Great, thanks Pat, looking into them and will be giving feedback as soon as I can! best, Orsan
> On 19 feb. 2015, at 00:54, Pat Conaty <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Orsan > > Thanks for these comments. > > As to your last question, I have done a three part series of short articles > on co-operative land reform and co-operative money reform which looks at > Polanyi’s plea to take both land and money out of the market and how this has > happened historically and periodically every 40 to 50 years since wage labour > was created through enclosure - the primitive accumulation of capital. > > So I argue we should go Back to the Future because the hallowed truths of a > culture of resistance comes back round again with the vicious Kondratiev > curve of Depression. > > Michel and Stacco have posted this series on the Commons Transition website. > Here is the link to the first of the three articles on reviving the > vernacular concept of co-operative commonwealth or what I call Co-operation > in 4 full dimensions. > > http://commonstransition.org/co-operative-commonwealth-de-commodifying-land-and-money-part-1/ > > Feedback welcome as John, Michel and I are working on a set of courses on the > Co-operative Commons. Be good to talk to you, Brian and Networked Labour > about this. > > All the best > > Pat > > >> On 18 Feb 2015, at 12:34, Orsan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yes a good review by Kevin Carson in the USA. Some additional info that >> could be helpful to some……..thinking about the practicalities of the Great >> Transition to a commons based new economy. >> >> Thanks a lot Pat, that is very helpful indeed. >> >>> Mike Lewis and I did a range of short fully illustrated articles to >>> serialise parts of our book, The Resilience Imperative. I attach a few of >>> these to give a flavour to folks on these lists about a number of >>> co-operative economic democracy solutions. Crucial to all is what Polanyi >>> argued, namely the need to reverse enclosure by taking people, earth and >>> money out of the market as these are false commodities. >> >> the idea of translating Polanyi's vision and understanding double movement >> really important for the win, I believe. In the sense of, hacking the >> material needs becoming dividing lines between individuals, governed >> classes, and societies, and exploited by the ruling classes. It will sound >> stupid or naive, but in a was while allowing a mesh networked solidarity at >> the grassroots. Like house owning pauperized and disspossed low waged >> workers can support each other both in action and policy wise, at the >> bottom; groups who might needs higher basic income and lower taxes for >> instance can get support from home owners losing their homes like in Spain >> and in return actions like Pah's can be linked to actions for BI. The visual >> material you sent gives insights for designing actions in this direction. >> >>> As Kevin points out we do in the book a calculation of what would be the >>> impact on an average household with a couple of kids in North America if a >>> Community Land Trust home, a JAK interest free mortgage fee based mortgage, >>> green energy solutions and local food sourcing were all provided. Here is >>> the calculation over 25 years on a slide further below. You see this is the >>> size of a good pension pot. >> >> and this is obviously some thing can be linked to green and ecologic justice >> movements. Could you imagine how all these be integrated with a monetary >> system Varoufakis was imagining in Michels' last email? thinking and >> working on these ideas openly this way we may be helpful for both John, in >> sketching a semi-wiki-action plan, and then these exchanges can become >> itself part of 'rapid solidarity force' for the emancipation, if we say by >> not using militaristic terms. >> >> best, Orsan >> >> >>> <CCCR - i42011NOV11_CLTs and Affordability.pdf> >>> <CCCR - i42012MAR05_Kristianstad.pdf> >>> <CCCR - JAK Bank article.pdf> >>> <CCCR - i42011DEC15_MHOS.pdf> >>> <CCCR - i42011NOV30_CLB.pdf> >>> >>> <RI - Hardwicks Pg329.pdf> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 17 Feb 2015, at 11:09, Örsan Şenalp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Guessing I.M. is someone in the Greek delegation from Syriza government? >>>> What would really be interesting is to hear whether they had any vision or >>>> plan for this moment expected to come, since this was obvious possibility. >>>> Since the email sounds like requesting for public support campaign to grow >>>> underground. This is partly similar to that we have been trying to think >>>> of, on these exchanges, like an emergency deployment force, commons action >>>> plan, so on.. the situation now shows that is rather an expressed need by >>>> the greek gov? It would be great to know if there is any preparation from >>>> syriza's side, for instance if they would support, or encourage, such a >>>> commons conference for instance for radical alternatives? Would it be an >>>> interest of them? Could anyone who received the above email in the first >>>> place, or close to Syriza inform us on that? