Glad to see Bob H. cc ed in. I look forward for us to enable greater situational awareness , understanding (inter)dependencies ,
having further individual capacity to make choices regarding the "code" / contracts we want to suggest , and the ones each of us wants to contribute to. Through deconstruction / reconstruction. For now, many of us still depend more or less on certain social contracts, including those related to the contracts of / and leading to credit creation as monetary units. Each having their externalities , which can be better visualized , with the potential for additional layers of context creation, metadata creation ( and alternative social contracts suggested ) ... in my view, if and when we start using semantic technologies. Also see some projects converging here : https://www.loomio.org/g/exAKrBUp/openapp and a presentation by Seth, Helene and co on one of the concepts which to some extent share an understanding with other projects I like to interact with https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/156YzIeH-eoYFl9nMzFxofQ55KVoksqusS0pYYL4WVaA/edit?pli=1#slide=id.g121aaf830_00 Best Dante On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 12:54 AM, P2P Foundation mailing list < [email protected]> wrote: > Probably I am the worse in that sense. I mean tempering my fluctuating > enthusiasms, is not my strong side, but I can be very agree with you Bob, > and Anna on the points you make. > > May be there is also a phycological or personality wise labour division we > are in need of, between femininity and masculinity, modesty and pride, ego > and id.. > > What is certain though is that not everyone will reach at a certain level > of wiseness, self- and general awareness, consciousness at the same time, > and even one reach there it is hard to get it stabile -at least under this > mode of production or for me :) > > but sure, this is something that was causing, from the agency side, so > much trouble in terms of getting somewhere, understand in each other, and > standing together. The worse thing is that is doesn't matter who is saying > these words, like me myself, the same person can be the one loosing her his > awareness-less at most. what makes difference is if he or she holding a > point in power structure or network -like me moderating of this list > (although i do not own the server where the list is hosted :)) can be the > one bullying. And sometimes people doing this kinds of things can be ones > doing this out of worry, they grow in their minds our of ignorance, so > futile worries, for protective purpose. But sometimes these kind of > behaviors are hard core elements established and there to stay. > > Anyway, there were at one point a reference to molecular, radical inner > chance -as part of changing whole at community, societal, and global > levels- may be what is happening or needs to get stronger these days is the > emergence of new form of social labour division, distributed in a way it > transcends artificial borders dividing social relations by identities like > gender, class, geographies, ethnicities so on. those border that are built > to reproduce disempowerment. > > p2p, cooperation, commons,... the more intensified and open the exchange > between people is the more possible to realize such labour division. and to > develop awareness of our awareness of how these borders being built, > function, and overcome. > > > > Anna, > > I appreciate when people temper their enthusiasm with experience. I see > too many people being unwilling to critically reflect on their enthusiasms. > > Thank you, > Bob > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Anna Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > >> After my enthusiastic foray into Otto Scharma's U.Lab I have to report >> that I found it another liberal attempt to encourage people to become >> 'change makers', supporting them in a self blaming exercise, where fear >> and greed are seen as the problems of our social dis/ease, without linking >> this to social and economic pressures. >> >> Some good ideas of deep listening, connecting head, heart and will, >> moving from ego to Eco, focussing on what is emerging, but falling short of >> a radical critique which could reveal the enormity of the task in hand. >> >> Going beyond the shift in consciousness required to let go of old habits >> of thinking, takes us to an unexplored place on the edge of what we know. >> Few are willing to go there, because everywhere we judge, and we are >> judged, by what we know. In this culture ruled by science, there does not >> seem to be any room or any relevance for not knowing. Yet I persist in >> trying to bring it to the attention of those on this email list. >> >> Anna >> >> >> >> On 28 Jan 2015, at 10:57, Anna Harris <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> A very different answer to the same question from Otto Scharma : >> >> >> [–]rodneyrod <http://www.reddit.com/user/rodneyrod> 6 points 6 days ago >> >> Otto, as you have worked with change makers across the globe where have >> you seen the most resistance/discomfort in people as they attempt to enter >> the "presencing" stage of listening? How can those observations assist us >> as we open this journey to others? >> >> - perma-link >> >> <http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2t6gy3/iama_a_senior_lecturer_at_the_mit_sloan_school_of/cnw57t3> >> >> [–]OttoScharmer <http://www.reddit.com/user/OttoScharmer>[S >> <http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2t6gy3/iama_a_senior_lecturer_at_the_mit_sloan_school_of/> >> ] 