opportunity for new steps towards a more inclusive human society
>> and more emancipation (freedom, equality, justice ...).
>>
>> For sure, people with linkages to the strands you describe will try to
>> make sense of the new within the frameworks they grew up with, and that is
>> inevitable.
>>
>> So what is the difference? Instead of picking and choosing and creating
>> new ideologies, why not create platforms for dialogue, however difficult,
>> where people with or without affiliation with such strands can actually talk
>> together.
>>
>> Where can a free-market-fundamentalist like Kevin Carson, a self-described
>> neoliberal such as yourself, distributist christians, and an assortment of
>> more traditional lefties talk together?
>>
>> I believe in the possiblity of integration, in which people can make
>> efforts to recognize truth in the others ...
>>
>> It is not easy ...  I find it difficult to accept your pro-nuclear stance,
>> others with the ones on GMO, and many people can find fault in particular
>> points brought by other, including with my own points of view  ... none of
>> us makes the grade, totally, for each other in terms of similarity of views
>> ... we take a deep breath, and we continue our efforts to talk and learn
>> from each other beyond such differences ...
>>
>> It seems that on this list and forums, for the last 3 months have seen an
>> increase in level of a focus on differences ... this is not always
>> comfortable, but beyond anyone's control I think ...
>>
>> but there are enough commonolaties in favour of p2p solutions to keep
>> going at it ...
>>
>> this is why I continue, despite everything, to continue building the
>> resource base ...
>>
>> I figure that, even if I'm totally wrong in my own interpretations of p2p,
>> the materials I collected, from various and opposing quarters, will be
>> useful anyway, even if used in different frameworks,
>>
>> As my recent project on neotraditional economics indicates, I think
>> dialogue with many different quarters remains fruitful,
>>
>> Michel
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:31 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> What follows is a crude sketch forming in my own mind:
>>>
>>> There were three great historical threads of anti-materialism in
>>> the Anglo-American sphere that all reached their peak in the 1930s.
>>>
>>> The first was the conventional Utopian socialist model.  This one still
>>> plays out today (often in this list) and suggests a higher moral ground for
>>> certain enlightened parties who can see clearly the ills that affect
>>> society.  These groups tend to form communes, tend to collapse when sects
>>> become unworkable, and tend to have radical ideas for doing away with money,
>>> creating leisure societies, etc.  Their futurist component is the group that
>>> hopes Star Trek replicators become reality.  There is a high quantity of
>>> self-proclaimed intellectuals in this group often made up of disaffected
>>> rebels who fair poorly in conventional schools and degree programs.  Their
>>> past patron saint is George Bernard Shaw.  It seems to me the world center
>>> of this movement now is German-speaking.
>>>
>>> A second group of anti-materialists peaked with the writings of C.S.
>>> Lewis against materialism.  These persons tend to be motivated by faith
>>> considerations believing that money is a spiritual evil.  Wealth destroys
>>> the soul.  They have threads permeating radical religious groups in the US
>>> and British protestant movements.  Often these groups conflate anti-semitism
>>> and anti-materialism.  The average devotee is the working poor with a strong
>>> theological upbringing or those who fill jobs such as military roles,
>>> teachers or small civil service posts where pay is low and discipline is
>>> strong.  Their futurist component is millenialist.  They often speak of
>>> divine judgment and hope for their justice to be delivered by spirit-world
>>> interventions.  This group is now centered in Latin American and radical
>>> protestant groups and sects.  Without the otherwise essential religious
>>> thread, members of participating movements tend toward nationalist
>>> socialism/fascism as in Venezuela.
>>>
>>> A third group was the classical technocrats.  These were disaffected
>>> engineers, architects and planners who foresaw the problems of maintaining
>>> continuous consumption societies.  They tended to want to arrange the world
>>> based on energy use and accounting which tied closely to the growing
>>> awareness of physics theories in related areas from the 1880s-1930s.  Their
>>> futurist component is a strong thread in the transhumanist discourse.  The
>>> typical devotee is a technophile idealist who has tough encounters with
>>> conventional modes of power and economic control.  These conflicts lead to
>>> inflated views of technical possibilities that are usually Utopian, absurd
>>> and ego-building for those who are able to conceive grand visions--the
>>> rightful heirs of social control.  This group now fills subaltern positions
>>> in universities and are leaders in social networking technologies, tending
>>> to be early adaptors, idealistic visionaries and the like.  Their geographic
>>> center is in Scandanavia, California, and, to some extent, Japan.  The
>>> modern national manifestation is something like Holland or perhaps Finland.
>>>
>>> My own view is that only this third group has legitimate linkages to the
>>> current P2P movement.  The second makes no effort or has no interest in
>>> worldly sharing models outside of the Church.  They tend to align with the
>>> right politically.  The first group is jumping on to the P2P movement so as
>>> to advance their own often stifled idealism.  They tend to hope for radical
>>> catalysts to realize a future they expect to emerge regardless of any
>>> evidence to the contrary.  In a sense, they are millenialist as well, but
>>> they tend to have limited or no spiritual focus.  Their end times results in
>>> some Utopian socialist vision of paradise on earth.
>>>
>>> My guess is that the interaction of these groups will continue to prove
>>> mutually destructive.  The third will maintain leadership and action roles
>>> because of their technical interests and skills.  The second will continue
>>> to reject earthly models.  The first will alienate others by their constant
>>> focus on theory with little commitment to empirical action or results.
>>>
>>> The end product will be a slowly growing P2P movement periodically
>>> revitalized by neo-technocrats fixated on future issues and their seeming
>>> powerlessness to respond to unresponsive power structures.  Ironically, this
>>> mentality is extremely close to the techno-entrepreneur movement of the
>>> 1980s and beyond.  The difference is that the neo-technocrats tend to be
>>> anti-materialistic.  One will continue to see cross-overs between the
>>> neo-technocrats and the techno-entrepreneurs in the areas of social
>>> entrepreneurism.  Again, both the millenial heirs of C.S. Lewis and the
>>> Utopian socialists will be at the fringes of these projects.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ryan
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>
>> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
>> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
>> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>>
>> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>
>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>
>
>

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

Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
http://p2pfoundation.ning.com

Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090622/26e4a2b6/attachment-0001.html>