[p2p-research] labour, capital and p2p
Michel Bauwens
michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Mon May 18 11:58:35 CEST 2009
Hi Andreas
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Wittel, Andreas
<andreas.wittel at ntu.ac.uk>wrote:
> Hi Michel,
>
> this four-tiered currency system sounds terribly complicated. My first
> reaction: not very practical.
I'm not sure what is complicated about it, since all levels already exists,
with only the local level embryonic, but emerging rapidly. These are simply
congruent reforms, a central basket of commodities currency as reserve
currency that has 'sustainability' protections; regional infrastructures
like the Euro for the zones not having it, some changes at the national
level, etc...
> Most people I know would cry out in pain if they'd been forced to deal with
> currencies simultaneously. Rather than simplifying exchange this would go in
> the opposite direction. It would force us to endlessly translate between
> these currencies, it would put our minds to stuff that nobody I know really
> wants to think about.
Specialized currencies would only be used by people voluntary accepting it
in certain local settings. People are already using airmiles, food stamps,
lunch vouchers ... it's not that much more complicated
>
> The main reason why most people in Europe welcomed the Euro was not an
> economic reason. It just made their life easier, especially travelling
> across boarders.
> Woergl: well, yes it worked. However it worked for one year only, and these
> were different times. Would it still work in a globalised world? Possibly.
> However I see one big problem. A circulation charge would not change
> anything, as those 10% of the population who own about 50% of all wealth are
> just unlikely to join these alternative local currency systems.
The circulation charge would actually be for the national/regional/global
system, and that is why it is so difficult to implement, given the current
balance of power; the local systems are a protective mechanism against
dislocation; depending on the gravity of the dislocation, they may emerge
though as seeds of a global interconnection for the future
> Why should they? If they dont, the whole exercise is a bit pointless in my
> view.
> I fully agree with the question that Stan raises:
> if we don't have equitable ownership norms or standards or laws
> or rights, why would we expect money or finance to be fair? How could
> we even tell if it was?
>
As we change the monetary logic to protect communities and enhance the
conditions for peer production, we can also work at the level of property.
For example: why do peer production communities not work preferentially with
cooperatives?
Michel
>
>
> Andreas
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Michel Bauwens [mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sun 17/05/2009 15:55
> To: Wittel, Andreas
> Cc: Peer-To-Peer Research List
> Subject: Re: labour, capital and p2p
>
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> <This is a point I don't understand. How can new financial and monetary
> systems (do you make a distinction between financial and monetary?) lead to
> a closing of the ever increasing gap between the rich and poor? And what
> would these strategies look like? And how could these 'small and emerging'
> p2p strategies compete with the hegemonic financial system in place?>
>
> This is a complex issue, but I follow Bernard Lietaer's lead who proposes a
> four-tiered strategy, that includes the global, the regional, the national
> and the local level. See
> http://p2pfoundation.net/Four-tiered_Monetary_System_of_the_Future
>
> On the local (and internet affinity level, which is global), we can
> institute local currencies like the Worgl, which have shown substantial
> results in reviving local economies, and can follow different rules than
> mainstream bank-debt money, see http://p2pfoundation.net/Worgl_Shillings.
>
> A circulation charge, also proposed by ATTAC (Tobin Tax) and neo-marxists
> such as Yann Moulier-Boutang, would substantially slow down 'hot money' and
> make it less interesting to invest in the speculative economy, and could
> free a major part of the tax burden on workers (boutang has calculated that
> a minuscule circulation tax on financial flows would already replace the
> totality of the income tax needs in France). Don't forget that it is
> essentially capital circulation of hot money (capital flight) which has made
> social policies impossible in the last 30 years. Breaking hot speculative
> money is therefore a very important, strategic, part, of any pro-labour
> policy. Think also about Obama's fundraising, showing how more inclusionary
> financing, outcompeted traditional funding, to show the power and
> possibilities of 'social money' approaches. A socially engaged social
> lending scheme, or credit commons, could direct money in entirely different
> ways than current banking priorities. Or look at sovereign wealth funds,
> which unlike multinational bank money, favours public goods and social
> goals. The more we can strategically integrate financial and monetary
> reforms, the more we can diminish the power of finance capital, and favour
> labour. Today, if labour strikes for better conditions, capital simply moves
> out seeking better conditions for itself, but if you diminish that
> capaticity, that one-sided fluidity, you change the balance of forces.
> Labour still needs to fight on many other fronts, but it can do so in much
> better circumstances.
>
> I think there is indeed a difference between the financial system and
> 'money as such'. For example, Obama's measures for the transparency of hedge
> funds, or tax heavens, does not touch the logic of money as such, only
> offers new rules for existing money. But the Worgl shiling and the hundreds
> of contemporary alternatives, change the very functioning of money.
