Here again the link, also cross posting to networkedlabour list for those who 
are not on this one:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_kM4x3RhnHdSWRGeXY3TGk1aTA/edit?usp=docslist_api&filetype=mspresentation


> On 8 aug. 2016, at 07:14, Orsan <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Also to your earlier response Kevin, did you mean with a better argument 
> something like, of which I was thinking about too, in the context of 
> revolution-radical reform-gradual change context; a conscious and planned and 
> documented counter-vortex construction, as in Dyer-Witheford? 
> 
> I sketched something to discuss in Pavia last April, and wanted to go to 
> Montreal to put it in practice.. But in both failed to proceed because of 
> rarely missing the flights, something strange happening with the flight 
> times; which I guess happens often enough. 
> 
> Yet would love to open the discussion to broader participation, especially on 
> the design process of the form and content of such a counter-vortex. From 
> closed deep dives to public spaces.. To me building global value-unchains and 
> network of direct democratically governed transition-refuges, on top of an 
> people's Internet; while taking labour, land, money, and the data out of the 
> control of the market and the state. When you do this and at some point state 
> and market rulers use violence then armed resistance becomes legitimate and 
> then it should be democratically implemented, through public assemblies. 
> 
> Orsan
> 
> 
> 
>> On 8 aug. 2016, at 00:22, Kevin Carson 
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> I agree. I just object to necessarily dismissing all gradualism as
>> "reformist." But even if reformism and radical gradualism are
>> conceptually distinct, there's probably -- as you say -- a great deal
>> of line-blurring in their practical application. And it's not at all
>> clear to me when the cumulative effect of a series of reforms becomes
>> structural and qualitative -- you put together a series of actions
>> taken by the ruling class under pressure from below, in order to
>> stabilize the system, and at some point the system becomes something
>> else.
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Roberto Verzola <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> In my opinion "reformism" and gradualism are two entirely different
>>>> things -- the difference being that the later envisons a transition to
>>> 
>>> But a lot of misjudgments are made, and some who think themselves very 
>>> radical misjudge people who want fundamental change too, as people who just 
>>> want to protect the present system.
>>> 
>>> Furthermore, even those who want fundamental change will disagree among 
>>> themselves up to what point change must happen. Are you just against high 
>>> interest rates (but low rates are ok)? Are you against the entire principle 
>>> of charging interest? Or maybe you are also against fractional reserve 
>>> banking? But others are against the whole idea of fiat money too. Or are 
>>> you for the abolition of money in general? Or perhaps against markets in 
>>> general? Are you against specific bad corporations only, or against the 
>>> corporate form of business in general, or against business in general? If 
>>> some are not against money in general but only about some aspects of it, 
>>> does that make them reformists now because because they want to retain 
>>> other aspects of the money system? Or the market system for that matter. 
>>> Someone's radical is somebody else's reformist.
>>> 
>>> In such an incredibly complex situation, especially when activists continue 
>>> to educate themselves along and their positions may change over time, it is 
>>> not good to set onesself up as judge and brand people this or that, 
>>> especially on an open list, as if one had exclusive monopoly over truth.
>>> 
>>> In fact, most on this list are right some of the time and wrong some of the 
>>> time.
>>> 
>>> On a different note: I'm currently reading this (admittedly old--2004) book 
>>> THE GREAT ADVENTURE: Towards a Fully Human Theory of Evolution by David 
>>> Loye (ed.). It refers to "evolution theorist" Riane Eisler. It says Eisler 
>>> in her contributed article "brings to life how, underlying the full range 
>>> of human relationships from intimate to international are two basic social 
>>> structures: the domination model and the partnership model". Eisler "shows 
>>> how the tension between these two models has shaped history, and how the 
>>> outcome of this tension is key to fulfillment or extinction for our 
>>> species."
>>> 
>>> Eisler might as well have written about the client/server vs the P2P 
>>> model... In my current work on renewable energy, I am also coming across 
>>> the same tension between the centralized power generation model and the 
>>> distributed generation model. A similar tension exists in agriculture and 
>>> many other areas, as Eisler has observed. Their efforts might yet provide 
>>> another illuminating context to the P2P movement.
>>> 
>>> The book itself describes an ongoing effort to marry psychology with the 
>>> theory of evolution towards a new theory of *human* evolution that goes far 
>>> beyond the "survival of the fittest" cliche of neo-darwinists.
>>> 
>>> Greetings to all,
>>> 
>>> Roberto Verzola
>>> Philippines
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 21:33:19 -0500
>>> Kevin Carson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In my opinion "reformism" and gradualism are two entirely different
>>>> things -- the difference being that the later envisons a transition to
>>>> a system that is fundamentally different, but simply sees the
>>>> transition as a medium- or long-term process, whereas the former wants
>>>> to stabilize and ameliorate the existing system of power.
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Michel Bauwens
