[p2p-research] Cybernetics the missing piece for partnership state and steady state economy?

Fri Sep 18 15:28:57 CEST 2009

Here's my intuition:

- central planning is mostly dead

- but monetized markets are not good for everything

- what we can develop though is coordination, i.e. following the model of
large scale coordination of small groups, pioneered by linux and wikipedia
through stigmergy and holoptism, but applying it to production, assuming
that productive entities can see each other's production, compare that to
the demand (also available via retail) and so adjust production to real need

in short: central planning is replaced by regional, national, global
coordination when and where needed,

Michel

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Paul D. Fernhout <
pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:

> That "945 marginal tax rates" was supposed to be "94% marginal tax rates".
>
> See, for an example of what the USA will *eventually* do in the next decade
> if it is to survive as a viable system:
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
> """
> The U.S. economy grew rapidly during Roosevelt's term.[66] However, coming
> out of the depression, this growth was accompanied by continuing high levels
> of unemployment; as the median joblessness rate during the New Deal was
> 17.2%. Throughout his entire term, including the war years, average
> unemployment was 13%.[67][68] Total employment during Roosevelt's term
> expanded by 18.31 million jobs, with an average annual increase in jobs
> during his administration of 5.3%.[69]
>  Roosevelt did not raise income taxes before World War II began; however
> payroll taxes were also introduced to fund the new Social Security program
> in 1937. He also got Congress to spend more on many various programs and
> projects never before seen in American history. However, under the revenue
> pressures brought on by the depression, most states added or increased
> taxes, including sales as well as income taxes. Roosevelt's proposal for new
> taxes on corporate savings were highly controversial in 1936–37, and were
> rejected by Congress. During the war he pushed for even higher income tax
> rates for individuals (reaching a marginal tax rate of 91%) and corporations
> and a cap on high salaries for executives. In order to fund the war,
> Congress broadened the base so that almost every employee paid federal
> income taxes, and introduced withholding taxes in 1943.
> """
>
> Note, beyond a faltering infrastructure, the USA is currently fighting at
> least two wars (Iraq and Afghanistan), both of which have gone on for longer
> than WWII.
>
> Historically, that high marginal tax rate (so, paid by high earners on the
> extra high income) created booming businesses, because wealth was spread
> around so everyone could spend it or start businesses with it. That tax
> policy created a relatively-affluent middle class and a vibrant social
> landscape leading to the family values of the 1950s because families only
> needed one wage earner, so one spouse could interact locally with children
> as well as peers, all outside the marketplace. And all that was happening
> even as much productive capacity was being used for war. It is true that was
> in part because the government was redistributing money from those who were
> doing tremendously well to everyone else, but it was justified on the basis
> that the economy was a common system, with common needs, and that there is
> an inherent problem with markets that the rich get richer and wealth
> centralizes otherwise causing the system to freeze up. By analogy, in a
> garden, one sunflower inches away from many others will grow big while it
> outcompetes all the others around it for nutrients, and as it gets bigger in
> will outcompete others even better. In the garden, that is why gardeners
> will "thin" out plants, but the equivalent action to humanity ("thinning
> out" the poor) would be horrendous (although it happens in practice, say
> with poorer people having little access to health care, as the USA has
> chosen to ration health care based on economic status). Intervening to
> redistribute wealth prevents this centralization and concentration of
> wealth, and thus prevents this runaway positive feedback loop of a
> competitive economic arms race. One way to do that is related to a basic
> income and universal health care paid for through progressive taxes (and
> other revenue sources like renting government land or a high tax on fossil
> fuels or other market aspects with negative externalities).
>
> Still, even within gardens, if one keeps the soil healthy, with plenty of
> rock dust and organic matter, and water, one may still see a lot of growth
> by all plants that might otherwise be stunted. That's equivalent to creating
> general abundance in some ways. And peer-to-peer work on a commons like
> Wikipedia can accomplish that to an extent outside of direct government
> support, as, maybe someday, open manufacturing will as well.
>
> But ironically, this is what conservative/libertarians think of Roosevelt's
