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

Michel Bauwens michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 30 04:28:25 CET 2010 

Hi Dante,

My own view in this is that peer production, in the context of abundance of
digital reproduction, creates a plurarchy of options both within and outside
the projects, leaving the various shades of democracy to that part of the
process which deals with scarcity. SInce abundance and scarcity are always
polarities and never absolutes (every abundance creating its own scarcity),
there is always an issue of scarcity to be dealt with, through democracy,
markets, or hierarchy. The problem of our current representative democracy
is that it has become subsumed to the powerful market oligarchies. and while
democracy will always be contentious and antagonistic, there have been
periods in history when it worked differently, also using different forms
that representation.

see http://p2pfoundation.net/Special:Search?search=democracy&fulltext=Search

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Dante-Gabryell Monson <
dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:

> yes. thanks Michel.
>
> as for "representative democracy", I wonder if it is not best to call it
> "Iron Democracy", or "Iron Law of Representation" ... leading to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchy ?
>
> A recent article, in french, perhaps somewhat cynical , on the latest
> developments of "representative democracy" in Ukraina ( developments very
> similar to the "Iron Law of Bureaucracy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy>"
> ? )
> which I would personally like to interpret as going against the
> emancipation of collective intelligence
>
>
> http://www.courrierinternational.com/article/2010/12/29/dix-petites-lecons-de-democratie
>
> english machine translation :
>
>
> http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http://www.courrierinternational.com/article/2010/12/29/dix-petites-lecons-de-democratie
>
>
> <http://www.courrierinternational.com/article/2010/12/29/dix-petites-lecons-de-democratie>
> ---
>
> for a further personal response regarding the "devils in the details of
> implementation",
> while trying not to distance myself too much from the initial subject,
>
> I'd say I wish for distributed networked protocols, where people themselves
> can choose the details, and implement them themselves.
>
> So that if there are "devils" in some details, then they can be isolated by
> the users/peers/nodes in the system,
> before or without the risk of the devils to take control on other
> individuals and interdependencies.
>
> Hence finding out about the "devils" being part of the collective
> intelligence of the networked peers ?
>
> Perhaps this is what we do now ? I hope so !
>
> Perhaps some people would call this "democracy" ?
>
> I would hope that a functionning emergent, transparent, distributed and
> networked p2p approach could be "democratic".
> I hope we can experiment further with such protocols, while trying to
> structurally avoid the devils to take over.
>
> Perhaps some people call it anarchism ?
> Frankly, I sometimes get lost in what words to use.
>
> What I do seem to notice,
> is that Democracy seems to have so many meanings, especially when I listen
> to politicians.
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
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/20101230/44792a30/attachment.html>

More information about the p2presearch mailing list