[p2p-research] Blog on Political Economy of P2P

[marc fawzi]

If capitalism is creative destruction, which I think is flawed overall even
if it applies in some aspect, then what do you call those who wish to
creatively destroy capitalism itself? In other words, capitalism will eat
itself if Schumpeter is right. But I think, while that will happen, creative
destruction is a far deeper and more fundamental phenomenon than
capitalism.

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Schumpeter famously described capitalism as creative destruction.  He meant
> that it is so hard to stay on top that innovation constantly destroys the
> less than sharp.  It is probably true.  Wealth management allows people to
> stay rich, but their productivity must come from investment.  Now that cash
> flows are difficult (long-term) that is even becoming extremely hard.
>
> The best answer to economics is education.  Smart, scientifically educated
> people win.  Asia is winning.  Africa will win next.  The key for poor
> countries is to eliminate the incredibly high costs of corruption.
> Corruption destroys far more wealth than anything else on the planet--far
> more.  A country like Jamaica which was exceedingly promising has been
> completely destroyed by corruption--so too Burma, Kenya, Zimbabwe, etc.  If
> you hate poverty and inequality, hate corruption.
>
> But monopoly power is unlikely in a framework where you don't have corrupt
> power because systems innovate vastly more quickly than they did in Marx's
> time.  Just look at PCs and software which change almost daily.  Innovation
> is the friend of the smart and the fair...and the commons must continually
> innovate to stay relevant...another strength of P2P.
>
> Here is a stunning statistic from a leading venture capitalist (I can give
> the exact source if anyone needs it but I don't have it at my
> fingertips...)  $27 Billion USD have been invested in Web 2.0 firms.  Guess
> how much has been realized from either profit returns or IPOs so far?
> Zero.  Zilch.  Not one penny.  That is devistating to capitalists...even
> they don't understand it...but it appears that firms like Facebook and the
> whole raft of Web 2.0 firms are effectively operating as non-profits.  Very
> odd times for the market economy.
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Tomas Rawlings <tom at fluffylogic.net>wrote:
>
>> I've always felt this is a major hole in capitalism; that all companies
>> aim for monopoly, which destroys competition.
>> In addition while competing against other companies using better products,
>> price and services is one method to achieve this monopoly (and the one in
>> theory companies are supposed to use), once a company reaches a certain
>> size, other options become open to it; competing using legal and financial
>> muscle, so 'buying' legal influence to alter the business environment to
>> favour you and disenfranchise your competitors, buying then closing
>> competing companies and dramatic temporarily price wars to knock the
>> competition out of the game.
>>
>> In a post-capitalist economy where much of the wealth resides in a
>> commons; I guess it could be the commons that has the monopoly position,
>> thereby fixing this problem?
>>
>>>
>>> Monopoly is a major problem in capitalism.  It necessitates regulatory
>>> workarounds.  Socialism assumes government or "people's" monopolies also
>>> leading to various problems.  In those cases, there is no one to regulate
>>> the state.  My own view is that state monopolies make good sense where
>>> service-provider commitment is essential or where equality of output is
>>> valued above all.
>>>
>>> Certain functions, I believe, are ideally fulfilled by the
>>> state--national
>>> defense, policing, certain banking functions, certain social service
>>> functions, public health functions, certain basic health services, some
>>> types of insurance services, prisons, etc.
>>>
>>> What I think is emerging is a poly-system of modes where various
>>> production
>>> mechanisms are optimizing to fit the ecosystem--economies are evolving to
>>> be
>>> more than one thing at once--capalist/socialist/anarchist/polyarchist,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Tomas
>>
>> -----------------------
>> Tomas Rawlings
>> Development Director, FluffyLogic Development Ltd.
>> web: www.fluffylogic.net
>> tel: 0117 9442233 -
>> Also see:
>> blog: www.plugincinema.com
>> tweet: www.twitter.com/arclightfire
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>


-- 

Marc Fawzi
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090522/1567e03a/attachment.html>