> high marginal tax rate policy that created a vibrant middle class:
>  http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm327.cfm
> """
> There is a distinct pattern throughout American history: When tax rates are
> reduced, the economy’s growth rate improves and living standards increase.
> Good tax policy has a number of interesting side effects. For instance,
> history tells us that tax revenues grow and “rich” taxpayers pay more tax
> when marginal tax rates are slashed. This means lower income citizens bear a
> lower share of the tax burden – a consequence that should lead class-warfare
> politicians to support lower tax rates.
> """
>
> And the conservatives go on to cite economic bubbles like leading up to
> 1929 as justifications of this policy, while ignoring huge rich/poor
> disparities and the collapse of markets under that. Just like now, Obama is
> already blamed (less than a year in office) for the economic crisis, which,
> according to the most extreme conservatives, occurred only because there was
> too *much* regulation and too *high* taxes. (What truth there is to that is
> probably that too much of US taxes go to the military and not wealth
> redistribution).
>
> The problem is that markets can't function well with centralized wealth, or
> essentially, you just have the worst parts of USSR central planning but with
> a few plutocrats instead of a few Party members making key economic
> decisions.
>
> President Barack Obama got it right when he said, from his heart, to "Joe
> the Plumber" that we should "spread the wealth around" to have a better
> society. But the problem is, unless Obama moves past mainstream economics
> (basically, mainstream macroeconomic is an apology for current social
> hierarchy a this point)
>  "The Mythology of Wealth | Conceptual Guerilla"
>  http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/402
> Obama will not have a rational model for explaining what his heart tells
> him is right. And so the "conservatives" conserving only the last few
> decades of disaster for the US middle class tear his statements apart. And,
> the conservatives are doing this fairly, in the sense that Obama can't
> explain technically why his heart is right as long as he tries to do it in a
> mainstream macroeconomic paradigm that led to the current economic disaster.
> Basically, you have Obama saying, "let's be nice to each other" and the
> conservatives saying "that will never work because of such-and-so in our
> collective ideology that you agree with too".
>
> But *cybernetic* theories of decision making will better show how what
> Obama said from the heart also makes a lot of sense in reality. A cybernetic
> approach, looking at feedback cycles and information flows, shows why
> Obama's statement from the heart was right, because of basic cybernetic
> reasons of managing positive feedback loops (arms races of
> the-rich-get-richer) and negative feedback loops (downward spirals of
> the-poor-get-poorer).
>
> The human "heart" (in the sense of collective peer-to-peer behavior) has
> been evolving for thousands, even millions, of years, where a good
> cybernetic model of collective action was punished by life and death for
> communities. The human "head" in terms of neo-liberal/libertarian economics
> has been evolving for only a few decades, or at most a few hundred years.
> Which is more likely to be right in the long term? Cybernetics help us see
> rationally why our hearts are so wise intuitively.
>
> --Paul Fernhout
> http://www.pdfernhout.net/
>
>  Paul D. Fernhout wrote:
>
>> It's interesting to me to see this cybernetics issue coming up as a theme
>> (E see it's been mentioned twice before in subjects).
>>
>> That video is related to an issue I brought up in Post-Scarcity Princeton
>> on reinventing economics where I mentioned cybernetics (including three
>> levels of a model). From theret:
>>  "Post-Scarcity Princeton "
>>  http://www.pdfernhout.net/post-scarcity-princeton.html
>> """
>> Here is a sample meta-theoretical framework PU economists no doubt could
>> vastly improve on if they turned their minds to it. Consider three levels of
>> nested perspectives on the same economic reality -- physical items, decision
>> makers, and emergent properties of decision maker interactions. (Three
>> levels of being or consciousness is a common theme in philosophical
>> writings, usually rock, plant, and animal, or plant, animal, and human.)
>>  At a first level of perspective, the world we live in at any point in
>> time can be considered to have physical content like land or tools or fusion
>> reactors like the sun, energy flows like photons from the sun or electrons
>> from lightning or in circuits, informational patterns like web page content
>> or distributed language knowledge, and active regulating processes
>> (including triggers, amplifiers, and feedback loops) built on the previous
>> three types of things (physicality, energy flow, and informational patterns)
>> embodied in living creatures, bi-metallic strip thermostats, or computer
>> programs running on computer hardware.
>>  One can think of a second perspective on the first comprehensive one by
