On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:42 AM, peter waterman < [email protected]> wrote:
> Michel > > Although, as you know, I generally agree with your posture toward ICT, I > am not sure whether your response meets Ariel's concerns. Let me inter-leaf > in horrible CAPS... > > > 1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: > Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. > > <http://snuproject.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/1987-e-reader-ed-by-peter-waterman-on-labour-social-movements-and-internationalism-the-old-internationalism-and-the-new/>http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism > _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ > > <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/> > (Free). > > 2. 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social > Movement Internationalisms'. (Free). > <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/> > * <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* > 3. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in Jai > Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements: > <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/>Struggles > for Other Worlds (Part I). > <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/> (10 > Euros). > 4. 2012. EBook: Recovering Internationalism > <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A > compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download > formats] > 5. 2013. EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum: > Critical Explorations > http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ > 6. 2012. Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: *For > the Global Emancipation of Labour > <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* > 7. 2005-? > > <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf> > Ongoing. Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.???. Needed: > a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!) > > <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf> > 8. 2011. Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements Confront > a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism > <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) (c. > 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980's-90's). > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> dear Ariel, >> >> I understand the argument, and the energy costs, >> >> my argument is two-fold >> >> 1) that in a different systemic context, internet energy usage can be >> seriously curtailed >> (SEEMS TO BE 3-FOLD!). DEPENDENCE ON A 'DIFFERENT SYSTEMIC CONTEXT' IS A >> LITTLE LIKE SAYING, AS WE DID IN HAMPSTEAD YCL 1951: 'AFTER THE REVOLUTION >> THE MEN WILL HAVE THE BABIES'. MOREOVER, THIS POINT DOES NOT ADDRESS EITHER >> THE MOMENT OF RAW-MATERIAL EXTRACTION NOR THAT OF WHAT I CALL 'INSTANT >> OBSOLESCENCE' AND ITS POLLUTION EFFECTS. >> > no, Ariel questions the internet and communications infrastructure in general, so the argument that this is context-dependent is crucial, unless you assume that capitalism is eternal ; obviously the internet is polluting , and the answer there is indeed to do something about it, not wishing it away; and lots of people are working on that; to that add the crucial argument that the internet itself may be saving a lot more energy that it is spending itself, through its energy efficiencies and dematerialization effect; in short, it allows zero marginal cost economics b creating high knowledge intensive production (zie also the arguments and documentation on rifkin on this) > >> 2) that it is in any case an essential civilizational advance, like >> writing etc, which we will want to preserve even in times of crisis >> > AGREED, A *CIVILISATION* ADVANCE, NOT JUST A CAPITALIST ONE (CASTELLS > SAYS SOMETHING LIKE 'TRANS-EPOCHAL'). > > 'EVEN'? IN SO FAR AS WE ARE LIVING A *CIVILISATIONAL *CRISIS, I WOULD > SAY THAT ICT IS BOTH PART OF THE PROBLEM AND PART OF THE SOLUTION. > fully agree, so the whole meaning of our work at the p2p foundation is to be part of the solution > >> 3) that it is essential to social struggle >> > > INDEEDY. SOCIAL STRUGGLE IS TAKING PLACE BOTH WITH AND WITHIN ICT. > MOREOVER, IT INCORPORATES THE PRINCIPLE OF FEEDBACK, IT HAS A HORIZONTAL > POTENTIAL (THUS UNDERMINING, FOR EXAMPLE, THE TRADITIONAL HIERARCHY OF THE > TRADITIONAL SOCIAL MOVEMENT ORGANISATION), AND (AS ONE OF THE DOCS ON P2P > POINTS OUT) HAS THE POTENTIAL FOR EMPOWERING THE LOCAL AND THE SMALL-SCALE > PRODUCTION. > > yes, what i have been saying for about 10 years now > >> 4) that it is essential for the transformation of the economy towards >> sustainability if we want to avoid massive loss of human life >> > > AGREED, BUT NEEDS SPELLING OUT. AND THE SOURCES OF SUCH ARGUMENTS IN THE > P2P DOCS YOU INDICATE AROUSE MY SCEPTICISM. > > that argument can be returned since it seems most of the arguments on energy cost can be traced back to the coal industry > >> Of course, we are having this conversation of the network as well, >> > > ALL OF WHICH IS NOT TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH ARIEL'S POSTURE, AS YOU MAY > HAVE NOTICED IN PREVIOUS POSTINGS IN THIS EXCHANGE! > k > > Best, > > Peter > > >> >> see also: http://p2pfoundation.net/Internet_is_NOT_an_Energy_Hog >> >> eventually http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Ecology#Green_Computing / >> http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Ecology#Specifics:_Green_Computing >> >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Ariel Salleh <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Michel >>> Thanks. There are a number of interesting political economy questions in >>> this outline of P2P commoning but let's keep focus on the environmental >>> costs