[p2p-research] labour, capital and p2p

Sun May 17 16:04:25 CEST 2009

Ryan, 
the intensification of income differences is not something that happened in the 19th century, but in the last four decades.
Are you suggesting, that knowledge and information-driven production will somehow undo this development? If so, how would you explain the following parallel: Exactly at that moment when information and knowledge became the motor for economic development (from the 1970s onwards), the gap in income differences opened up significantly.
Andreas

________________________________

From: Ryan Lanham [mailto:rlanham1963 at gmail.com]
Sent: Sun 17/05/2009 01:23
To: Wittel, Andreas
Cc: Michel Bauwens; p2presearch at listcultures.org
Subject: Re: [p2p-research] labour, capital and p2p

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

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.