[p2p-research] Concerning wikiworld and its use of socialist terminology

[Michel Bauwens]

Hi Tere,

this is from a little dialogue on facebook,

perhaps you want to say something about your future vision and your choice
of terminology?

couldn't find the beginning of the discussion, but you'll get the drift

Michel


 *Daniel Araya* <http://www.facebook.com/dezuanni>* *April 28 at 11:45pm
 Michel. New models are always appreciated even if they borrow from
'communism'. But a direct application-- its silly.

Why do you continue to deny the wealth generated by capitalism and wax
poetic about an abstract communism that exists no where. Have you read Don
Quixote?
   <http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens>
 *Michel Bauwens* <http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens>* *April 29 at 12:07am
 Daniel: I gather neither you nor me actually read the book, so what are we
talking about. As for me, I'm only talking about the real observable,
already existing thing: the peer to peer dynamics online, and the commons of
the physical world, not of which are abstract. So I'm wondering what you are
referring to?
   <http://www.facebook.com/dezuanni>
 *Daniel Araya* <http://www.facebook.com/dezuanni>* *April 29 at 12:12am
 I'm talking about confusing p2p with communism. One is an emergent form
(growing out of the real capacities of networks--- collective intelligence).
The other is a romantic vision for a secular paradise of worker coops. They
may be parallel but in my mind they're not the same.

Don't be offended. Just reacting to the liberal use of the word 'communism'
in that wikiworld book.
   <http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens>
 *Michel Bauwens* <http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens>* *April 29 at 9:48am
 technically, p2p as a social mode is what alan page fiske calls communcal
chareholding, i.e. exchange with a totality, it is not related to workers
coop, which is currently just a different market modality, unless there
would not be work for money exchange in the coop. as far as I can see Tere's
is asking is how do we get from p2p in the immaterial world, to a system of
worker coops. If that is your usage of communism (in old marxist terms, this
is what technically would rather be socialism, i.e. the intermediary stage
where there is still exchange, i.e. everyone gets rewarded according to
effort.
   <http://www.facebook.com/dezuanni>
 *Daniel Araya* <http://www.facebook.com/dezuanni>* *April 29 at 10:07am
 Michel, you are humorless on this subject. The point is not "my
interpretation" but the common understanding of a term loaded with
generations of assumptions. It is not merely an empty signifier but comes
with over a century of political contestation. Tere clearly uses the term
communism to highlight Marxism not despite it. So its not some 'new road'
he's pointing to but a mere restating of a well-worn gospel. Build a working
an example of this utopia and I'm sure people will begin to take it
seriously again. Until then...
   <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=528245547>
 *Michel Bauwens* <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=528245547>* *April
29 at 10:32am
 that is why I personally not use this terminology, because indeed it is so
loaded, and certainly in the U.S., can only lead to misinterpretation


-- 
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/20100429/d3c38dc6/attachment-0001.html>