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ps: Cant access the original book, but from Kevin's below review of Pat >>>> and Mike's book, I got the idea that there is another transition >>>> perspective in the book: >>>> >>>> "Michael Lewis and Pat Conaty. The Resilience Imperative: Cooperative >>>> Transitions to a Steady-State Economy (New Society Publishers, 2012) 400pp. >>>> >>>> This book starts with a macroscopic analysis of where the existing >>>> corporate capitalist economy goes wrong — the pathological effects of >>>> debt-based currency, a GDP that counts waste as “growth,” etc. — and >>>> proceeds to outline a detailed blueprint for a resilient alternative. This >>>> latter blueprint, in a series of detailed chapters, examines the authors’ >>>> proposals for a sustainable successor society. >>>> >>>> Most of the proposals are things readers in the green, decentralist and >>>> alternative economics communities are probably familiar with: basic >>>> guaranteed incomes, barter currencies, taxation of land value and >>>> extraction, community land trusts, employee ownership and self-management >>>> as the standard business model, etc. Each of them, by itself, involves the >>>> kind of fundamental structural change you could spend days imagining the >>>> effects of. Taken together, their cumulative effect is the a model of >>>> society that makes a “petty bourgeois socialist” like me salivate, and >>>> would make P.J. Proudhon and Henry George jump up out of their graves and >>>> shout “Hallelujah.” >>>> >>>> >>>> In the course of each chapter, the authors examine the pathological >>>> effects of a particular structural privilege or monopoly — and in >>>> particular, it’s contribution to the cost of living. At the end of the >>>> chapter, they present the savings from the average family’s expenditures >>>> that would result from their proposed reform, along with a running total >>>> of the cumulative savings from previous proposals in the book. By the end >>>> of the book, that amounts to a huge portion of average household >>>> expenditures. >>>> >>>> I have a few quibbles; I’m an anarchist, after all. Although the >>>> guaranteed basic income coupled with Pigouvian taxation would be a vast >>>> improvement on the present system, my preference is for >>>> >>>> 1) letting the full deflationary effect of technological progress and the >>>> abolition of monopoly run their course (with a much bigger likely >>>> reduction in GDP and prices than even Lewis and Conaty envision); >>>> >>>> 2) distribute the hours of necessary labor as widely as possible through a >>>> drastically reduced work week; and >>>> >>>> 3) support the elderly and incapacitated, and those whose productive >>>> activity is difficult to monetize, through cost- and risk-pooling >>>> mechanisms like communal primary social units (cohousing projects, >>>> extended family compounds, urban communes, intentional communities, >>>> squatter communities, and the like). >>>> >>>> Second — a quite minor quibble — I’m skeptical about the authors’ claim >>>> that an end to the subsidized corporate food system would significantly >>>> raise household food costs. For one thing, I think a lot of food >>>> production would be shifted out of the cash nexus altogether, and into the >>>> informal and household economy. And even if it takes more labor to grow a >>>> tomato in a raised bed than on a mechanized plantation, I still think the >>>> total labor involved in growing it via soil-intensive cultivation at the >>>> actual site of consumption is probably less than that required to earn the >>>> money to pay the price of agribusiness produce (including all the embedded >>>> costs of long-distance distribution, high-pressure marketing, batch and >>>> queue processing, etc.). Ralph Borsodi’s analysis of the economics of home >>>> production is still valid, eighty years later. >>>> >>>> Third — much more important in my opinion — is their treatment of the idea >>>> of “free markets.” For example, here’s their take on the neoliberal >>>> policies of recent decades: “When government got out of the way and the >>>> free market was unleashed, once again the rich got richer and the poor got >>>> poorer.” >>>> >>>> No. Neoliberalism involved simply weakening some secondary restrictions on >>>> the state’s primary grants of privilege to big business and the >>>> plutocracy. These primary grants of privilege — the most fundamental >>>> structural feature of our economy — were left in place and strengthened. >>>> Without all the government-enforced or -provided subsidies, regulatory >>>> cartels, artificial property rights and artificial scarcities that now >>>> exist — subsidies to extractive industries, the state-enforced banking >>>> monopoly, absentee titles to vacant and unimproved land, and “intellectual >>>> property” [sic] among them — Fortune 500 corporations and the entire >>>> billionaire class would melt like garden slugs with salt on their backs. >>>> >>>> One thing I especially appreciate is they grok the concept of resilience >>>> in its essence, not just some accidental features of it. Their seven >>>> principles of resilience on pp. 19-20 include things like redundancy, >>>> modularity, and tight feedback loops that should be familiar to readers of >>>> John Robb or John Boyd. >>>> >>>> If you’re the kind of person who’s review in the first place, it’s a safe >>>> bet this is the kind of book you’d enjoy. I know I did." >>>> >>>> best, Orsan >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 17 February 2015 at 09:55, mp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 17/02/15 01:24, Michel Bauwens wrote: >>>>> > Ioannis requests to forward this message: >>>>> >>>>> !!And requests that you delete email >>>>> addresses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>>> >>>>> > In case you forward this, please erase previous e-mail addresses for >>>>> > privacy reasons. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Commoning mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning >
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
