[p2p-research] [Commoning] Re(markets without capital?): new post
Michel Bauwens
michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 1 09:18:08 CEST 2010
Very interesting points made by everyone so far, but I think that Massimo's
point in crucial.
A possible strategy is to combine a multi-phronged approach: 1) generalize
infrastructures that can distribute use value outside the market; 2) create
alternative market structures that can create a diffirent type of
circulation, and needs to be based on a different type of money and exchange
as well. (and of course, 1 and 2 need to take into account political and
social movements and the limitations imposed on them by the current regime).
But I think it is important to have a position that embraces the choice of
large segments of the world population for free exchange and
enterpreneurship, without which any new hegemony would be impossible.
I'm in the same position as Massimo, i.e. travelling, so can't contribute
more,
Michel
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Massimo De Angelis <commoning at gmail.com>wrote:
> I cannot address all the aspects of this very interesting debate, as I am
> about to take a bus to Cusco and emerge on the other side after about 30
> hours!
>
> But I really just want to point out a couple of things.
>
> 1) Andreas point about the importance of labour markets for the
> contemporary version of the "market" is crucial (although I tend to agree
> with Martin on other points) because among other things it underlines the
> *degree of people's dependency* on the market for reproducing livelihoods.
> The origin and recurrent material basis of this dependence are enclosures
> and a given configuration of property rights. To talk about a degree of
> people dependence on markets is another way to pose the question of people’s
> power over the condition of their reproduction. (power to)
>
> 2) This dependency -- and the enclosures presupposing it -- implies that
> the process of abstraction implicit in the workings of capitalist markets
> is NOT simply a market ideology as maintained by Silke. It is a very REAL
> process of abstraction of human life-activity (and indeed nature) that
> occurs through capitalist market processes.
>
> 3) this REAL and not simply ideological process of abstraction occurs
> through the formation of market prices that in turn acts as signals to
> define the limit of what can be the standard of production in a give time
> (subject to all profitability criteria). The ongoing process of formation of
> prices and competition -- again constituting modern capitalist markets --
> is a social mechanism that reduces human commoning into a social
> measuring mechanism in which its human sensuous determinations are secondary
> or irrelevant , i.e. into **abstract** social labour or simply “work” in the
> most crude sense. Popular terms expressing this mechanism are terms such as
> “competitiveness” and “ efficiency”. The first implies a relation towards
> the other that sees my reproduction as dependent on the undermining of your
> reproduction, making constant civil war a constituent of economic life of
> the people. The second implies the reduction of human “wowing” about nature
> -- and the correspondent establishment of absolute values, i.e. of the sense
> of the sacred -- into an instrumental “wowing”, one that marvels and
> rejoices only over the magnitude of a ratio: “how much of nature can I turn
> into a commodity output per unit of cost”? (and ratios are very abstract
> entities, although their use for measuring real life activity has quite
> concrete applications).
>
> 4) although markets have existed for thousands of years, the specific
> character of markets in capitalism in 1) 2) ad 3) depends to a large
> extent on how much people are dependent on them for reproduction of their
> lives. This is a case in which -- old dialectic tells us -- quantity turns
> into quality. As I discuss in my Salinas post -- cooperatives are forms of
> commons, but **the extent** to which they got to compete against one another
> to reproduce their livelihood (i.e. meet or beat the market norm) implies
> that they are also involved in the process of abstractisation of labour (and
> concentration of wealth, and planet destruction . . .).
>
> 5) This **extent** is something I think we should look into and start to
> dissect, if you know what I mean . . .sorry, but my coach has arrived I got
> to run . . .
>
> best to all
>
> massimo
>
> On 30 Mar 2010, at 14:07, Silke Helfrich wrote:
>
> Hi Andreas and all,
>
> Andreas, I guess I don't get your point,
>
> "market in sensu strictu", IMHO is precisly the place where people
> exchange things (and they've done so for hundreds of years). In that
> sense, they precede capitalism.
> There has been always a currency (a measure for exchange) and there has
> been always a way to define the "equivalent". The difference to
> capitalist markets (and to 'market' as an ideology, which we all refuse,
> I guess) is, as you point out, that the definition of the equivalent
> was/is not based on abstract economic value, but was done by those who
> get in touch with each other on the market place, probably based on use
> value.
> (This could well be considered a result of commoning, isn't it?)
>
> If you want, call it market-place-economy. That's what I sometimes do in
> order to avoid criticisms by those who strictly stick to the very
> valuable (!) "critique of value and value form" way of thinking ;-). Or
> call it whatever you want, but I think it is not usefull at all to
> privilege the "market = the current economic system where abstract
> econonomic value dominates" denotation of the word. This is just ONE
> acceptation of the notion "market", and we should not insist it to be
> the most important one. It isn't! It is an ideological connotation based
> on an ideological way of thinking.
>
> Perhaps we should use two different words. One, when we talk about
> markets as places where certain forms of social relationships and social
> control are possible and another for market as an ideology, where
> abstract economic value determines the quality of social relationships.
> The former will continue within a commons based economy, the latter
> won't (hopfully).
>
> 'Beyond', in German "jenseits", IMHO means 'more than', 'farer reaching'
> but it does not mean 'completely delinked', 'without', 'totally
> independent'. The challenge is to redefine the relation between markets
> (marketplaces), state and commoners, i.e. a new social contract.
>
> Best
> Silke
>
>
> Am Montag, den 29.03.2010, 19:45 +0200 schrieb Andreas Exner:
>
> Dear Michel
>
>
> I do not think there is evidence of markets preceding capitalism for a few
>
> thousand years. What we know from anthropology is, that different "peoples"
>
>
> entered into relations of exchange (see Polanyi), but these were not
> relations
>
> of equivalency of abstract economic value (as in capitalism). Antique
> markets
>
> (where more is known about how they worked) are also not to be compared to
>
> markets sensu strictu.