5 points 6 days ago >> >> i have found that most people who, regardless of their sector, are >> exposed to real world change, and have to hold the space for people related >> changes (or are exposed to the creative process one way or another) are >> already well prepared to drop to these deeper levels of operating. so where >> is it not the case? with people who are stuck in powerpoints worlds of >> headquarters and politics--sometimes also people that are just very remote >> of real reality, like old style academia... but overall i am VERY surprised >> how significant the readiness for these deeper levels are --although that >> readiness is usually not conscious (yet) >> >> - perma-link >> >> <http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2t6gy3/iama_a_senior_lecturer_at_the_mit_sloan_school_of/cnw5gks> >> - parent >> >> <http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2t6gy3/iama_a_senior_lecturer_at_the_mit_sloan_school_of/#cnw57t3> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:01 PM, P2P Foundation mailing list < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> hi Anna, >>> >>> At the p2p foundation we stress personal and interpersonal change and >>> facilitation, but at the same time, we have to be realistic in this, what >>> is already possible but very difficult in small groups of committed people >>> may not be possible for society at large ... For understanding this, and >>> though I'm critical of the authoritarian interpretations of that tradition, >>> the integral psychology of clare graves remains fundamental .. >>> >>> Detailed studies by Susan Cook-Greuters have determined that at most 2% >>> of the population have integrative consciousness, with 30% more or less >>> having this as a aspirational consciousness .. >>> >>> I take great comfort in the growth of participative culture and skills >>> now evident in the new mutualized working spaces but this is far from >>> being the general culture .. >>> >>> Again, referring to the scheme of John Heron, I would say that for the >>> greater masses, we are at the potential change of stage 2 to 3, with >>> significant minorities at four .. >>> >>> so here is how I see it: >>> >>> * develop fully participative cultures for mature peer producing >>> communities >>> >>> * develop deeper participative potentialities for the aspirational parts >>> of the population (active citizenship) >>> >>> * embed participative process in the general social technology of our >>> time, to upgrade the general culture .. >>> >>> A lot then further depends on the relative positioning of scarcity vs >>> abundance dynamics ... >>> >>> for abundance context, the generalization of peer governance is very >>> realistic >>> >>> for scarcity contexts, the choice between hierarchical, >>> democratic-representative, and market-driven allocation mechanisms remains >>> entirely open >>> >>> see for example how the wikipedia re-introduced a rather toxic >>> bureaucracy by re-introducing artificial scarcity ... (notability >>> requirements to be decide by elite editors) >>> >>> just today, I am involved in a frustrating dialogue with a feminist >>> activist who did not even want to share even excerpts of her book on >>> 'moneyless living' .. in other words, she is creating a artificial scarcity >>> of her own book, that is technically freely copyable, in order to 'swap' it >>> in exchange for something else ... reproducing the artificial scarcities >>> in so-called advanced milieus ... moneyless living for those that have the >>> money to buy it .. >>> >>> I'm sure you can find similar contradictions in all of us, including me >>> .. >>> >>> in conclusion, we are not ready to shed relative domination processes >>> for any pure egalitarianism any time soon, >>> >>> Michel >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Anna Harris <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Amid all the euphoria in celebrating the Greek landslide, and following >>>> Michel's integrative approach, the points in the article below need to be >>>> emphasised. We all carry within us the wounds of oppression however much we >>>> feel we have cast them aside, and they will surface again in the new post >>>> capitalist structures unless we put some focus individually and >>>> collectively on healing ourselves and becoming whole. >>>> >>>> 'the wounding through oppression that we all experience shows up in our >>>> organizing, and have permeated organizational culture except where the >>>> influence of feminists and others committed to transformational work has >>>> created a different way of creating structure, that prioritizes a strategy >>>> and collective struggle rooted in healing and wholeness.' >>>> >>>> Pauli Friere spoke about this in his Pedagogy of the Oppressed. >>>> >>>> What does that mean? How do we do that? Often it seems there isn't time >>>> to go into this now, let's get into power first, then we can see to these >>>> issues. That's when the multitude becomes an instrument, and arguments >>>> between hierarchy and horizontality appear to be abstract concepts with no >>>> people involved. >>>> >>>> How do we become more fully human in our relationships with each other? >>>> What makes it particularly difficult is that there is no ready made formula >>>> - follow these steps and you will get there. No. This is a step into the >>>> unknown. But that also makes it an exciting exploration. >>>> >>>> Anna >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 25 Jan 2015, at 11:38, P2P Foundation mailing list < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/andrew-willis-garc%C3%A >>>> 9s/another-politics%E2%80%94from-anticolonial-to-occupy >>>> >>>> *Another Politics-from anti-colonial to Occupy* >>>> *Chris Dixon's new book identifies four principles that underpin the >>>> success of transformative social movements.