>> picking out only the decision makers like bi-metallic strips in thermostats,
>> computer programs running on computers, and personalities embodied in people
>> and maybe someday robots or supercomputers, and looking at their
>> characteristics as individual decision makers.
>>  One can then think of a third level of perspective on the second where
>> decision makers may invent theories about how to control each other using
>> various approaches like internet communication standards, ration unit tokens
>> like fiat dollars, physical kanban tokens, narratives in emails, and so on.
>> What the most useful theories are for controlling groups of decision makers
>> is an interesting question, but I will not explore it in depth. But I will
>> pointing out that complex system dynamics at this third level of perspective
>> can emerge whether control involves fiat dollars, "kanban" tokens,
>> centralized or distributed optimization based on perceived or predicted
>> demand patterns, human-to-human discussions, something else entirely, or a
>> diverse collection of all these things. And I will also point out that one
>> should never confuse the reality of the physical system being controlled for
>> the control signals (money, spoken words, kanban cards, internet packet
>> contents, etc.) being passed around in the control system.
>>  The above is somewhat inspired by "cybernetics".
>>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetics
>> So, I'd suggest, should the PU Economics Department faculty be kept on,
>> the department should be renamed the "Princeton University Cybernetics
>> Department" with there being an "historical economics" subsection all the
>> current economics faculty are assigned to, and one faculty member each from
>> the PU Department of Religion, the PU Department of History, and the PU
>> department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering be put in as an acting
>> team triumvirate leadership of the larger department. :-) As economics
>> faculty broaden their research, then they could move into other new
>> Cybernetics department sections. See also:
>>    "The Human Use Of Human Beings: Cybernetics And Society" by Norbert
>> Wiener
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Human-Use-Beings-Cybernetics-Paperback/dp/0306803208
>> """
>>
>> One can compare/contrast with that video:
>>  "Management Cybernetics: The Cybernetic State"
>>  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrgRJiJBU2I
>> "The Cybernetic State is inevitable. We have everything to do it. We look
>> the basic structure of the modern democratic state through the lens of
>> Management Cybernetics and the Viable System Model. The teachings of
>> Stafford Beer are applied to understanding the evolution of the State and
>> the reason why Law, Economics and Politics are different aspects of the
>> State. The Cybernetic State is not so much about computers as it is about
>> following nature's rules. The influence of the Iroquois on the US
>> Constitution is referenced. "
>>
>> Though one has to be cautious about elitism; also that video misses the
>> issue of meshwork and hierarchy balance, and misses some understanding of
>> the diversity of nature. But it is a great start down that road.
>>
>> The video relates to the first 9/11 (in Chile, in 1973) where people in
>> the USA government actively destroyed the first computerized cybernetic
>> government on the planet (it was mixing aspects of top-down and bottom-up
>> control, so, had some form of hierarchy/meshwork balance):
>>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn
>>
>> And the video mentions the Iroquois Confederacy:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=100th+congress+iroquois+331&btnG=Search
>>
>> Leading to:
>> "H. Cons. Res 331"
>> http://senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/hconres331.pdf
>> "100th congress. 2d Session. H. CON. RES. 331. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED
>> STATES ... To acknowledge the contribution of the Iroquois Confederacy [to
>> the development of the US Constitution]..."
>>
>> So, while the Iroquois used wampum (tapestries of beads) instead of
>> electronics as their external computing, communication, and record-keeping
>> medium, See:
>>
>> "NativeTech: Wampum; History and Background"
>> http://www.nativetech.org/wampum/wamphist.htm
>> "Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of
>> Multimedia Theory and Practice"
>>
>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/studies_in_american_indian_literatures/v019/19.4haas.html
>>
>> maybe it would be fairer to consider the Iroquois Confederacy the first
>> cybernetic government on the planet? And one *also* severely damaged by the
>> corporatized social system brought from England that would later control the
>> US government? :-(
>>
>> Anyway, one might hope for a peaceful upgrade of the US government and
>> related socio-economic systems to incorporate more aspects of cybernetics
>> over time. Still, ultimately, a broad definition of human rights is
>> essential to make any such systems function well for most people. The