of ICT - >>> like the massive contradiction faced by WSF activists between dependency >>> on the Internet, on one hand, and Climate Change, on the other. >>> >>> Internet Cloud data centers or server farms are giant warehouses stacked >>> with computers covering a denuded land area of hundreds of acres across a >>> given state. >>> They draw electricity to function as info-distributors and email >>> storehouses, but day and night, generate so much heat that half as much >>> power again must be used to cool the machines by air-conditioning. >>> Google Corp alone is said to have over 20 ‘farms', housing some half >>> million servers - each with a power consumption measured in triple digit >>> megawatts. >>> To gauge scale, we can compare domestic use where one megawatt would on >>> average supply 1000 homes. >>> Computing is seen as clean technology, but only because its ecological >>> footprint - mining, global warming - is externalized on to nature and less >>> privileged others to deal with. >>> Ariel >>> >>> >>> On 15 Jun 2015, at 9:18 pm, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> the solution to me seems obviously not to leave the communication power >>> in the hands of the elite only, but to democratize it and make it >>> sustainable. >>> >>> I would guess that the change in mode of production, using globally >>> networked distributed production (light is global, heavy is local) would >>> have the following effects, first in terms of redistribution of value: >>> >>> * interest-free money would remove 38-48 percent of production costs >>> that now go directly to the elite >>> >>> * abolisning IP taxes as well would also have a huge redistributional >>> effect, both these first measures would redirect massive amounts of capital >>> for making production sustainable >>> >>> * creatomg commons-producing open cooperative models would keep the >>> surplus value within the hands of primary producers as well, causing the >>> same re-investment potential >>> >>> >>> The direct effects of networked local production models would be: >>> >>> * local production would remove 75% of production costs by eliminating >>> transport >>> >>> * local production 'on demand' would eliminate overproduction but also >>> the massive need for promoting consumption through mass advertising and >>> communication >>> >>> * open supply chains would make the transformation possible towards a >>> massive adoption of circular economy principles and cradle to cradle design >>> >>> * together with open book accounting this would ensure also a massive >>> ethical shift towards fair distribution of value >>> >>> Of course, none of these is an automatic result of technology alone, but >>> of a techno-social appropriation of technology by struggling populations, >>> and in the meantime, by prefigurative productive communities. >>> >>> None of this can be done without the mutualization of knowledge and >>> physical infrastructures. >>> >>> Without networked technology, this can only be done by massive loss of >>> human life. For example, without technology, the renewable transition would >>> be catastrophic since people would revert to wood burning and other >>> destructive practices, while solar and wind technology would ensure a much >>> smoother transition path. >>> >>> The answer can never be anti-technology, since the use of technology is >>> what defines being human, but 'what technology and for whom'. The internet >>> has to be re-appropriated, made sustainable, and put to use for a massive >>> transition of our industrial and agricultural basis, not left into the >>> hands of the enemies of mankind. >>> >>> Michel >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Ariel Salleh <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Peter - of course, we both love a good wrestle of ideas. But I don’t >>>> see you engaging below with either - commodification - or - global warming. >>>> The first topic we can save for another day, because I have work to get >>>> on with here. >>>> >>>> But re global warming, as I wrote yesterday: >>>> >>>> A globally just technology would not damage the planetary ecosystem >>>>> that we all depend on for our very existence. The Internet has massive >>>>> costs in terms of toxifying water - just as we approach “peak water”. >>>>> >>>> It’s global warming impacts alone should be enough to stop WSF >>>>> activists in their tracks. >>>>> Then there are the medical effects of electromagnetic radiation on >>>>> human bodies. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I will be really grateful if you can point me to a serious >>>> consideration of climate impacts among any of the cyber scholars you list >>>> below. >>>> Ariel >>>> >>>> >>>> On 13 Jun 2015, at 7:45 pm, peter waterman <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Ariel: >>>> >>>> It is a pleasure to dialogue with you. But to avoid us going round in >>>> circles, rather than in a constructive spiral, I should really leave a >>>> defence of - no a positive, eco-sensitive, gender-aware - the emancipatory >>>> implications of the internet/the web/cyberspace to those better qualified >>>> than I. >>>> >>>> So I will take issue with one one para of yours: >>>> >>>> 'No I think you are not quite grasping the full meanings of >>>> ‘commodification' and 'colonisation' as materially and culturally embodied >>>> in this manufactured instrument the Internet. That reflects perhaps your >>>> marxist schooling, which tradition has leaned towards an assumption that >>>> technologies are neutral. >>>> Here it seems important to emphasise the difference between a >>>> technology and a tool. The latter is a relatively simple object. The former >>>> brings - and commits us to - a whole fandangle of social relations.' >>>> >>>> My Marxist schooling: A touch, a touch, I do confess. But