>
> The logic is simple. If you have compound interest (and usury levels),
> accumulation is favoured, as it becomes interesting to hoard money, which
> invites short term planning and speculation. Interest is a tax from the
> borrowers to the lenders, from the poor to the rich. But with a circulation
> charge, or demurrage, hoarding money is expensive, therefore discouraging
> speculation, and stimulating everyone to invest in the productive economy.
> See for example the high medieval renaissance which used such money and
> could invest, through the crowdfunding of the time, in Gothic cathedrals
> which took decades to build. This high growth of 3 centuries collapsed when
> the kings introduced central currencies after the defeat of the Cathar
> rebellion.
>
> Now, I'm very well aware that if we are too weak to tackle the
> macro-system, i.e. your hegemonic system, we are missing crucial power, but
> that is why we also have to start at the local scale, and internetwork to
> scale globally, until we are strong enough to tackle the global system. Now
> of course, if a global movement emerges which can tackle the global system,
> so much the better, but we would still need to cover the local needs.
>
> Michel
>
>
>
> On 5/16/09, Wittel, Andreas <andreas.wittel at ntu.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Michel,
>
> thanks for this reply, I agree with many things obviously, but do
> have some questions and need some clarifications. I have not read Carlota
> Perez, it is on my to-do-list, and your introduction to her work makes a lot
> of sense to me.
>
> Maybe it is not important if the dominance and relative autonomy of
> the financial markets was an illusion or a reality for the last 4 decades
> that has come to end but could be resumed sooner rather than later.
> Basically we all agree (I would suppose) that this relative autonomy of the
> financial markets is a very bad thing.
>
> So how can we prevent this? My answer at the moment: by establishing
> a fairer system for the value of labour on a global scale. I have a huge
> amount of respect for Obama, but he does not seem to willing to engage with
> this issue at all. And if he doesn't, nobody else of those in political
> power will do so.
>
> You say: 'But the point is that the specific way that the financial,
> and money systems, are organized and designed, is crucial for the way the
> production system is organized. If we want to have a more 'fair' labour
> system, even within capitalism, we need to tackle the financial system.'
>
> This is a point I don't understand. How can new financial and
> monetary systems (do you make a distinction between financial and monetary?)
> lead to a closing of the ever increasing gap between the rich and poor? And
> what would these strategies look like? And how could these 'small and
> emerging' p2p strategies compete with the hegemonic financial system in
> place?
>
> Andreas
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Michel Bauwens [mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Fri 15/05/2009 04:24
> To: Wittel, Andreas
> Cc: Peer-To-Peer Research List; Andrea Fumagalli; Vasilis Kostakis;
> andrew paterson; Franz Nahrada; Samuel Rose; Kevin Carson
> Subject: Re: labour, capital and p2p
>
>
> (Hi Andrea (Fumagalli), I was wondering if you could forward a copy
> of this discussion to the 2 russian authors, as they might find if of
> interest how their analysis inspires our own community)
>
> Hi Andreas (Wittel),
>
> Let me first say that I completely agree with your analysis. Of
> course the financial system is rooted in the exploitation of labour, it is a
> specific way of extracting value from it. That's actually what relative (not
> absolute) autonomy means, that it is interlocked in a complex feedback loop
> with the other sectors. But the point is that the specific way that the
> financial, and money systems, are organized and designed, is crucial for the
> way the production system is organized. If we want to have a more 'fair'
> labour system, even within capitalism, we need to tackle the financial
> system. (not alone of course, as part of an integrative strategy)
>
> I'm not sure how familiar you are with my own take on the different
> cycles of capitalist development, but I recently updated my insights after
> reading the following, i.e. one of the essays in the journal I sent you
> yesterday, and which I already commented upon here,
>
> see
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/peer-money-as-the-solution-for-sudden-system-stock/2009/05/14
>
> The essay is:
>
> Badalian L., Krivorotov V., "Technological shift and the rise of a
> new finance system <
> http://ejess.revuesonline.com/article.jsp?articleId=13147> : the
> market-pendulum model", European Journal of Economic and Social Systems,
> Vol. 21, No. 2, 2008, p. 231-264.
>
> And here are my own thoughts, on how 'p2p' is connected with such a
> transition to a new wave of development:
>
> The authors continue the work on understanding 'long waves',
> pioneered by Kondratieff, continued by Schumpeter and recently summarized
> and updated by Carlota Perez.
>
> The important thing is this, every long wave of appr. 50-60 years
> has been based on a combination of 1) a new form of energy the UK domination
> = coal, the US domination is oil); 2) some radical technological
> innovations; and 3) a new 'hyperproductive' way to 'exploit the territory';
> and 4) an appropriate financial system. An important insight in the latter,
> is that what enables growth in a first phase, becomes an unproductive burden
> in the second declining phase of the wave.