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Örsan Şenalp <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As for your reply, what is very striking that not the lack of clarity
>>>>>> of your opinions on Fabians and relation to Fabianism, but rather a
>>>>>> weak confirmation you have given only one thing find good in it;
>>>>>> namely guild socialism; or cooperative solidarity economy vision. I
>>>>>> would guess this means you believe in gradual change instead of
>>>>>> full-force attack at the heart of the machine; which kills billions of
>>>>>> people and destroy the planet; the main principle of the Fabians.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Dear Orsan,
>>>>> 
>>>>> it seems we are re-doing here the 250 year old battle between revoluton 
>>>>> and
>>>>> reformism, and that your critique of Pat, and sometimes of me, is that we
>>>>> are reformists.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Personally, I don't see myself as a reformism in the sense it was defined,
>>>>> 
>>>>> but, I do consider this:
>>>>> 
>>>>> * the record of revolution is abysmal, with at least 100 million death 
>>>>> when
>>>>> the revolutionaries were in power (the soviet one, but the earlier french
>>>>> was almost as dramatic); and an untold number during the ongoing defeats 
>>>>> of
>>>>> those that did not succeed
>>>>> 
>>>>> * the record of social democracy in its golden age was extraordinary, at
>>>>> least for the western working class, but I would argue, if you look at
>>>>> national liberation, that was also a fundamental advance, not to mention
>>>>> civil, gender rights etc ..
>>>>> 
>>>>> * but even the revolutionaries who were combatting reformism, were not
>>>>> against reforms
>>>>> 
>>>>> * now, there is a lot of evidence of social unrest, there were social and
>>>>> political and electoral s shifts that brought progressives to power, but 
>>>>> is
>>>>> there any evidence that global south workers for example are revolutionary
>>>>> .. I would argue, they are not, even as they fight radically for social 
>>>>> and
>>>>> labor improvements
>>>>> 
>>>>> People like Pat Conaty , and myself, want post-capitalist structural
>>>>> reforms, and a phase transition, but at the same time, we are not opposed 
>>>>> to
>>>>> reforms and to any social advances that social movements can win
>>>>> 
>>>>> we want full and real democratization, an end to extractive regimes and
>>>>> practices
>>>>> 
>>>>> yet, you continuously paint us as enemies it seems, and use a sliding 
>>>>> scale
>>>>> that always ends up with the enemies of the people
>>>>> 
>>>>> it always seems that your real enemy is not the 1%, but those of the 99% 
>>>>> who
>>>>> do not share your views ..
>>>>> 
>>>>> I see pat conaty, john restakis and others in the network for a 
>>>>> cooperative
>>>>> commonwealth and synergia, as people with a lifelong record of fighting 
>>>>> for
>>>>> the betterment of their fellow humans
>>>>> 
>>>>> they want reforms, but they are not reformists,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Michel
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: 
>>>>> http://commonstransition.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>> 
>>>>> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>>> 
>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NetworkedLabour mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Kevin Carson
>>>> Senior Fellow, Karl Hess Scholar in Social Theory
>>>> Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
>>>> 
>>>> "You have no authority that we are bound to respect" -- John Perry Barlow
>>>> "We are legion. We never forgive. We never forget. Expect us" -- Anonymous
>>>> 
>>>> Homebrew Industrial Revolution:  A Low-Overhead Manifesto
>>>> http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com
>>>> Desktop Regulatory State http://desktopregulatorystate.wordpress.com
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>>>> 
>>>> Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>> Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>>>> 
>>>> Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by 
>>>> making a donation. Thank you for your support.
>>>> https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation
>>>> 
>>>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Roberto Verzola <[email protected]>
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>>> 
>>> Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>> Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>>> 
>>> Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by 
>>> making a donation. Thank you for your support.
>>> https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation
>>> 
>>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Kevin Carson
>> Senior Fellow, Karl Hess Scholar in Social Theory
>> Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
>> 
>> "You have no authority that we are bound to respect" -- John Perry Barlow
>> "We are legion. We never forgive. We never forget. Expect us" -- Anonymous
>> 
>> Homebrew Industrial Revolution:  A Low-Overhead Manifesto
>> http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com
>> Desktop Regulatory State http://desktopregulatorystate.wordpress.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>> 
>> Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net
>> Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>> 
>> Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by 
>> making a donation. Thank you for your support.
>> https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation
>> 
>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list

Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net
Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net

Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by making 
a donation. Thank you for your support.
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation

https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Reply via email to