[p2p-research] What comes next?

[Joss Winn]

On 13/07/10 14:14, Michel Bauwens wrote:

>  
> for example, as ostrom shows, you can have fisheries that are owned by a
> community, yet allow individual fishing rights and trading of the fish,
> provided the stock is not depleted.
>  
> I do believe then, that a commons approach should not be wedded to a
> single proposed mode of allocation, but can be compatible with the
> largest possible human freedom, such as the freedom to trade and to market,

It is worth reminding ourselves that commerce can, did and does exist
without capitalism, as is discussed very well in this article and
related book:

http://www.monthlyreview.org/798wood.htm
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Origin-Capitalism-Longer-View/dp/1859843921/

>  
> why not call it capitalism, well in my case, because of the infinite
> growth argument, but I'm actually perfectly happy with green capitalism,
> natural capitalism, and other similar movements,
>  
> when you look at them closely, they are really about the freedom to
> trade, not about infinite growth, hence they are market approaches but
> prefer to use the term capitalism for cultural and political reasons,
> because it is associated with dynamic enterpreneurship etc..
>