dear Michael, I will add some responses in-line
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:51 PM, Michael Lewis <lewisc...@shaw.ca> wrote: > Pat I really like the memo you sent. But I have several questions. > (Michel - I wrote this and then see you have replied to Pat) I will think > about and perhaps comment later. I the meantime here is my response to Pat) > > I am a poor student of history, but as I have come to understand Cole his > guild strategy was rooted in the work place, although relevant to other > kinds of association. The role of the state was radially reduced. What > emerged was a decentralized, democratic approach to provisioning, where > workers were the central (but not only) actors. Advise me here what I am > missing. > > If this is the case there a large difference in what Michel is proposing? > The foundation of his proposition is public-commons partnerships. Is this > not very different? Given the radical difference in reference points - > Cole with workers a the base and this 21st idea where globally mediated > knowledge that enables localize production on an > open-mutualized-cooperative basis; I wonder where the context renders some > of Cole’s propositions less relevant. > in my interpretation, the commons are themselves multi-stakeholders, so this include the workers and the user communities ; you may be familiar with the idea of some that today the workplace has exploded and is no longer confined to the factory; but there is an obvious linkage between the commons seen as the locus of co-production, and thus a sphere of production including workers, and industrial and craft workers as they used to exist > Second, as I understand it Michel, your proposition is critically > dependent of an member cities to be active at the city and global level, > the latter through associations. In short, cities are organized into a body > the coordinates and governs the terms under which sourcing technical > solutions is build and maintained on an open source base. Question here > Michel is whether access to the knowledge repository requires cities to be > active members of the global mutual…?? > the code is open source, and would be accessible to everybody, but the right to commercialization of that code may be subjected to some reciprocity limitatations, in my opinion (reciprocity-based licensing) > > Third, the territorial platform co-operatives become critical > infrastructure for production, distribution and governing. Michel…a > question about the platform co-ops; are they conceived of as being > multi-stakeholder and, if so, what is the role of local state actors, if > any? > yes, they are conceived as multi-stakeholder and I'm open to co-governance by local public actors > > Lastly, I am wondering about the thinking to date on whether there will > be limits to what is gathered into the global digital open source > repository? Is the focus on all the critical elements to aid and > accelerate transition? Given the absolute urgencies emerging from climate > breakdown, this might make senses. Or is it broader? I think these are > important questions as they will shape the counters of the politics that > such a proposition would provoke. Even if it is restricted to urgent > transition related production, I can imagine that a global manufacturers of > say, public transit vehicles, and their employees, would be none to > pleased with a strategy that could has the potential for sidelining their > businesses and jobs.. But, then again, I may not be capturing the > fullness of the vision. > for me, this would work for all provisioning systems, and is connected to the climate/ecological/resource emergency of our time, i.e. this proposal is one of the crucial ways to radicallly reduce our material footprint > > One interesting and attractive feature of what Michel is proposing is the > bypassing of national governments. Given the growing network of cities > collaborating on climate breakdown and transition strategies, and for those > involved, their leadership in advancing more progressive transition > politics, the proposal being put forward has a strategic context where it > can be tested. > national partner-state governments could decide at a later stage to join and support these global depositories by the way, this was written in the context of urban transitions, but I realize it could be stronger in stressing the role of the cooperative sector in supporting the deployment of such infrastructure Michel > > Anyways, a bit more grist for the proverbial mill. > > Michael L > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:04 AM, Michel Bauwens <mic...@p2pfoundation.net> > wrote: > > Dear Pat, > > as I was schooled in marxism in my youth, and subsequently abandoned it, > this means that much of the tradition you speak of is completely unknown to > me, I had simply no idea that georgism and guild socialism even existed and > where so big back then ... for me there were revolutionaries, reformists > and anarchists (and stalinists <g>) ... > > when I decided to embark on p2p work, I decided to make a clear break with > my dogmatic past, and start constructing a 'low theory' that would be a > more direct expression of what is happening and possible today. Hence in my > wiki, I only include things that exist (no projects or plans) and use > concepts that are born from the very movement I am observing. > > as much as I think it is necessary, I don't see it as a very realistic > possibility for me to dig into that history, so I am very much counting on > you for this historical context and genealogy!! > > one note, you will have seen in my approach a combination of the local and > the global, bypassing the nation-state level. > > There is both a opportunistic and strategic reason for this > > Opportunistic as it appears in a report on urban transitions, > > but strategic as I see coalesced cities (and bioregions/territorities) as > a crucial new part of transnational governance, which can't be a > inter-statist world government, but must be based on global public-commons > alliances > > quid with the nation-state, > > I am not dissing it, but I think nation-states should now support > transnational commons infrastructures > > the double movement has become inoperative because of the > trans-nationalization of capital; national revolutions carry great risks > and dangers (syriza, venezuela), and keynesianism can only be a small part > of the solution in the context of overshoot > > so what is a progressive majority in a nation-state to do, for sure, let > it do green new deals at the national level, but crucially, it must also > understand that change today is not going to come from a frontal assault > against a stronger enemy, but from a global coalition of change efforts > everywhere, which are the only ones that can overwhelm the repressive > capacity of the transnational empire > > in other words, progressive national governments must absolute support the > kind of global commoning policies we are proposing and cannot limit their > vision on their own citizens > > Michel > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:21 PM, pat commonfutures < > pat.commonfutu...