>
> Each wave has been dominated by a particular great power as well.
> And each wave ends with a Systemic Sudden Stop (3S), like the one we are in
> now. (and, each transition needed a war, as this seems impossible today, it
> will probably the global struggle against the climate change catastrophes
> that will mobilize the global energies).
>
> So we have to think, what new combination is in the works now.
>
> For energy, in the context of Peak Oil, it can only be renewable
> energies, like solar and wind etc... New technologies: essentially it will
> be based on the global internetworking, augmented by what it enables (bio,
> nano, etc..). That much is clear, but then the question is: how can we more
> efficiently 'exploit the territory'.
>
> What we will loose in terms of 'gross power' that we had with oil,
> will have to be compensated by IT-generated greater precision, in the
> application of that power, once we have renewables. In other words, the
> engine of growth will be the systematic integration of artificial and human
> intelligence in our productive activities.
>
> They also say that a post-3S transition, the cost of the transition
> is to high for the market and requires state intervention.
>
> So now my take on this. What global internetworking enables is open
> and global design communities. This means that information is no longer
> physically constrained, but can flow 'anywhere', and this is crucial, be
> used by local communities. Second, the same technological developments lead
> to more precision manufacturing, that can be done in a distributed fashion.
> This means again, that the cost of capital is dramatically declining and
> becomes affordable for the 'periphery. Again this empowers local
> communities. Finally on the energy level, distributed energy machinery can
> also empower the local communities. And finally there is the new financial
> system, and here is where the peer money movements come in, to create flows
> of financing right where they are needed, and not just in the unproductive
> casino capitalism that enriched the current oligarchy.
>
> Each long wave is also marked by a changing of the guard in the kind
> of institutions and the kind of ruling elite.
>
> Each wave was also based on more inclusion, for example the
> integration of labour in the Fordist system was much broader than in the
> 19th Smithian system, BUT, in the declining phase, the social contract
> breaks down and this is what Richard Wolff described as what happened under
> the neoliberal financial system.
>
> So:
>
> - renewable distributed energy
>
> - distributed manufacturing (linked to much more distributed
> ownership modes)
>
> - an organic farming revolution based on high info input instead of
> high petrochemical input
>
> - new stakeholder oriented global institutions
>
> - a new elite of netarchical capitalists
>
> - a new social contract based on broader inclusivity that will be
> beneficial to global open design communities
>
> - a new financial system, based on a redesign of the monetary
> system, a diversity of localized and affinity-based community currencies, a
> new credit commons and hopefully: a basic income (nobody by the way is
> suggesting 'tinkering' on that level, it needs a radical reformation)
>
> - a geographic shift to the periphery, i.e. East Asia as the newly
> dominant power of the next ascending wave
>
> Many of the above things are strongly related to what we talk about
> under the name of 'p2p' or distribution. I don't expect this to be dominant,
> but I expect that the new social contract will have to accept a major
> upgrade of inclusion to achieve its hyperproductive aims, while in a later
> stage, a phase transition may occur to a fuller p2p regime.
>
> A crucial aspect is the combination of global open design and
> knowledge communities, to the more distributed modes of precision
> manufacturing, which because of their more distributed aspects (much lower
> capital requirements), are favourable to the self-aggregation of smaller
> businesses, which could be organized on a new basis (cooperatives,
> solidarity economics, etc...).
>
> But can all this be tackled by 'p2p alone'? and you doubt rightfully
> that this can be done.
>
> I think it needs a combination of three movements:
>
> - the specific p2p movement for open and free exchange of innovation
> (tackling artificial scarcity in innovation)
>
> - the environmental movement, tackling the negative externalities
> creating biospheric destruction
>
> - the social justice movement (labour, agricultural, knowledge
> workers and precariat), fighting for inclusion
>
> It is the combination of these 3 social movements, and their mutual
> interpenetration and infusion, which can have the necessary force to obtain
> change and a new more favourable and inclusionary social contract, in
> combination with the efforts of the netarchical capitalists. This sector of
> capital is both friend and foe, depending on specific contexts, but I would
> suggest that such an alliance is crucial for success. They are going to be
> at the core of the next 'accumulation engine' (the concept used by the
> authors above to denote the full integrated system).
>
> These 3 movements need each other, and need to be fused in one
> global effort. They can't win without p2p, and 'p2p' can't win without them.
>
> None of the above is automatic, and the transition to a new
> ascending phase is complicated by the global energy and climate crisis, but
> it has a realistic chance of being achieved, which also depends on us, as
> the p2p meme is a crucial variable in the success of that transition.
