[p2p-research] Role of civil society

Wed Jun 2 15:30:12 CEST 2010

I generally agree that corporate actors will be bad if left to their own
devices.  But so will government and non-profit actors (e.g. the Church).
Anyone not "regulated" is likely to be rogue including governments.  I don't
trust anyone because they say, "Hey, I'm a good guy, not in it for the
money, so trust me!"  Any clever demon always looks like an angel.

That said, civil society allows us to build social meshes that do provide
checks and balances.  But it isn't a regulate everything world that works
with civil society.  Is a concept of responsibility implicit in peer
relationships.

I have worked in non-profit, universities, for profit and government.  I
really see very little ethical difference between any of these.  Top people
are typically ambitious and have conflicting motivations.  Junior people are
generally trod upon, quick to slack off, and lacking in long-term
commitment.

All forms justify their roles and resource uses as the most ethical given
their point of view.  And I personally believe there is a big place for all
in most societies.  Governments must exist to mandate big changes--though
they often fail to do this in time or appropriately.  For profit must exist
to drive motivation and innovation.  And non-profits must exist as an outlet
for those unable or unwilling to participate in existing schemes that can
generate monetary value.  Even still, non-profits are a market of sorts in
that they draw philanthropy.  I suppose what I have saying is that a garden
with lots of plant types is better than a garden with a few...even if the
few are my favorate types.