@phonecoop.coop> wrote: > >> Hi Michel >> >> Some feedback for consideration..... >> >> This is a really good summary and illustration. So much makes complete >> sense to me. Thanks so much for this articulation. I think it is rich and >> very helpful indeed. When will the report be coming out and who are the >> authors? >> >> I have a sense of deja vu however? So my comments are about the practical >> articulation and the dynamics as other forces are in play. For the past >> two hundred plus years, the tension and indeed struggle between authority >> at the political level and the striving for democratic authority from the >> grassroots has been continuous and constant. Polanyi's Double movement >> therefore has many dynamic aspects to consider. How is it best to do this >> to be clear about the dialectical complexity? >> >> Stephen Yeo, a very close colleague of Robin Murray's over decades, is >> writing a book on the Three Socialisms. These are Statism (from social >> democracy to communism), Collectivism and Associationism. The last form is >> the most forms that are participatively democratic and includes working >> class self-help associations for mutual aid and including of course trade >> unions that we should try to include in your illustration of the layers. >> >> The ideas you are advancing are a rekindling of the debates and thinking >> from say 1900 right up to 1947 when the Cold War kicked off and when >> Statism thereafter effectively crushed and suppressed associative democracy >> thinking and ideas. Statists East and West told co-ops and unions thank, >> but no thanks. We are taking over to make your bits and pieces integrated >> and comprehensive. >> >> But to guide this earlier struggle by commoners, In 1919 GDH Cole >> produced his book Guild Socialism Restated when he set out a very clear >> blueprint with a remarkable coincidence with what you, David B, Janelle >> Orsi and others are working up here. >> >> What is very creative about the Cole proposals that Bertrand Russell >> fully supported in his book Roads to Freedom a century ago was to recognise >> clearly that political socialism (social democracy shall we say) and >> associative socialism need to be established at the territorial level and >> at the national level in a system of checks and balances with a clear and >> agreed division of labour between the politicos and the economic democrats. >> >> Essentially the proposal of Cole set out a blue print for how economic >> democracy though a Guild Congress at local, regional and national levels >> would relate and complement Parliamentary democracy. But what was wonderful >> about the Cole proposals is that it considered co-operative commonwealth >> building in all industries, services, arts and sciences and worked out >> sector solutions for them. Plus Cole also proposed that cities should be >> based on land held in commons to capture economic rent and to stop >> speculation. Thus he argued for co-operative garden cities. >> >> 20 years earlier in Fields Factories and Workshops had attempted a very >> creative blueprint as well for economic democracy and what in practice this >> would look like. >> >> Okay Polanyi did not arrive in the UK until about 1933 and his way to >> escape fascism was paid for by crowd funding by Guild Socialist, but given >> that in Vienna in the 1920s Polanyi was at the forefront of associative >> democracy solutions and thinking, you can see the resonance. >> >> Given that democratic socialism is being rekindled in parts of Europe >> (Spain, Portugal, the UK and elsewhere), I think it would helpful to >> connect the sound thinking from the 1920s before the lights began being >> turned out with what you are proposing. >> >> I would suggest we are rediscovering co-operative commonwealth thinking >> and practice which you are doing such a brilliant job of updating to the >> digital age. >> >> I hope this helps. Drawing on the best practices from the past will >> enable us to contextualise the arguments and link these to this vernacular >> part of the Double Movement we should not overlook. >> >> All the best >> >> Pat >> >> On 04 October 2017 at 06:35 Michel Bauwens <mic...@p2pfoundation.net> >> wrote: >> >> this is the very last section of our report which will come out soon with >> the Boll foundation: >> >> 3.6. Towards a global infrastructure for commons-based provisioning >> >> We have argued in this overview that we are in a conjuncture in which >> commons-based mutualizing is one of the keys for sustainability, fairness >> and global-local well-being. In this conclusion, we suggest a global >> infrastructure, in which cities can play a crucial role. >> >> See the graphic below for the stacked layer that we propose, which is >> described as follows: >> >> - >> >> The first layer is the cosmo-local institutional layer. Imagine >> global for-benefit associations which support the provisioning of >> infrastructures for urban and territorial commoning. These are structured >> as global public-commons partnerships, sustained by leagues of cities >> which >> are co-dependent and co-motivated to support these new infrastructures and >> overcome the fragmentation of effort that benefits the most extractive and >> centralized ‘netarchical’ firms. Instead, these infrastructural commons >> organizations co-support MuniRide, MuniBnB, and other applications >> necessary to commonify urban provisioning systems. These are the global >> “protocol cooperative” governance organizations. >> - >> >> The second layer consists of the actual global depositories of the >> commons applications themselves, a global technical infrastructure for >> open >> sourcing provisioning systems. They consists of what is globally common, >> but allow contextualized local adaptations, which in turn can serve as >> innovations and examples for other locales. These are the actual ‘protocol >> cooperatives’, in their concrete manifestation as usable infrastructure. >> - >> >> The third layer are the actual local (urban, territorial, >> bioregional) platform cooperatives, i.e. the local commons-based >> mechanisms >> that deliver access to services and exchange platforms, for the mutualized >> used of these provisioning systems. This is the layer where the Amsterdam >> FairBnb and the MuniRide application of the city of Ghent, organize the >> services for the local population and their visitors. It is where houses >> and cars are effectively shared. >> - >> >> The potential fourth layer is the actual production-based open >> cooperatives, where distributed manufacturing of goods and services >> produces the actual material services that can be shared and mutualized on >> the platform cooperatives. >> >> ... >> >> [image: Figure 8.png] >> >> Figure 8: City-supported cosmo-local production infrastructure >> >> -- >> 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/ >> >> > > > -- > Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: > http://commonstransition.org > > P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net > > <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: > http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens > > #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ > > > -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
_______________________________________________ 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