[p2p-research] Post-Capitalism

Mon Jul 12 19:00:23 CEST 2010

Hi Dan:

Arguing with Marxists is very similar to arguing with anyone who believes
strongly in their point of view.  Personally, I see little evidence to
support Marxism any time I've made admittedly minimal efforts to understand
it.  As I am inclined to work with and use things that are evidential, I
have never seen any reason to seriously engage Marxism any more than I
do have reason to engage others systems or beliefs that are minimally
evidential.  That said, some very smart people have used Marxism as a basis
of analysis particularly in sociology and history.  I don't diss it as a
sort of theory of how the world works much from those academic traditions.
It isn't useful as economics or social policy so far as I can tell.  It also
isn't in any way a good predictor of social evolution.  I think Marx meant
well.  State implementations of his theories have been uniformly disasterous
in my opinion.  Others can certainly disagree, but I think an objective
viewer would find most instances of Marxism in practice to be worse than
mere failures.

You ask is innovation possible in a post-capitalist world.  I suspect it is
not only possible but it will accelerate.  What is killing capitalism
is technology.  Technology is rapidly encroaching on the mind and the body
as to how humans can control and own reasoning.  This is not a bad thing.
Personally, I'd much rather trust a system that was built and vetted by
thousands of doctors and nurses than the ideas of one human.  Soon, that
sort of collective, social technology will be commonplace.  Elements have
already begun.  Your field, learning, is all important.  Soon there will be
a greater synergy between machine learning and human learning.  This is all
but inevitable unless some cataclysm freezes us where we are or in a lower
state of progress.

Innovation requires a sort of willingness to trial.  Trials and experiments
are typically expensive and hard.  In a post capitalist society (one where
debt driven growth is not the norm) it may be less risky to try things.
This will give even further impetus to innovation in co-ops, maker faires,
garage-level manufacturing, etc.  I think all that stuff is very very
exciting.  Anyone who does not have a still or a CNC router or a set of test
tubes in the garage right now is really missing out on what is most exciting
about our times...it is the democratization of R&D...and that is the most
important driver of innovation of all.  Don't get me wrong, we are still in
the corporate age and will be for 20-30 more years at least.  The change is
started though.  Many of the people on this list are doing it.  That's why I
am here.  The associated Marxism is not helpful, but I'm unlikely to
convince those of that inclination of that nor are they likely to convince
me.  In general, it is better, as Michel has said, to seek out common
ground.  I find Marxian influenced people, like people of any strong
metaphysical view, have great difficulty finding common ground, however.

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Daniel Araya <levelsixmedia at hotmail.com>wrote:

> Ryan, one question I have for you: Do you think there is room for
> continuous innovation in 'capitalist' post-industrial economies? If so
> innovation in what areas? Green energy? Or are we in the early phases of a
> post-capitalist commons-based era?
>
> What is your view (ignoring all the Marxist fog)...?
>
> D
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:03:48 +0700
> From: michelsub2004 at gmail.com
> To: p2presearch at listcultures.org
> Subject: Re: [p2p-research] The problems of debt
>
> Hi Ryan,
>
> when do you place item 8, I think this would be crucial in your theory,
>
> if you place it in 2008, then obviously, this is right,
>
> but if you place it before, it's totally against the historical record, as
> debt and credit is precisely the strategy that was chosen to jumpstart the
> economy, i.e. the social product going to labour was dramatically
> diminished, forcing the middle class to resort to debt-fuelled lifestyles
> ... It is the collapse of this strategy that led to the meltdown of 2008 and
> the death of the neoliberal model (but not of the power of the elite that
> sustained those policies, as you rightly say, they were 'saved' and remain
> in place)
>
> as any enterpreneur or capitalist knows, in real production, profit only
> comes from monopoly, i.e. preventing as long as possible that innovations
> are shared, once this happens, super-profits become impossible, and start
> declining very rapidly; this is of course why IP is crucial,
>
> in a world of open and social innovation therefore, and I think this is
> happening, profit tends to be distributed much faster, and therefore
> declines much faster,
>
> as you can see in the RSA animate presentation by David Harvey, and this is
> confirmed by The Big Shift of Hagel/seely brown, production-based profit has
> dramatically declined, and only financial rent is now providing profit, or
> at least it was until 2008
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> I've been asked to explain debt problems as influenced by technology.  I'll
> try.
>
> Here's my "theory".  Many others share or have versions of something
> similar.  I claim no originality.  I've posted several versions on this
> list.
>
> 1. Growth occurs when someone produces something others value.  The sum
> total of value is the economy.
> 2. In the past, it was a matter of work and labour to produce something of
> value...like digging a hole where a hole was wanted.
> 3. People learned to take money that was not in use and to use it by
> borrowing it and then buying value-production which was then placed on sale.
> 4. The process of 3 entails risk.  Risk was rewarded by profit.
> 5. The system of 3-4 really works quite well so long as profit is likely.
> 6. In a world where learning and high productive machinery requiring low
> skill levels is readily available (i.e. post 1990 or so) making profit is
> harder.  7. Item 6 is especially true if innovation is not protected by the
> state (e.g. through intellectual property.)
> 8. Because profit is harder especially in tangible goods and services
> (because of technology and learning distribution) credit is harder.
> 9. When credit became hard, the incentives to cheat increased.  People lent
> money badly and then cleverly sold the bad loans to others who didn't
> understand.
> 10. When 9 happened, the state had to decide whether huge firms fulfilling
> important institutional roles would die, or be saved.
> 11. Nearly all states, especially in Japan and Europe, chose to save old
> institutions (e.g. Royal Bank of Scotland), or in the US, AIG.
> 12. There is now an open question as to whether markets can still create
> value (e.g. the iPod) in such a way that debt is justified.  If not,
> capitialism in the form that creates ready growth through using unused money
> is screwed.
> 13. When money goes unused, it is difficult to create new money and growth
> of value.  There is no/little incentive to innovate.  This can be called
> "deflation."
> 14. Deflation is more dangerous to capitalism by far than inflation.
> Deflation means shrinkage of an economy because unused money becomes more
> valuable by sitting than by being used.  Thus, people become even more risk
> averse.
> 15. When 14 happens for a long time (e.g. Japan) then demographic and
> institutional patterns start to become unsustainable.
> 16. When 15 happens, we do not understand the long term outcomes, but they
> don't seem good.
>
>
> --
> Ryan Lanham
> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
> P.O. Box 633
> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
> Cayman Islands
> (345) 916-1712
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with
> Hotmail. Get busy.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>

-- 
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
Cayman Islands
(345) 916-1712
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100712/ac0d1f8c/attachment.html>