[p2p-research] on peak oil and p2p

[Joss Winn]

Michel,

With regards to the role of the state in mass mobilisation and the
possible threat to democracy which you comment on at the end of this
post, there was a recent BBC radio programme, which I would recommend.

I have provided a brief summary here:

http://stuck.josswinn.org/are-we-doomed-by-democracy

The podcast of the programme can be downloaded here:

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/analysis/analysis_20100524-2030a.mp3

A related, earlier programme was 'Are environmentalists bad for the
planet' which discusses traditional Green views on technology.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00q3cnl

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/analysis/analysis_20100125-2102a.mp3

Joss

On 18/05/10 10:45, Michel Bauwens wrote:
> Dear Joss:
> 
> Thanks a lot for this contribution and for your challenges to received
> wisdom, some of which may be held, and others not, by myself or people
> congregating around the P2P Foundation.
> 
> As you know, between the polarities of predicting a future scarcity and
> a future abundant world,  there are some intermediary positions,
> including an ‘agnostic’ one.
> 
> First, let me acknowledge that I believe the Peak Oil hypothesis is
> correct, and that this will entail a crisis of the current model of
> political economy, almost entirely predicated on the abundant supply of
> fossil energies. I also think that the prediction that we will not be
> able to replace this by alternative energies at the same level. This
> being said, I have not studied this thematic, despite its importance, in
> any great detail. But even without Peak Oil, it is for me a basic truth
> that an infinite growth engine cannot function forever, and that many
> indicators point to a number of converging resource crises.
> 
> This is in fact the very basic first hypothesis of P2P Theory: that our
> system suffers from a combination of pseudo-abundance in the material
> world, and false scarcity in the world of culture and innovation.
> Because I’m not entirely sure how this crisis will play out, and at what
> speed, I always posited two scenarios, the high road, involving
> structural reforms in alliance with part of the elite, which allows for
> a smoother transition; and a ‘low road’, involving a destructuration of
> the current world system, and a reliance on developing more local
> resilient communities.
> 
> I think P2P infrastructures play a dual role in that regard. Yes, as you
> say, they rest on the present unsustainable industrial basis, but AT THE
> SAME TIME, if we do want to avoid to rapid and deep regression and a
> fate worse than capitalism, we will need precisely those type of
> knowledge sharing infrastructures. We cannot hope to solve any of the
> major global problems, without mobilizing the collective intelligence of
> humanity, and let crucial innovations be adapted everywhere. So P2P will
> be a necessary vehicle to achieve sustainability, a steady-state
> economy, or degrowth, at least if we want this to happen in a less
> harsher way. This is why I think that, in the broad array of
> technologies at our disposal, internetworks are the very last one we
> want to let go. We can miss cars, we can miss suburbs, we can miss many
> things, but we can’t miss the global and local cultural and scientific
> cooperation that rests on such networks.
> 
> I argued with others that while degrowth may be a inevitable objective
> necessity awaiting us, it is not a substitute for a political program,
> and therefore, our orientation must be towards a different, mostly
> non-material growth, based on relationality, personal development,
> spirituality, sharing, and other factors that most contribute to human
> well-being. While our world painfully transforms its value system and
> practices in order to get there, we can already start transforming the
> industrial system of P2P itself, i.e. introduce green computing,
> alternative energy sources, different materials, et c..  At the same
> time, we use it to run sharing systems (carsharing, bikesharing,
> neighborhood exchanges, mutual agricultural and technological learning
> around sustainability, etc..) that can greatly reduce the human
> footprint. We also need to prepare and study alternative policy commons
> frameworks, that can replace the misallocating market systems and
> centralized bungling; protect our natural resources through
> capital-preserving trusts, and many more.
> 
> This is why your point about mass mobilizations is well taken. It seems
> obvious that we are entering a period like the 1930’s, with increasing
> instability and a furious attack on the social achievements since 1945,
> and radical movements of both the right and left will emerge. This is
> why a political and policy approach is an increasing necessity, and
> dialogue between the constructive and resilient p2p approaches, and the
> structural-reform seeking social movements, will be on the agenda. But I
> think the resilient local communities approach represented by what Sam
> is doing in the Midwest around food systems for example, is very
> crucial, i.e. local P2P implementations geared towards sustainability.
> 
> One crucial factor will be time. While news coverage may show things
> moving fast, there is also a lot of evidence that this kind of
> destructuration, as happened at the end of the Roman Empire, is also a
> slow process, but in any case, we have to do what we can and keep our
> options open. The high road if we can, the low road if we must.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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 thank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
> 
> 
> 
>