[p2p-research] - Re: [Commoning] augmenting the movement¹s collective intelligence

[Michel Bauwens]

thanks Dante,

these are good ideas, but the devil will always be in the details of their
concrete implementation!

On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson <
dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Michel for your reply.
>
> yes, ... The "*Iron Law of Bureaucracy*".
>
> - profond soupir / deep sigh -
>
> thanks for mentioning it.
>
> I guess the current attempts at organizing research and cooperative
> structures related to the p2pfoundation are an interesting experiment for
> the ones involved in them.
>
> I am curious to see how it unfolds.
>
> Some more comments below, just in case some of us want to read on...
>
> Two main topics below : the first one being distributed "connectivity" and
> interdependencies ,
> and the second one being "how to enable hybrid systems" as to benefit from
> access to bureaucratically controlled resources, with some very broad
> examples in relation to EU funds.
>
> In both cases, I like the prospect of alternative currency architectures"
> to enable such forms of emergent intelligence. - I do not mention which kind
> of architectures, but this can be further discussed.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yes, attempt to circumvent it, possibly using a equipotential open source
> approach meme.
>
> Yet bureaucracies often seem to control over certain scarce resources, such
> as grant money, or infrastructure.
>
> I somehow have the feeling this may me a recurring theme. Not only
> capitalist enclosure, but possibly also bureaucratic enclosure.
>
> Is there a prospect of accessing resources coming from bureaucracies, as to
> enable support for p2p dynamics. Such as with Open Government Licenses<http://eaves.ca/2010/10/01/uk-adopts-open-government-license-for-everything-why-its-good-and-what-it-means/> ,
> but for "scarce" funding ?
>
> The main conceptual solutions to this I have up until now,
> for answering *"how to mobilize the periphery, against the attacks from
> the center?"*
> would be* setting up distributed interdependency information systems such
> as creating various types of emergent "alternative currency architectures"
> that would enable choice, on both sides, and eventually also transparency,
> if required.*
>
> I would hope it could *avoid a need for "information/propaganda wars" by
> making contracts and interdependencies more transparently available.*
>
> ----
>
> As for trying to find a way to converge available bureaucratic resources,
>
> For example, how could one make benefit of ( grants from )
> the "2011 European Year for Volunteering"
>
> http://europa.eu/volunteering/en/home2
>
> ... while avoiding the NGO's to use such funds merely for a "tokenism" type
> of volunteering ?
>
>
> http://partnerships.typepad.com/civic/images/ladder-of-citizen-participa-1.jpg
>
>
> Another example :
>
> How can we avoid this type of wasted potential, in terms of resource
> allocation - hundreds of billions of euros ( although the matching funds are
> usually a requirement to reduce corruption and ensure seriousness of
> projects )
>
> http://thebureauinvestigates.com/2010/11/29/top-story-3/
>
> EU funds to build a stronger Europe are tied up in red tape :: The Bureau
> of Investigative Journalism<http://thebureauinvestigates.com/2010/11/29/top-story-3/>
> Billions of euros of EU funds to promote growth in Europe’s rundown regions
> are lying idle because cash-strapped national governments cannot find the
> necessary matching funds to release the money.
> // Internal documents from the European Commission, obtained by the
> investigation, show that the EU has paid out only 10 per cent of the €347bn
> allocated by its flagship fund, even though it is more than halfway through
> its seven-year spending cycle.
>
> Ah, I also feel like
> excerpting from Wikipedia , Pournelle's version:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy
>
> *"Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy"<http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail408.html#Iron>
> *, which states:
>
> *"In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy
> itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the
> bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and
> sometimes are eliminated entirely."*
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear Dante,
>>
>> what you describe here is the iron law of bureaucracy, already described
>> by Weber at the turn of the 20th century, and seemingly unavoidable wherever
>> there are scarce resources to contend with,
>>
>> the best is you can hope for is a measure of formal democracy and
>> accountability, which introduces conflict and compromise in this process
>>
>> p2p comes in by creating a layer of abundance engineering around resources
>> that are not subjected, or not designed, for scarcity
>>
>> I would say that once you 'have' something, it seems natural to our nature
>> to 'defend' it, and for others to attempt to take it away, leading to a
