[p2p-research] labour, capital and p2p

Sun May 17 02:11:13 CEST 2009

There are many terms in Greek and Latin vocabulary which are still relevant today. So what is the problem with this? Yes, trems like capital and labour are probably not part of most people's worlds, and actually they never have been. They remained in the realm of concept/model/theory. That is not great. But that is not really the point.
I have used these terms to describe a widening gap between the rich and the poor. Most people who dont use these these terms still worry about this development. The terms might be old, the problem is contemporary. Would you agree that this increasing gap of inequality is a serious problem, Ryan?
Also, I really don't think that the left is unaware of how knowledge changes the game, all the debates on immaterial labour show that knowledge is today's battleground. But this does not mean that knowledge operates outside of capital and labour. Let's not talk about terms, let's talk about the organisation of production (and knowledge production) in capitalism
Andreas

________________________________

From: p2presearch-bounces at listcultures.org on behalf of Ryan Lanham
Sent: Sat 16/05/2009 15:06
To: Michel Bauwens
Cc: p2presearch at listcultures.org
Subject: Re: [p2p-research] labour, capital and p2p

I believe the seemingly absurd idealism of the European left is useful to the world.  Whether it leads anywhere or just gives fodder to the right that the left is silly remains to be seen in the voting booths. But my own interpretation is that it is useful for pushing collaborative, open inquiry types (I hope like myself) to further question and reflect on their own equivocations.  

Most of the discussions seem better set in 1880 than 2009.  Terms like "capital" "labor" "management" seem to me to belong with terms like "steam engine" "railroad" and "factory."  They aren't even seriously part of most people's worlds.  

The battlefield today is the mind.  Can its produce be free?  Can there be justice in allocating knowledge and the expansion of knowledge?  Who wins when knowledge is expanded?  Knowledge isn't a conventional capital like a gear or machine tool.  It is very different.  The left seems unaware of that.  Is there a left that open to post-capital social arrangements?  Or maybe I'm it.

Ryan Lanham

On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:

	Hi Marco,

	you may be right that there are many people who want to abolish the personhood of corporations, but I have yet to meet the first one ... on the other hand, I meet scores of people who want to be enterpreneurs and create a company, regardless of its bylaws ...

	I think that the answer here, if I'm correct about the lack of traction, is not necessarily to fight the old, we can do that later when we're stronger, but rather to build constructive and better alternatives .. I think that social entrepreneurships, fair trade, for-benefit associations and blended/value good-capital approaches, including chris cook's open capital, aim to do precisely that, to create better formats that can outgrow the limitations of the corporate patholotical form ...

	So I agree with the ultimate aims of POCLAD, but I think it's more fruitful to build alternatives at this stage,

	As you know, Douglas Rushkoff's Life Inc., is doing a good job of educating people in POCLAD type critiques, as did The Corporation a few years earlier ...

	Michel

	On 5/15/09, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net> wrote: 

		On Fri, May 15, 2009 16:14:02 PM +0700, Michel Bauwens wrote:
		> Hi Marco,
		>
		> Thanks for your contribution.
		>
		> I understand your comment, but my 'feeling' is just the opposite.

		No problem! As I said, I'm all but an expert on monetary reform issues
		or corporate law, so I don't really have any strong opinion or
		position to defend, no problem. When these specific issues are
		concerned, I'm still a student collecting material for homework.

		With respect to this:

		> Hundreds of cities and regions and tens of thousands of people are
		> working on monetary issues .. it's a vibrant and growing movement ..
		> In contrast, POCLAD is just minuscule

		There is no doubt that the "monetary alternatives" movement, for lack
		of a better term, is much more vibrant, growing and known among
		activists than things like POCLAD. I myself discovered POCLAD by pure,
		pure chance online some years ago. I also have no problem, at least
		now, to accept your evaluation that POCLAD has much, much smaller
		possibilities of success than monetary reform. What I didn't expect,
		and find really interesting, is this assertion:

		> and it requires really what the immense majority of people will find
		> an unacceptable reform.

		Regardless, again, of the probability of success and of any inherent
		flaws in the idea, I am pretty sure that, around here, I would find:

		1) much, much less difficulties to explain POCLAD proposals than any
		  money reform scheme passed on this list since when I subscribed

		2) (partly due to 1) ) many more supporters of such a corporate reform
		  than of any of those scheme.

		That is, my **feeling** is that if both sets of proposals were given
		equal coverage in mainstream media (we can dream, can we not?), the
		majority of non-activists, the "Joe Sixpack" class, in American slang,
		would go for POCLAD (especially in these times...) rather than money
		reform which would be, in that context, a much more alien concept than
		"corporations are bad".

		So I wonder how much of this feeling depends on where one lives. What
		do list subscribers from other parts of the world think? Which of
		those two classes of concepts is easier to sell (regardless of its
		intrinsic value) to Joe Sixpack? Just curious, really, answer off list
		if you think it's off topic.

		marco

		--
		Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
		software is used *around* you:            http://digifreedom.net/node/84

		_______________________________________________
		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://p2pfoundation.net/>   - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/>  - http://p2pfoundation.ning.com <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/ 

	_______________________________________________
	p2presearch mailing list
	p2presearch at listcultures.org
	http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

This email is intended solely for the addressee.  It may contain private and confidential information.  If you are not the intended addressee, please take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone.  In this case, please reply to this email to highlight the error.  Opinions and information in this email that do not relate to the official business of Nottingham Trent University shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by the University.
Nottingham Trent University has taken steps to ensure that this email and any attachments are virus-free, but we do advise that the recipient should check that the email and its attachments are actually virus free.  This is in keeping with good computing practice.