[p2p-research] Re(concretizations?): [Commoning] Re(markets without capital?): new post

[Michel Bauwens]

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Andreas Exner <andreas.exner at chello.at>wrote:

> Hello
>
> I agree with Franz, that "commoning" should not become
> another "phrase", but that it should be clearly defined.
>
> So the question goes to Michel, what really does mean
> "another money",



money that is not designed with compound interest and thus requires infinite
growth, but many designs can be experimented with, once we have new
platforms like the metacurrency project



> "another form of exchange"


any exchange that is not a market exchange in a capitalist system, or that
incorporates requirements of equity, for example fair trade comes to mind,
open book mgt, exchanges between coops in a solidarity economy, etc..., gift
economies are exchanges as well, any commons that needs to allocate
resources could use exchange mechanisms



> and why
> "free entrepreneurship" should be different to capitalist
> entrepreneurship as we know it.
>

again the only requirement is, not subjugated to capital accumulation and
infinite growth mechanisms, and not coerced


>
> Braudels notion of capitalism as an "anti-market" I
> think is misleading. (There of course again
> the liberal vision of "ideal markets" is the basis
> of his conception, I think, "capitalism" á la Braudel
> meaning "oligopoly/monopoly".)
>

i think it is not misleading but illuminating, as are the historical works
showing capitalism did not evolve from regional and local markets

>
> Concerning "hegemony": well, if people choose capitalism,
> that is not an argument for me to support "them" in this
> endeavour. Actually, "people" in general "just" try to
> survive, so in this respect, unfortunately, we cannot help them...
> Our function might rather be to clarify concepts, that's
> what intellectuals can provide to social movements who
> would like to transcend mere "survivalist" approaches.
> If we just would like to support what is happening anyway,
> without reflection, there is no specific role for us to play...
> (besides an ideological one).
>
>

I share that concern*


> So I personally am interested in "meta-commoning" as
> we might call it, meta-patterns of commoning which
> really transcend the very structure that makes commons
> a subfunction of capital accumulation (as currently), i.e.
> market exchange (which indeed links "commons" of various degrees
> and by doing this, constitutes the whole body of problems that, I think,
> we want to overcome by a more powerful "commons-approach").
>

I share that concern with the caveat that we are too weak now to achieve
much of that right away, so commons existing within capitalism, and hence
used by it, will be inevitable, and not necessary a purely negative thing;
but rather creating a dialectic that inevitably also strengthens the commons
and open communities, precisely as it is doing right now already

>
> Well, enough issues for a more structured discussion,
> maybe in the form of papers...
>
> Email is not really made to discuss this range of issues that
> sprang up here in depth...
>
> best, Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100405/d782cfc0/attachment.html>