>> mutual dynamic of inside against outside
>>
>> the prize is always the comfortable life, vs. continued precarity for
>> those who fail in that game
>>
>> the question becomes, if it cannot fully be fought or avoided, is how to
>> embed it in other dynamics, such as p2p, reciprocity, sharing, etc ..
>>
>> in your case an interesting approach could be, how to mobilize the
>> periphery, against the attacks from the center?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson <
>> dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Michel,
>>>
>>> one more concrete example I remember of the "Entraide et Fraternites"
>>> meeting ( they are based in Brussels )
>>>
>>> http://www.entraide.be/spip.php
>>>
>>> In addition to the increasing opposition between a "managment" catapulted
>>> from outside directly to the top ( a new financial manager with a slavic
>>> accent, but with experience in NGO's in London )
>>>
>>> is that the financial manager - who is officially the one who is in
>>> charge -
>>> ends up saying that one of their priorities is to "fight" the "pirate"
>>> projects.
>>>
>>> What they call "pirate" projects are direct small scale funding of
>>> projects done through the church networks accross the globe,
>>> networks the organization helped fostering,
>>> but that the new managment wants to "break down" as it reduces direct
>>> funding through their own platform.
>>>
>>> In effect, instead of supporting small scale "p2p" approaches, the new
>>> "corporate" style managment tries to re-centralize control, as to boost
>>> figures on their financial sheet books.
>>>
>>> Hence "destroying" value, instead of creating value.  Which is contrary
>>> to the mission of the organization, but becomes a need according to the new
>>> managment as to further increase their development.
>>>
>>> ----
>>>
>>> Another problem I noticed, this time with a smaller organization called
>>> http://fyeg.org ,
>>> is that as they try to become "more professional", and as an "elite"
>>> becomes more and more powerful ( even changing their own rules in their own
>>> favor ),
>>> there is less and less transparency.
>>>
>>> I remember writing posts, such as
>>>
>>> http://www.fyeg.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48
>>>
>>> http://www.fyeg.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=11&sid=24fefaab8f1f98b0e073761aeb668c82
>>>
>>> What finally happened, is , well, nothing much to create it more
>>> inclusive or transparent.
>>> What did happen, after that, is quite the contrary :
>>>
>>> there has been a severe case of playing with the finances of the
>>> organization, following such lack of transparency, with a member of the
>>> board stealing substantial sums of money.
>>>
>>> The organization survived because of ( financial ) support from the Green
>>> Party.
>>>
>>> This organization is supposed to represent what some may call
>>> "progressives",
>>> and basically enables its young politicians to access politics at a
>>> european level.
>>>
>>> Understanding how organizations work from the inside, really makes one
>>> feel alarmed about the prospects of governance for our societies.
>>>
>>> And do not seem to encourage "collective intelligence".
>>>
>>> Hopefully we can individually support alternative emergent movements of
>>> collective intelligence for the governance of our societies and
>>> civilizations.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson <
>>> dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Michel
>>>>
>>>> I would like to draw your attention in this question :
>>>>
>>>> from personal experience,
>>>>
>>>> I also see "capitalist" management techniques used more and more in (
>>>> big ) Not For Profit organizations,
>>>>
>>>> including within the "Christian Movements" supported by church
>>>> donations, such as
>>>>
>>>> http://www.entraide.be/spip.php
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.entraide.be/spip.php>What I hear from people that work for
>>>> such organizations ( or ended up leaving them ) and have
>>>> undergone management change in the last years,
>>>>
>>>> is increased inequalities within the organization,
>>>> increase of pressure, sense of loss of meaning, competition,
>>>> non-collaborative incentives.
>>>>
>>>> And the reason why the organization had to change management approach,
>>>> and employ a "London trained" manager, is that its "management" approach did
>>>> not correspond to needs required by foundations or organizations who fund
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> This despite grants only being around half of total funds ( as the other
>>>> half came from church donations ).
>>>>
>>>> I went to one of their meetings ( entraide et fraternite ),
>>>> and could see the different "fractions" within the organization.
>>>>
>>>> One which aims at "numbers" and , "performance", and "competitiveness" (
>>>> the new management catapulted to the top of the organization , and coming
>>>> from a different organizational culture ),