* >>>> >>>> Andrew Willis Garcés 7 January 2015 >>>> >>>> [This article originally appeared in* Waging Nonviolence*.] >>>> >>>> Seven years ago I worked at a tenant and worker organizing group in >>>> Washington, D.C. We referred to ourselves as a "movement-building" >>>> organization, but weren't always clear what we meant by that. One evening I >>>> was out door-knocking with one of our members, James, an African American >>>> man in his 50s. He asked me about a conference some of us had attended in >>>> Atlanta the previous week, the U.S. Social Forum. >>>> >>>> "What was the big theme there that stuck out to you?" he asked. >>>> >>>> It was a good question. At that moment, the DJ Unk song "Walk It Out" >>>> was booming from a nearby car. >>>> >>>> "Well, I was most impressed by the groups that really try to walk out >>>> their beliefs-connecting all the dots between racism, capitalism, even >>>> imperialism, and the inner work we have to do as people to overcome the >>>> things we've learned." >>>> >>>> I explained more about what that meant to me. >>>> >>>> He shook his head, amused. >>>> >>>> "That's a tall order!" He thought about it a little more. "When will we >>>> get time for all that?" >>>> That tall order is the subject of Chris Dixon's book* Another >>>> Politics,* newly released by University of California Press. The >>>> product of dozens of interviews conducted with community organizers over >>>> the last decade, the book is an excellent distillation of what Dixon calls >>>> "another politics," a shared political orientation that unites grassroots >>>> organizers working from similar principles in the United States and Canada >>>> across issue, movement, sector, strategy and identity. >>>> >>>> Through the interviews, he identifies four core principles that unite >>>> left "anti-authoritarian" organizers across different "strands" of >>>> struggle, transcending traditional notions of issue-based organization: >>>> >>>> . being against domination of all kinds; >>>> >>>> . prioritizing the development of new social relations and forms of >>>> social organization in the process of struggle; >>>> >>>> . linking struggles for improvements in people's lives to long-term >>>> transformative visions; and >>>> >>>> . grassroots organizing from the bottom-up. >>>> >>>> >>>> In regards to these different strands, he writes, "We braid them >>>> together as we work collectively and build relationships across politics, >>>> campaigns and movements: anarchist labor organizers draw on analytical >>>> frameworks from women of color feminism; radical queer activists use >>>> community-based models for dealing with violence, developed by anti-racist >>>> feminists and prison abolitionists." >>>> >>>> He explores how Occupy Wall Street, anti-colonial movements, and >>>> INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence, among other groups, have >>>> contributed to developing "another politics" across decades. >>>> >>>> Dixon digs even deeper, characterizing organizations practicing >>>> "another politics" as being explicit about their "collective refusal" of >>>> oppression-specifically, as incorporating "the four anti's" of : >>>> anti-authoritarianism; anti-capitalism; anti-oppression; and >>>> anti-imperialism, into their work. This left me wondering how some >>>> organizations might "fit" this taxonomy-what if your group has a handle on >>>> economic exploitation, for instance, but relies on charismatic leadership? >>>> >>>> But Dixon is nevertheless clear about organizations that he sees as >>>> practicing "another politics," and the book is most compelling when he >>>> recounts movement-building victories, like the story of Canada's multi-city >>>> immigrant rights group* No One is Illegal*: >>>> >>>> "In a stunning December 2007 action, some 2,000 people, largely South >>>> Asian, blockaded the Vancouver International Airport to stop Singh's >>>> impending deportation. And starting with an 'Education Not Deportation' >>>> campaign in 2006, NOII-Toronto launched a multi-year fight for Toronto to >>>> become a solidarity city, where all people can access city services >>>> regardless of immigration status. Organizing across sectors and services, >>>> they finally won in 2013." >>>> >>>> >>>> Dixon also uses the book to highlight "ideas rarely in writing," >>>> exploring dynamics of movement-building organization that don't get much >>>> print. For instance, he writes about the process of integrating not just >>>> issue lenses but our whole selves-creating community and organization that >>>> operates at the speed of the whole. >>>> >>>> As Dixon writes, "recognizing and deliberately fostering feelings and >>>> relationships as essential ingredients for transformative struggle" is >>>> still not a widespread practice, and he points out that this is not a new >>>> phenomenon, as the Black Panthers and Student Nonviolent Coordinating >>>> Committee also sought "to develop common expectations about how people >>>> should treat one another." >>>> >>>> Continuing this thread, he also counts as emergent practices among >>>> "another politics" practitioners, forms of organizing that affirm families >>>> and domestic and