[p2p-research] A joint statement on P2P and post-scarcity thinking

[Ryan Lanham]

Franz and Michel:

I read what seems a prelude to a manifesto (and I don't mean that as a bad
thing) with interest.  I agree with much of it.  However, I am conflicted by
too whole-heartedly abandoning abundance theory discussions since so many
seem to hold it as a primary view.  Fragmenting those people into another
stream or movement would not prove productive.  I personally do not hold the
anti-capitalist views of 98% of the community.  Stan might be another with
somewhat similar views to mine on that score...we differ on others.
Abundance discussions will, for a long time, be prominent.  I'd personally
advocate welcoming them, and note your desire to work through contentions to
common grounds.

Otherwise in tone, I strongly agree with what you have here. I personally
doubt there are magical technical fixes looming, but I am from that
worldview as well in some ways.  If technology can help save us, we should
be open to it (not that you are saying otherwise.)

Ryan

On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Franz Nahrada <f.nahrada at reflex.at> wrote:

> We know we don´t speak for everybody, since we are a pluralistic community
> and we seek commonalities  between divergent views, but that does not mean
> that we don’t have a concern about the efficiency of what we are doing. In
> this context, we feel the need to distinguish the P2P theory view from
> post scarcity assumptions that have received such a prominent place on the
> P2P research mailing list.
> To make a strong statement: P2P (and also GlobalVillages) is not about
> post – scarcity, but about restoring the right balance between scarcity
> and abundance – which is an alltogether different thing.
> It does not believe that technology by itself provides any complete social
> solution, but it is always embedded in and driven by particular social and
> political logics
> For example, automation is very much driven by capitalist competition to
> be more productive than other market players. It is absolutely not sure
> that autonomous communities would choose to totally abolish manual work.
> It is totally legitimate that communities or countries would choose
> industrious development paths preserving and augmenting direct human
> involvement in material production.
> For example, an agricultural community may want to preserve its
> traditional ways of life – and that is a freedom we want everybody to have.
> Maybe we can say that our contacts with local activist communities have
> made us aware that the identification with post-scarcity thinking is
> politically problematic – in particular the image of the „magical
> technical fix“.
> We do not want to stop the dialogue, but we would like to make clear that
> no consensus can be assumed on that - and as a movement we do not want to
> be identified with it. It is not a central message, it is merely the hope
> of some, of people that we do respect but also who carry a much stronger
> burden of proof. People who make extraordinary claims are bound more than
> others to show practical implementations.
> All the material we have in the P2P wiki are actually existing projects
> and it is out of the observation of these existing social practises that
> we draw our conclusions.
> STRATEGY
> P2P is operating in a world which is characterised by 2 main factors,
> mostly wrongly perceived:
> - Scarcity of natural resources, which is increasingly accelerated by a
> dysfunctional mode of production and is putting us into ever more serious
> planetary management problems. We are in friendly terms with the
> environmental movement(s) that adresses these issues and becomes more
> practical every day (renewables, solar, distributed energy...)
> - Our own priority as P2P movement is adressing the second factor, which
> is the enclosure of the intellectual and scientific and cultural commons
> which is being addressed by the „Open Everything Movements“.  Opening up
> the realm of ideas and allowing the massive collaboration of the general
> intellect of the world is an essential condition of mastering the
> ecological crisis and to the fulfillment of the better promises and
> achievements of our civilisation through the building of a new
> civilisation or rather new culture.
> But there is a third necessary factor that is crucial for a thrivable
> solution which would allow for further human evolution:  without true
> active participation of all in the design and production of our material
> life, without the involvement of the majority of human beings into the
> effort to find a new social contract, we will not be able to reach the
> goals of a better life on this planet. Therefore P2P has to join forces
> with the third mass movement on this planet, which could roughly be
> characterized as the social justice movement, involving the struggles of
> workers, farmers, entrepreneurs and knowledge workers.
> We currenly see a strategic convergence of these three movements and we
> think it is our own responsibility to help make it happen. We believe that
> a perceived identification between P2P and post scarcity is counter to
> that goal, because post-scarcity is intentionally ignoring important
> issues raised by the other two movements, i.e. the ecological and social
> justice movement.
> Michel Bauwens, P2P Foundation
> Franz Nahrada, Global Villages Network
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>



-- 
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
Cayman Islands
(345) 916-1712
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090913/f426d2a5/attachment-0001.html>