>>>>
>>>> and another which aims at the core values of the organization itself,
>>>> experiencing it within the organization.
>>>>
>>>> Before the new management arrived, the employees all received the same
>>>> compensation.
>>>> Since the new managment, the divides grew bigger and bigger, and
>>>> solidarity within the organization apparently starts to break.
>>>>
>>>> The managment style was more "cooperative", and ended up becoming more
>>>> "corporate".
>>>>
>>>> How can alternatives to corporate style management be offered to such
>>>> not for profit organizations, which work on a global scale, and have
>>>> significant budgets ?
>>>>
>>>> I also noticed such approach in smaller organizations, including
>>>> european youth organizations.  Because of financing requirements, top down
>>>> control structures are being created and reiforced, often further
>>>> diminishing a sense of collaborative camaraderie, while rather incentivizing
>>>> competition and information hoarding instead of sharing,
>>>> which ends up with a centralized organization supposed to represent 40
>>>> 000 youth all over europe, but basically only operating within a small elite
>>>> of around 10 people, who use it as a way to legitimize their power, and
>>>> their access to more power.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Michel Bauwens <
>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear George,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that both strategies have advantages and limitations, but as
>>>>> for our own p2p-foundation practice, it IS aligned with your ideas, and I
>>>>> have no real interest, in adopting mass marketing strategies, which I see as
>>>>> problematic and in tension with p2p values,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've seen the transition regarding Ponoko, which used to regard me as
>>>>> an adult and partner in their communication, but now communicates with me as
>>>>> if I was a childish consumer in need of excitement ...
>>>>>
>>>>> I've also seen how Greenpeace uses mass marketing techniques that are
>>>>> the same as capitalist companies
>>>>>
>>>>> and I don't think that is the way forward,
>>>>>
>>>>> however, shareable magazine practices, of making complex messages
>>>>> easily understandable and focusing on practices that everyone can implement,
>>>>> is I think very compatible,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michel
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 1:47 PM, George Por <
>>>>> george at community-intelligence.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Neal wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> From a communications strategy standpoint, the challenge to grow a
>>>>>> >> movement from a small core to a mass movement is this that you have
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >> find messages that expand your base of support (new adherents)
>>>>>> without
>>>>>> >> splintering or alienating the base (the true believers).  This is
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> >> the Green Party in Vienna was struggling with five years ago.  As
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> >> was told to me, the factions within the core group had problems
>>>>>> >> developing effective messaging around the platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What worked well for the Greens as a political party may not work that
>>>>>> well for a policentric social movement such as the commons. Some of the
>>>>>> critical issues that I see for the latter is not as much how to get the
>>>>>> message out and recruit adherents but rather:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - how to increase connectivity among the nodes for augmenting the
>>>>>> movement’s collective intelligence?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - how to develop better functioning collective sensing organs and
>>>>>> meaning-making practices?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - how to facilitate the emergence of a coherent theory of society,
>>>>>> culture and economics, which both reflects and supports the struggles and
>>>>>> innovation by the multitudes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is anybody interested to explore further any of these questions, maybe
>>>>>> even engage in a rigorous, collaborative inquiry around them? Does any of
>>>>>> those questions speak to CSG?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> george
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Commoning mailing list
>>>>>> Commoning at lists.wissensallmende.de
>>>>>> http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> Think tank:
>>>>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Commoning mailing list
>>>>> Commoning at lists.wissensallmende.de
>>>>> http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>> Think tank: 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

Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20101227/d3f15939/attachment.html>