reproductive work simultaneously with challenging systemic >>>> inequity, and moving beyond an individual-focused anti-oppression politics. >>>> >>>> Dixon and the people he interviews point out that the wounding through >>>> oppression that we all experience shows up in our organizing, and have >>>> permeated organizational culture except where the influence of feminists >>>> and others committed to transformational work has created a different way >>>> of creating structure, that prioritizes a strategy and collective struggle >>>> rooted in healing and wholeness. This increasing focus on wholeness and >>>> wellness, seen in the recent popularity of integrating somatics and other >>>> healing disciplines into community organizing, can only make us more adept >>>> at building a broader and more resilient web of movements. >>>> >>>> And Dixon helps unpack the challenges unique to movement-building >>>> organizations, which, he says, must move towards specific victories and >>>> goals, while also moving through a process that creates new ways of being, >>>> doing and relating, that avoid replicating oppressive practices. All while >>>> avoiding "ruts" common to anti-authoritarian groups, like knee-jerk >>>> non-hierarchy, and the "burn bright, burn out" cycle of organizations that >>>> rise and fall quickly. >>>> >>>> Dixon illustrates this point with a fantastic metaphor offered by >>>> Project South's Steph Guillioud, comparing different forms of organization >>>> to different kinds of cars suited to particular functions: >>>> >>>> "The variations in vehicles don't change the map, they don't change the >>>> road, they don't change the need for people to drive and people in the back >>>> or the people moving it. We will always have and need the people who can >>>> push it and the people that can work on the insides, the people who can >>>> never get a ride, et cetera." >>>> >>>> >>>> It's rare to find a book on social movements written explicitly for >>>> people with less academic credentials than its author. Dixon, who wrote the >>>> book for a PhD program, takes care to explain terms as they come up; he >>>> doesn't assume we know about ethnography ("analyzing lived culture while >>>> experiencing it"). And he gives his interviewees plenty of airtime to put >>>> their own spin on, for instance, "affective organizing," which becomes "not >>>> being a fucking asshole," in the wonderfully succinct words of Bay Area >>>> activist Harjit Singh Gill. >>>> >>>> Still, the number of concepts he introduces feels overwhelming at >>>> times, and I longed for a glossary or flow chart when concepts like >>>> "non-instrumental organizing" popped up (which, it's worth noting, refers >>>> to the analysis and strategies people can create when they come together in >>>> dialogue and struggle as peers, as opposed to treating people as >>>> instruments to be manipulated, or pieces on a figurative chess board to >>>> mobilize toward a predetermined end). >>>> >>>> "Anti-authoritarian," then, could be shorthand for "principled >>>> organizing"-organizing that gets down to the roots, that refuses to settle >>>> for electing a slightly better candidate, for selling out our potential >>>> allies to scoop up a superficial win, or that sees the path to victory as >>>> anything less than the destination itself. >>>> >>>> Towards the end of the book, I was reminded of my exchange that day >>>> with James. Clearly, as Dixon demonstrates, there are mixed-class >>>> organizations that make time for individual and collective healing >>>> practices, for skillshares and strategy seminars, for discussion groups, >>>> for intentionally developing and evaluating leadership, and for developing >>>> organizational structure. But increasingly, as people are forced to work >>>> longer hours for lower incomes, I have to wonder: How are organizations >>>> adapting to support their people to do more with less? >>>> >>>> I longed for more detail on what day-to-day life is like for an >>>> organizer in the six specifically-chosen cities from which Dixon chose his >>>> interview subjects. What does it look like to practice "another politics" >>>> in Atlanta, for instance? It's worth asking, given that the book is >>>> structured around questions like, "How can we most productively manifest >>>> our visions through our organizing work?" Like a good organizing mentor, >>>> Dixon (and his interviewees) gives us insight without "right" answers, >>>> helping to deepen our understanding of commonalities and remind us of the >>>> deep roots of the "another politics" leftist lineage. >>>> >>>> (((((( ))))) >>>> >>>> *Andrew Willis Garcés* works with Training for Change and has led >>>> trainings for immigrant activists in several US states on campaign strategy >>>> and civil disobedience. Read more of his work at www.porvida.org/. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetworkedLabour mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>> >>> 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 >>> http://www.p2pfoundation.net >>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetworkedLabour mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour >> >> > _______________________________________________ > NetworkedLabour mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour > > > _______________________________________________ > P2P Foundation - Mailing list > http://www.p2pfoundation.net > https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation > >
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
