[p2p-research] labour, capital and p2p
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Sun May 17 02:23:53 CEST 2009
As I understand it, capitalism is the accumulation of capital to control
means of production. Who or what does that now? Name five "capitalists"
who matter. Most either parlayed intellectual property rights into
fortunes, or they invested in large financial engineering schemes where debt
was the leverage to create huge cash flows.
Very few successful firms actually produce things with capital--that is all
in China and Eastern Europe and such places. Like I said, it is like
discussing the 19th century. Not sure what world this is that people are
discussing, but it isn't the one I live or work in.
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Wittel, Andreas
<andreas.wittel at ntu.ac.uk>wrote:
> 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.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090516/fdaa2fcb/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the p2presearch
mailing list