[p2p-research] [Commoning] Am I missing any commons?

[Alex Rollin]

I think it is a bit silly to say that any Commons can meet these criteria,
now or in the future.

That said, I am sure we have been over a great deal of this definition
territory before.

The question is, how explicit can the definition be?  The wide swaths cut by
Michel on this are not even applicable to the digital commons as Diego or
myself would be apt to point out.

This is a complicate intersection of a numer of factors, timescales,
operations, and general systems.

Alex
I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think.- Socrates



On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Massimo, the p2p people that I know, are all precarious and very well
>> aware of the p2p dependencies, and most of them are very active in building
>> the necessary new infrastructures, based on different social relations ...
>> of course, most of them may not be shouting against capitalism in rallies,
>> but their contributions are just as crucial; most of them are immensely more
>> grounded and embodied than old style activists ...
>>
>> as for creating broad alliances by harping on class, good luck with that,
>> but I have seen scant evidence of that working, except in the phone booths
>> where the trots are arguing about the right path ... I see more value and
>> strength in the internetworking of all the initiatives that are already
>> creating the world of tomorrow, (of course, we talk about class, but it is
>> counterproductive to frame it totally in such a way)
>>
>> you will note that at least in the work of the p2p foundation, p2p is NOT
>> about cyberspace, but about the knowledge, code and design commons that
>> intersect with concrete physical communities and their real needs
>>
>>
> I think there is a thread of P2P...maybe even a major source, that has
> roots in Marxist ideas.  That said, P2P is now ascendant, and Marxism is, to
> my mind, in decline.  Consequently, there is an attempt by conventional
> Marxists to appropriate P2P.  If they succeed, P2P will simply become the
> Marxism that many reject.
>
> I think it is important for those heavily influenced by Marxian lines to
> have an open path to commons and P2P discussions.  I also think there is a
> point where those historical ideas are exclusive and fundamental.  I
> consider myself to be a strong advocate of the commons and P2P.  I consider
> myself to in no way to be Marxist.  If it becomes a process whereby Marxists
> argue there is no place on the commons or in P2P for me, that's
> fine...that's a political process.  My guess is that the same structures as
> exist now will ensue where most reject the Marxian political and social
> overtones.
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100226/5bddc942/attachment.html>