On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> it is true that there is some measure of change, like CSR, but having
> worked 30 years in corporations, I can tell you that this has never been
> through inner motivation, but through external pressure and regulatory
> demands. the logic of capitalism was most often, in the context of a weak
> civil society, that corporations trying to do 'good', would be more
> expensive and go out of business ... it is only quite recent that increased
> transparency makes this kind of behavviour counterproductive in the long
> term .. on the other hand, in many other ways, due to shareholder
> capitalism, conditions within corporations have severely deteriorated, with
> a focus on short term profit .. I'm afraid division and conflict are part of
> life, you can have a dialogue, but when you are in a position of structural
> weakness ... due you think American blacks would have gotten freedom and
> civil rights, without struggle. Why are corporatoins who have CSR in the
> west, dumping more oil in the Niger delta than in the Gulf, without
> compensation, and killing the protesters? There is only one reason: civil
> society in Africa is weak .. When you have to make social changes, politics
> enters the fray, though not necessarily parliamemtary  politics ..
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Very few corporations would say their sole purpose is profit.  Most would
>> say that socially responsible profit is their driver.  Now we all no the
>> outcomes have been suboptimal, but there are reasons for hope.  CSR is now a
>> huge field.  Some of the largest philanthropic organizations in the world
>> are corporations, banks and funds.  Many operate to build local
>> communities.  I think we need to criticize bad behavior.  I think we don't
>> so much need to establish prejudicial judgments on organizational forms or
>> partial motivations.  Part of what Civil Society meshes offer is a greater
>> mesh that helps make all of us more responsible...academics, corporations,
>> citizens, politicians, etc.  It builds rather than creating divisions.  Too
>> much of our theory is we/they.  That is very 19th century.  Labour versus
>> capital.  Profit versus non-profit.  Libertarian versus statist.  Anarchist
>> versus democrat/liberal.  Those battles don't resolve and they don't much
>> help except for a very crude form of recruiting and fund raising.  We need
>> to be counter-cultural in advancing civil society which can be a common
>> meeting place...a shared agenda that is about as a-political as we can be.
>> Or we must choose division and conflict.  As a sort of corporate/for profit
>> person, I sense I shall fall outside the realm if we remain judgmental.  I
>> hope that ultimately isn't the case because I believe in P2P as a mode of
>> organization and I believe it falls strongly under civil society which I
>> support completely.
>>
>>
>> R.
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think p2p excludes profit, but corporations are entities that are
>>> exclusively dedicated to profit at the expense of everything else; when
>>> profit is embedded in a commons, it has different effects than when it
>>> destroys the commons ... so p2p calls for a different type of corporate
>>> entities ..
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>>   On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not very good at analyzing the motives of others.  Everyone (amongst
>>>> the relatively wealthy) chooses where and how to live and there are trade
>>>> offs that call for differing income objectives.  What Civil Society offers
>>>> to me is the sort of organizational possibilities that allow for openness.
>>>> I would prefer P2P focus on openness and peerage than whether or not profit
>>>> is involved.  In other words, I would tend to argue (as you might have
>>>> guessed) for less/fewer motivational litmus tests and more outcomes.
>>>>
>>>> R.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think there can indeed be a broad consensus, but of course, the devil
>>>>> is in the details, the trick is finding commonalities despite the
>>>>> differences.
>>>>>
>>>>> But for me, the link is clear and direct, peer to peer is the ability
>>>>> for civil society to create value without resorting to the state or
>>>>> corporate form, and its institutional form is the commons. But of course,
>>>>> you are right as well, that civil society is broader than p2p.
>>>>>
>>>>> The analysis of coops is less clear to me, as you could see it as
>>>>> another corporate form as well, but arguably it is a free association of
>>>>> individuals, and profit is usually not the main motive.
>>>>>
>>>>> Michel
>>>>>
>>>>>   On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michel,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would hope this sort of thing is something left, right,
>>>>>> progressive/conservative, anarchist, libertarian, state socialist and
>>>>>> democrat and even republican could agree upon.  Civil Society is the key in
>>>>>> my view.  I actually sent the Cato Institute statement on the same the other
>>>>>> day to show just how broad this consensus seems to be.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The relationship of P2P to Civil Society, as I have stated in past, is
>>>>>> not obvious.  Clearly P2P orgs are part of CS, but it also seems to me that
>>>>>> P2P is a "version" or view of civil society ideals.  Certainly open source
>>>>>> and commons organizations are mainstream civil society as are co-ops by
>>>>>> nearly any reasonable definition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>   On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Michel Bauwens <
>>>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interesting report attached
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>>>> From: Marilyn Mehlmann <mmehlmann at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:05 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Role of civil society
>>>>>>> To: Anne Marie Boutin <amboutin at apci.asso.fr>, "c.ritchie" <
>>>>>>> ritchie at fiig.org>, carine at uia.be, bmiche at skynet.be, Tim Casswell <
>>>>>>> tim at creativeconnection.co.uk>, secgen at uia.be
>>>>>>> Cc: Rolf Carriere <r_carriere at hotmail.com>, Michel Bauwens <
>>>>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apologies for sending the message below with a misleading 'subject'
>>>>>>> line. Here it is again, hopefully easier to trace when needed.
>>>>>>> Marilyn*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1 June 2010 14:04, Marilyn Mehlmann <mmehlmann at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry I can't be with you for the upcoming Bureau meeting. I wish
>>>>>>>> you good deliberations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Via Michel Bauwens I just received the attached report on the
>>>>>>>> present and future role of civil society in the UK. It seems to me that many
>>>>>>>> of the conclusions could be extrapolated to international civil society.
>>>>>>>> Perhaps one basis on which to further develop the ideas we have had for
>>>>>>>> conferences/workshops?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Warm regards
>>>>>>>> Marilyn*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *************************************************
>>>>>>> Marilyn Mehlmann, General Secretary
>>>>>>> Global Action Plan (GAP) International
>>>>>>> Brovägen 9, 1 tr
>>>>>>> SE-182 76  Stocksund, Sweden
>>>>>>> tel  +46-8612 1440
>>>>>>> secretariat at globalactionplan.com
>>>>>>> http://www.globalactionplan.com
>>>>>>> *************************************************
>>>>>>> I don't care what you know
>>>>>>> until I know that you care. - Anon.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ryan Lanham
>>>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>>>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>>>> P.O. Box 633
>>>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>>>> Cayman Islands
>>>> (345) 916-1712
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ryan Lanham
>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>> P.O. Box 633
>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>> Cayman Islands
>> (345) 916-1712
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
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/20100602/fd072f25/attachment.html>