[p2p-research] open manufacturing, generalized exchange, and non-market functions

[Michel Bauwens]

I think you are right Ryan,

feudalism did not just replace slavery because it was more competitive with
slaves, but because it was an entirely different value proposition and
social organization; and similarly capitalism did not compete with feudal
landlords on feudal terms; I think similarly p2p represents a new value
proposition and social organisation ... It will take over if the former is
sufficiently in crisis not to be able to solve deeprooted and increasing
social and environmental problems of its own creation ... of course, I think
this is effectively the case ..

The anwswer depends to a large degree if capitalism can integrate the
externalities that it has historically 'externalized' ... which has be
considered highly unlikely,

I personally think this has to do with the very core logic of the system,
but I'm willing to be proven wrong, both in argument, and in practice,

Michel

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>  On 1/29/10, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Let me repeat that it is imminent that we don't just apply/introduce
>> market mechanisms to nonmarket projects (see Benkler's blood example).
>> When we keep this in mind we might end up catalyzing an important
>> paradigm shift, if we forget this, we might just mess up functional
>> projects!
>>
>> Erik
>> http://blog.erikdebruijn.nl/
>>
>
>
> This is exactly right. (of course important...not imminent)  The key point
> is that nonmarket projects need to be politically and economically
> compelling...not politically and economically competitive.  If it is a
> paradigm shift, it is self-evident and disruptive.  Else, it is simply
> evolutionary and derivative.
>
> It is an unresolved question as to whether open approaches can matter.
> Personally, I still see the model as all but inevitable.  That said, markets
> are responding and innovating.  That innovation will have to drive
> non-market approaches...not to compete, but to be more compelling and to
> avoid being disrupted.  That is, to "win" by being different.  That implies
> co-existance until one is simply not compelling.  It is not on
> price/performance that P2P wins, but on creating a different worldview.
> Unless it is feature rich, timely, responsive and of high quality, no one is
> going to abandon market models outside of a fringe group.  Mozilla is
> interesting in that it merges the two.  Open Manufacturing is going to need
> systems and methods for sharing and developing knowledge that are easy,
> open, logical and foundry-like.  Strangely, P2P is failing on interpersonal
> communications.
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>


-- 
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/20100129/19ba6b6b/attachment.html>