>> Iroquois had that too, so it is not just the notion of "a learning people",
>> or a "system of checks and balances", but also upholding core values.
>>
>> In the USA, those values were articulated in 1941 by US President Franklin
>> Roosevelt to an extent (in an age that already had 945 marginal tax rates),
>> but the last seventy years has seen a long struggle to achieve them against
>> a neo-conservative backlash:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms
>> """
>> The Four Freedoms are goals famously articulated by United States
>> President Franklin D. Roosevelt, urged by wife Eleanor Roosevelt and friend
>> Jon Run, on January 6, 1941. In an address also known as the Four Freedoms
>> speech, FDR proposed four points as fundamental freedoms humans "everywhere
>> in the world" ought to enjoy:
>>   1. Freedom of speech and expression
>>   2. Freedom of religion
>>   3. Freedom from want
>>   4. Freedom from fear
>> His inclusion of the latter two freedoms went beyond the traditional
>> American Constitutional values protected by the First Amendment, and
>> endorsed a right to economic security and an internationalist view of
>> foreign policy that have come to be central tenets of modern American
>> liberalism. They also anticipated what would become known decades later as
>> the "human security" paradigm in social science and economic development.
>> """
>>
>> A "Basic Income" and universal health care is an updated version of that
>> third theme.
>>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
>> And as mentioned in the "Triple Revolution" memorandum is essential for
>> cybernetic reasons:
>>  http://educationanddemocracy.org/FSCfiles/C_CC2a_TripleRevolution.htm
>> """
>> The Cybernation Revolution: A new era of production has begun. Its
>> principles of organization are as different from those of the industrial era
>> as those of the industrial era were different from the agricultural. The
>> cybernation revolution has been brought about by the combination of the
>> computer and the automated self-regulating machine. This results in a system
>> of almost unlimited productive capacity which requires progressively less
>> human labor. Cybernation is already reorganizing the economic and social
>> system to meet its own needs.  ... The continuance of the income-through
>> jobs link as the only major mechanism for distributing effective demand—for
>> granting the right to consume—now acts as the main brake on the almost
>> unlimited capacity of a cybernated productive system.
>> """
>>
>> "Mutual security" by Morton Deutsch is an updated version of that fourth
>> theme, and something that again relates to Cybernetics (since it tries to
>> dampen down positive feedback loops that lead to arms races). Example:
>> http://www.beyondintractability.org/audio/morton_deutsch/?nid=2430
>>
>> My interest in peer to peer is in part not so much a desire to see p2p
>> everywhere in everything as the *only* control system, so much as to,
>> following Manuel de Landa, rebalance our current system, so that peer to
>> peer meshworks regain a lot of the importance they once had. So, I expect
>> that p2p meshworks will interact with hierarchies that peers create or
>> direct for self governance (like, for example, standards of internet packet
>> exchange, or authorities that regulate and tax markets).
>>  http://www.t0.or.at/delanda/meshwork.htm
>>
>> Or, as US President Lincoln said, my efforts are ideally so that:
>>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_Address
>> "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish
>> from the earth."
>>
>> But within that, there is a lot of room for negotiation and experiment.
>> :-) Again, from Manuel de Landa:
>>  http://www.t0.or.at/delanda/meshwork.htm
>> "Indeed, one must resist the temptation to make hierarchies into villains
>> and meshworks into heroes, not only because, as I said, they are constantly
>> turning into one another, but because in real life we find only mixtures and
>> hybrids, and the properties of these cannot be established through theory
>> alone but demand concrete experimentation."
>>
>> --Paul Fernhout
>> http://www.pdfernhout.net/
>>
>>
>> Michel Bauwens wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for the contribution, which will appear on the 20th!
>>>
>>> (
>>>
>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/cybernetics-for-resource-based-economics/2009/09/20
>>> )
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Alton Lindsay Jr.
>>> <junioreality at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>
>>> One of the key aspects of enhancing P2P in the material world is figuring
>>>> out how we can divide up natural resources for means of production. And
>>>> while we divide up such resources, the need for stabilizing this
>>>> resource
>>>> throughput and waste disposal is important in not deteriorating
>>>> ecosystems.
>>>>  The current organizational structures of governments and corporations
>>>> are
>>>> not designed for such solutions. What does a new redesign look like?
>>>> This is
>>>> the answer from the viewpoint of Cybernetics and the Viable System