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:15 AM, Wittel, Andreas <
> andreas.wittel at ntu.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> This is an attempt to revive the debate without using the
> poisonous apple tree metaphor any longer. Let's start instead with the sun
> and earth example used by Christian. In his reply Michel says:
>
>
>
> 'This means that the financial and monetary systems have a
> real relative autonomy and a real influence on behaviour and choices. If
> this is true then financial and monetary regulations and design make a
> difference, both in observable reality and in the unseen structural rules.'
>
>
>
> I would argue that this is what we all thought before the
> crash. We all thought that financial markets are (1) relatively autonomous
> from the realm of real production, and (2) anyway much more powerful than
> real production.
>
>
>
> But the financial markets crashed and suddenly it becomes
> clear that both, their strength and their autonomy was a bit of an illusion,
> similar to the idea of the sun turning around the earth. Financial markets
> proved to be unsustainable on their own. In order to avoid the collapse of
> global finance, taxpayer's money is needed. Suddenly capital seems to be
> very dependent on labour.
>
>
>
> The question is how this illusion has been created. In my
> view Richard Wolff comes up with a convincing explanation.
> http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=139 <
> http://www.mediaed.org/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=139>
>
> For those who don't want to see the full video, this is what
> Wolff says in a nutshell (focusing on the US but this would also be true for
> large parts of Europe): This crisis did not start with banking, but with
> something else. From the 1820s until the 1970s the workers enjoyed a rising
> standard of living, meaning: rising real wages. For these 150 years the
> growth of productivity corresponded with the rising level of real wages.
> This changed in the early 1970's, when a steadily increasing gap opened
> between these two graphs. Real wages stopped rising, while productivity
> continued to rise. Consequently workers had to borrow money and accumulate
> debts. The workers were given loans. For business however the last few
> decades have been like paradise. The gap between rising productivity and
> stagnating wages created spectacular profits. These profits were the
> precondition for financial markets becoming increasingly powerful. At some
> point interests from loans became financially more productive than the
> production of commodities, and so on.
>
>
>
> If we accept this story, we have to conclude that the
> increasing domination and independence of the financial market has one main
> cause: the exploitation of labour power.
>
>
>
> So why tinkering at the edges of a monetary system, why
> creating new ones? How could new monetary systems stop or even diminish the
> exploitation of labour power? If they can't, why bother? Of course I am not
> suggesting that work towards a new monetary system should be abandoned in
> the p2p community. I just don't see the point. I would like to focus my
> inquiries on the question how the p2p community can contribute to a fairer
> system of monetary exchange for labour (= value)
>
>
>
> I don't have any ideas at the moment (or better, I have
> abstract ideas, e.g. basic income for everybody, e.g. ownership of
> organisations by the workers and not the shareholders, but don't have a clue
> how to work towards realising these ideas). I hope that other people in this
> list have a lot to say about this.
>
>
>
> To be completely honest, I have some doubts that this goal (a
> fairer system of exchange) can actually be tackled in the p2p world alone.
> Open source and p2p communities have achieved mind-blowing results, but so
> far these are limited to non-rival goods (the digital stuff, software,
> music, ideas, news and so on). These achievements have been possible because
> open-source and p2p communities were able to operate largely outside the
> economy. Two reasons for this: (1) the means of production and distribution
> for non-rival or digital goods are available to many. (2) So all that is
> needed to produce and distribute digital things is the value of labour
> (Marco I know you disagree, I am merely simplifying this to illustrate the
> difference with material things). Open source and p2p communities are full
> of enthusiasts who are willing to contribute with their labour to the
> changes we have experienced, social changes, economic changes, political
> changes. This labour mostly is free labour.
>
>
>
> But how far can we go with free labour? As soon as it comes
> to the housing market, we can't do open source and p2p any more. We need to
> approach banks and ask for loans and live with debt and pay them back.
>
>
>
> I am not really sure where I am going with this: For me
> open-source and p2p represents a new form of resistance, a very constructive
> resistance, one that is not any more defined by public protests, and
> banners, and strike and opposition lone, but simply by doing things without
> asking anyone for permission and thus changing the world. (This would be my
> contribution to Ryan's p2p manifesto). But, as said above, this mostly
> refers to non-rival goods. A fairer exchange system for labour power, I
> believe, cannot be achieved with a new piece of software and a p2p community
> of several hundred (or even thousand) enthusiasts that uses this new
> software tool. For this to happen we need to develop strategies which are
> aimed at societies at large. Actually this comes across far too opinionated.
> It really is a question.
>
>
>
> Andreas
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
> 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.
>
>
--
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/20090518/74ae2a66/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the p2presearch
mailing list