>
>
> First of all, there were no labor markets - the fundamental criterion of
>
> capitalistic production.
>
>
> Secondly, no free price setting existed.
>
>
> As a result, those "markets" were far away from any regulating role
>
> concerning societal relations with nature. This is equally illustrated by
>
> "markets" in the Middle Ages - producers were mostly independet, markets
>
> came into existence where "communities" ended (their objects were luxury
>
> goods, for the most part).
>
>
> I am not aware of any english publications of Hans Christoph Binswanger -
>
> maybe one finds some in the net - anyway, he really just replicates Marx
>
> (without citing him) but without drawing adequate consequences (that's
>
> "bourgeois" ;-). I just found interesting, that different people develop
> similar
>
> analyses sometimes.
>
>
> Capital accumulation is in no way caused or driven by interest (as you
>
> suggest probably).
>
>
> First of all, the abstract nature of economic value (embodied by money)
>
> (resulting in "quantitativism" and "boundless growth")
>
>
> Secondly, by competition for abstract value.
>
>
> Interest is a secondary phenomenon (actually hampering growth, as common
>
> economic policy measures show).
>
>
> Is your conception of a "different money" some way related to this idea of
>
> "money without interest"? or is it another concept (which would be new to
> me,
>
> then)?
>
>
> In any case, as far as we could reach consensus about the core feature of
>
> capital: that living time is sold as "labor" - then we can easily conclude,
> that
>
> "markets" in a non-capitalist society (without labor markets, then) would
>
> regulate nothing of importance ("flee markets" may exist).
>
>
> This - NOTE (!) - is NOT a traditional position at all, which, to the
> contrary,
>
> always held (and continues to hold), that money is an "ahistoric" necessity
> of
>
> human relations (or at least a "major advance" not to be missed) and
>
> socialism is based on a market economy without capital (so that's rather
> your
>
> position, it seems to me). (the third way of state socialism we all rule
> out, i
>
> am sure.)
>
>
> The point that I really do not understand: if we are talking about commons,
> we
>
> are talking about collective action beyond state and market relations. If
> we
>
> think commons to be connected through market relations, I do not see any
>
> progress as compared to (failed) models of "market socialism".
>
>
> best, Andreas
>
>
>
> Dear Andreas,
>
>
> yes, this is a very important and difficult topic, because, though
>
> markets have preceded capitalism for a few thousand years, breaking
>
> the link would now be much more difficult. I would add to your more
>
> classic analysis, and do feel free to send some english links on that
>
> german economist, that there is now an important discovery about the
>
> design of money itself, that leads to accumulation even without
>
> capitalism. This would mean that building alternative structures,
>
> based on open design communities and distributed manufacturing, who
>
> could operate a lot of their activities through mutual coordination
>
> instead of market signals, could also buy and sell rival goods without
>
> any necessity for accumulation, if they would use differently designed
>
> money. The latter priority is part and parcel of the p2p approach,
>
> in fact a central plank, Michel
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:15 AM, Andreas Exner
>
> <andreas.exner at chello.at> wrote:
>
> hi all, espacially michel,
>
>
> what we did not really discuss in crottorf, though i think it to
>
> be of great importance, is the thesis, that market logics could be
>
> decoupled from capitalism.
>
>
> i wish that to be discussed some day in a more profound
>
> way. actually we recently submitted a research project where
>
> this question (inter alia) will be tackled.
>
>
> actually, i would argue that the growth imperative is founded on
>
> one central structural feature of a money economy, i.e. one
>
> reigned by markets (of labor, first of all): the abstract
>
> character of (economic) value.
>
>
> this leads to
>
>
> (1) an urge to grow, since more money is better than less money,
>
> and agents in a market economy have (per definition) no other
>
> means to measure economic success than to compare expenditures (in
>
> money terms) and income (in money terms)
>
>
> (2) a compulsion to grow, since markets imply competition for
>
> abstract value.
>
>
> this essentially is the position of Marx, but can be found also in
>
> the interesting works of the "bourgeois" economist hans christoph
>
> binswanger.
>
>
> best wishes, andreas
>
>
>
>
> great reportage Massimo ... this is pretty much what I envision
>
> the > transition situation to be, when commoning becomes more
>
> central within > capitalism, but with great potential for a phase
>
> transition away from > it, as you indicate, it has problems, but
>
> it is at the same time > vastly superior of the existing corporate
>
> alternatives in so many > ways, the question then becomes how to
>
> extend the commons aspects on > a local and global scale, and how
>
> to divorce market logics from > capitalism as an infinite growth
>
> system centered on endless > accumulation, Michel > > On Sat,
>
> Mar 27, 2010 at 11:24 PM, Massimo De Angelis >
>
> <commoning at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everybody > here is
>
> the latest reflection on a strange place we found high up > on
>
> the Ecuadorian Andes. It is quite amazing that in a desolate >
>
> and far away area like this, you could find so much >
>
> "entrepreneurship" . . .but what makes this Salinas experience >
>
> truly interesting and intriguing is the mixture of commonism and
>
> capitalism we have found . . . > > Read > Branding + Mingas
>
> + Coops = Salinas > at http://www.commoner.org.uk/blog/?p=239 > >
>
> Saludos > Massimo > >
>
> _______________________________________________ > Commoning
>
> mailing list > Commoning at lists.wissensallmende.de >
>
> http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning > > > >
>
> -- > Work:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - 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 > > > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Commoning mailing list
>
> Commoning at lists.wissensallmende.de
>
> http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning
>
>
>
>
--
Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - 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/20100401/7d94f650/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the p2presearch
mailing list