>>>> Model.
>>>> Parliaments and Congresses are replaced by citizens chosen for their
>>>> knowledge and competence, not their ability to run political campaigns.
>>>> Ideology is scrapped in favor of practical organizations and technical
>>>> solutions.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrgRJiJBU2I&feature=related
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cybernetics is inevitable and we have the means to do it in every aspect
>>>> of
>>>> the social environment. When computers eventually have sensors extended
>>>> into
>>>> all areas of the physical and social complex, we will be able to achieve
>>>> centralization of decision-making. In a global resource-based economy,
>>>> decisions would not be based on local politics but on a holistic problem
>>>> solving approach.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For example, with electrical sensors extended into the agricultural
>>>> region,
>>>> computerized systems would manage and control agriculture by monitoring
>>>> the
>>>> water table, insects, pests, plant diseases, soil nutrients, and so
>>>> forth.
>>>> The information processed will enable us to arrive at more appropriate
>>>> decision-making based on feedback from the environment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Computers, open software, and artificial intelligence will serve as
>>>> catalysts for change. They will establish scientific scales of
>>>> performance.
>>>> Eventually, the installation of machine decision-making will manage all
>>>> resources serving the common good of a steady state economy and P2P
>>>> production.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This will result in a more humane and meaningful approach for shaping
>>>> tomorrow’s civilization that is not based on the opinions or desires of
>>>> a
>>>> particular sect or individual. All decisions would be made on the basis
>>>> of a
>>>> comprehensive survey of resources, energy, and existing technology
>>>> without
>>>> allowing any advantage to a particular nation or select group of people.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This may be accomplished with large-scale, computer-based processors
>>>> that
>>>> can assist us in defining the most humane and appropriate ways to manage
>>>> environmental and human affairs. This is essentially the function of
>>>> government. With computers processing trillions of bits of information
>>>> per
>>>> second, existing technologies far exceed the human capacity for
>>>> processing
>>>> information and they can arrive at equitable and sustainable decisions
>>>> about
>>>> the development and distribution of physical resources. With this
>>>> potential,
>>>> we would evolve beyond political decisions made on the basis of power
>>>> and
>>>> advantage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Further readings on cybernetics:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/CYBERNETICS.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.thevenusproject.com/images/stories/a-designingthefuturee-book.pdf
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_System_Model
>>>> http://www.metaphorum.org/govpol.htm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- On *Thu, 9/17/09, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>* wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: Cybernetics the missing piece for partnership state and
>>>> steady
>>>> state economy?
>>>> To: "Alton Lindsay Jr." <junioreality at yahoo.com>
>>>> Date: Thursday, September 17, 2009, 10:59 PM
>>>>
>>>> Dear Alton:
>>>>
>>>> Would you like to write an intro to that video, which we could show on
>>>> the
>>>> site, and explain how you see the connection with steady state and p2p?
>>>>
>>>> In any case, thanks for the references!
>>>>
>>>> It's not an area I'm well versed in myself,
>>>>
>>>> Michel
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Alton Lindsay Jr. <
>>>> junioreality at yahoo.com<http://mc/compose?to=junioreality@yahoo.com>
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>  Hello, I've recently became a big reader of your p2p blog and i
>>>>> thought
>>>>> you would find this video and readings on Cybernetics interesting and a
>>>>> possible solution for establishing a partnership state and a steady
>>>>> state
>>>>> economy.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/CYBERNETICS.html
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrgRJiJBU2I&feature=related
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viable_System_Model
>>>>> http://www.metaphorum.org/govpol.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>>>> Research:
>>>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
>>>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>>
>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  -
>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>
>>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>
>>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

-- 
Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research:
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090918/efd916dc/attachment-0001.html>