[p2p-research] Fwd: Empowering the Commons: The Dedicated Account (Part I)

Michel Bauwens michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 1 08:18:36 CEST 2010 

links on tom's work on decision systems:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tom Crowl <culturalengineer at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:00 AM

On Creating Communities (Part
1)<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/08/on-creating-communities-part-1.html>

Money and the Machinery of Representation
<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/07/money-and-machinery-of-representation.html>

Political Fundraising: Act Blue, Facebook and the Missing Network Imperative
<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/08/political-fundraising-act-blue-facebook.html>

The Foundations of Authoritarianism
<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/05/foundations-of-authoritarianism.html>


Essentially this all arises out of an approach

   - that looks at any social organism as a product of individual and group
   decisions
   - that within a natural-human-community-size (Dunbar's Number) social
   organism, while some stratification exists,  peer-to-peer interactions
   facilitated by proximity constrain excessive imbalances in power and
   decision rights
   - that when the social organism extended beyond the size of a Dunbar's
   Number sized group the effects of biological altruism's boundaries (very
   real though very fuzzy and variable) drove and justified the rise of social
   classes and Authoritarianism... (hierarchical networks of networks)
   - that representative systems employ designs to interrupt these
   hierarchies by introducing methods encouraging the *mixing* of personnel,
   their networks and their ideas.
   - that other technologies (finance, marketing, communications, etc) and
   ideologies (Objectivism, neo-Conservatism, etc.) have worked simultaneously
   in the other direction... i.e.  to justify and increase stratification
   - that 'money' is a store of 'decision rights'... (regrettably) and that
   technologies are necessary to counter-balance the ability of concentrated
   money to distort collective decisions.
   - that these 'decision rights' CAN be more equitably utilized in the
   political sphere by facilitating direct peer-to-peer capability for the
   co-ordination of very small amounts of money
   - that this capability catalyzes a stable network and this network then
   offers additional opportunities for peer-to-peer empowered interaction
   (including the creation of currencies by self-defining peer-to-peer networks
   for internal development and based on their own resources which may or may
   not interact with traditional currencies)
   - that capability ENABLES responsibility (while necessity may demand
   it... only capability allows it)



Tom Crowl
http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com <http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/>


  On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Michel Bauwens
<michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> no, I mean the general context ...
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Tom Crowl <culturalengineer at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> That's okay... by 'where it's coming from'... do you mean my background?
>>
>>  Tom Crowl
>> http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/>
>>
>>
>>   On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Michel Bauwens <
>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> thanks, and sorry to make it a little more difficult .. but if it has to
>>> have any impact, people need to know 'where it's coming from'
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Tom Crowl <culturalengineer at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Michel,
>>>>
>>>> COOL!
>>>>
>>>> Glad it's making sense... I'll somehow re-configure the piece or write a
>>>> Part 2 and call it Part 1 or something. I also will place more focus on the
>>>> peer-to-peer potentials which emerge with growth of the network. The 'trick'
>>>> with the construct is that the network enables and catalyzes those
>>>> capabilities though it doesn't depend on them for its creation.
>>>>
>>>> Tom Crowl
>>>> http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Michel Bauwens <
>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> hi tom,
>>>>>
>>>>> yes, this is what I meant, our people need to know why it is needed,
>>>>> before you go on explaining how it works,
>>>>>
>>>>> just imagine you are writing for the first time for people who do not
>>>>> yet know you, which is of course, the case,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michel
>>>>>
>>>>>   On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 3:54 AM, Tom Crowl <
>>>>> culturalengineer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok....  I'm all for clarity!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Isn't the problem about finding a way to compete with corporate (or
>>>>>> other concentrated) money? Making it easier for more to participate in the
>>>>>> process? And a means for community decision, organization and action?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does the X-box analogy make sense? That for citizen lobbying to viably
>>>>>> compete... if an interested group wanted to lobby against whatever
>>>>>> corporately-funded position it happened to be... ultimately the ability to
>>>>>> harvest very small contributions from very large numbers easily and
>>>>>> painlessly is the only thing that makes that possible? And such groups might
>>>>>> find that useful?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But those transactions are NOT viable now because of transaction
>>>>>> costs. However if I have such an account... (Say I gave $18 to the Heart
>>>>>> Fund and kept $2 in my account for 'lobbying opportunities' in line with my
>>>>>> views)...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I could quickly and painlessly respond to solicitations for very small
>>>>>> amounts (along with a couple of hundred thousand with similar views) on one
>>>>>> issue or another...  This can have a very strong impact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MOST PEOPLE NEVER GIVE TO A CAUSE OR CAMPAIGN! This is the critical
>>>>>> metric that can easily change with this system. Because most DO, at least
>>>>>> very occasionally give to a charity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even if a significant number only very rarely find use for such a
>>>>>> capability... But it can also be shown that once in a while that has real
>>>>>> impact... (and I believe it will but I suppose that's a point to
>>>>>> consider)...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the account can handle also their 'traditional' charitable
>>>>>> contributions... doesn't it then lend persistent utility to that account?
>>>>>> And make more typical political contribution more likely?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And then doesn't that allow you to add an associated platform
>>>>>> (accounts by themselves wouldn't really need a platform other than to check
>>>>>> your balances, etc... any more than you would go and 'hang-out' at the
>>>>>> PayPal homepage...)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BUT... if accounts have even occasional (but persistent) utility for
>>>>>> general contribution... that persistence opens up opportunities to dovetail
>>>>>> that with peer-to-peer associations with other account holders (with funded
>>>>>> or unfunded accounts) building around both common interests... but more
>>>>>> especially geographical location for community purposes defined by the Users
>>>>>> themselves? Something you're not going to see with PayPal or Mastercard...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In other words, it forms the root of a natural (and neutral) community
>>>>>> hub... upon which local power-centers can build local leaders and local
>>>>>> candidates. It also provides a scalable venue for these same grassroots
>>>>>> candidates to reach their potential voters *at much lower cost*...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And of course those "hubs' can be at any level... (my image is that a
>>>>>> User, in addition to account pages, would have perhaps a 'neighborhood,
>>>>>> national and world page... each with a different focus)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SO... while, in theory you'd never NEED to go to an associated
>>>>>> website... the nature of the account offers potentials that make it
>>>>>> reasonable you will want to at least occasionally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd also add that a neutral vehicle with much greater opinion
>>>>>> granularity than that offered by our political parties is essential to
>>>>>> combat the 'opinion bundling' that has so confused the political
>>>>>> landscape... (e.g. in ideological terms attitudes towards business
>>>>>> regulation and abortion rights are completely unrelated... but somehow our
>>>>>> system crams them together is particular parties... this has negative
>>>>>> implications for viable governance.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, is this the kind of stuff you mean by context? Or what
>>>>>> problem(s) it may address? Are there questions re the mechanism or
>>>>>> practicability? Legal issues? Campaign reporting? Security? Bootstrapping,
>>>>>> etc... or something else? These have all, of course had extensive
>>>>>> attention... and I believe can be well addressed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S. Thanks for your quick response!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Tom Crowl
>>>>>> http://CulturalEngineer.blogspot.com<http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Michel Bauwens <
>>>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hi tom,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it woulld need a lot more context to introduce these ideas ... i.e.
>>>>>>> what is the problem and how does this solve it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  --
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100901/157ff989/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the p2presearch mailing list