it was, >>>> rather, a Communist schooling, to which your strictures, here and >>>> elsewhere, do certainly apply. I have been struggling with both, however, >>>> since - let's say - my first experience of living with and under Communism, >>>> in Czechoslovakia, 1955-8. >>>> >>>> Commodification and colonisation: the first of these is pretty much >>>> associated with Marxism. The second was taken over and reworked in >>>> Marxist/Leninist theories of imperialism. >>>> >>>> Technology: I think we have to recognise this as marked by profound >>>> internal contradictions. >>>> >>>> It was not the intention of the railway to make it possible for French >>>> workers to take a cheap trip to London, to meet up with those of other >>>> countries, 1851 (I seem to recall). >>>> >>>> No more was it the intention of the German Empire that their sealed >>>> train, with Lenin inside, should lead to the Bolshevik Revolution (they >>>> only wanted him to screw up the Russian Empire's war effort). >>>> >>>> I go with the spirit of Hans Magnus Enzensberger, commenting on the >>>> Paris 1968 activists' failure to occupy the TV rather than the Opera, and >>>> to depend on wall slogans and hand-lithographed posters. He said, of the >>>> highest capitalist communication technology of that era, 'A distaste for >>>> handling shit is something sewer workers can hardly afford'. >>>> >>>> Well, the latest capitalist technology is, in comparison, dramatically >>>> different from the shit of 1968. It has created a new universe, which I >>>> call Cyberia, of an extremely contradictory nature. It is, of course, both >>>> surrounded by shit, full of shit and productive of shit. You have stressed >>>> the ecology-destructive effects of the technology involved. These are known >>>> to those concerned with emancipation and the commons. As, also, of course, >>>> its capacity for surveillance, control and punishment. The moment of >>>> left-ish cyber-utopianism was the 1980s-90s. What I today see is a wide, >>>> varied, complex and - yes - contradictory wave of radical-democratic >>>> efforts on this novel terrain. I mention a few names: Snowden, Castells, >>>> Bauwens, Laura Agustin, Gerbaudi, Sally Burch, Dyer-Witheford, Jodi Dean. >>>> >>>> You will be considering yourself lucky that I didn't respond to ALL the >>>> paragraphs? >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> PeterW >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: >>>> Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. >>>> >>>> <http://snuproject.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/1987-e-reader-ed-by-peter-waterman-on-labour-social-movements-and-internationalism-the-old-internationalism-and-the-new/>http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism >>>> _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ >>>> >>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/> >>>> (Free). >>>> >>>> 2. 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social >>>> Movement Internationalisms'. (Free). >>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/> >>>> * <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* >>>> 3. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in >>>> Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements: >>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/>Struggles >>>> for Other Worlds (Part I). >>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/> (10 >>>> Euros). >>>> 4. 2012. EBook: Recovering Internationalism >>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A >>>> compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download >>>> formats] >>>> 5. 2013. EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum: >>>> Critical Explorations >>>> http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ >>>> 6. 2012. Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: *For >>>> the Global Emancipation of Labour >>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* >>>> 7. 2005-? >>>> >>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf> >>>> Ongoing. Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.???. >>>> Needed: >>>> a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!) >>>> >>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf> >>>> 8. 2011. Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements >>>> Confront a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism >>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) (c. >>>> 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980's-90's). >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Ariel Salleh <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:27 am, peter waterman < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Ariel, hola! >>>>> I am wondering whether or not you received a message I sent in >>>>> response to you, dated c. May 29. >>>>> >>>>> Peter dear friend, I did reply - to you and Jai and Mikel all together >>>>> - but it evaporated in the ether - which may well be a sign of things to >>>>> come. >>>>> >>>>> It might have got lost in space. I will not repeat it. But I do want >>>>> to respond to what you say below (re-pasted by me so that it fits my >>>>> screen). >>>>> I know it is a pain on the eye, but I will do this para by para and in >>>>> CAPS. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *While considering security aspects of the 2016 WSF in Canada, >>>>> remember that the more we embed our activities in capitalist technologies >>>>> like ICT the more we give up our autonomy and make our politics >>>>> transparent >>>>> and vulnerable to unsympathetic powers. * >>>>> I AM WONDERING WHETHER THERE ARE ANY EMANCIPATORY TECHNOLOGIES AROUND, >>>>> EITHER PRE- OR POST-CAPITALIST. WE ALL USE TRAINS, MOST OF US USE PLANES, >>>>> WE WATCH OR PRODUCE MOVIES, VIDEOS, PHOTOS, PRINT. OF THESE THE ONLY ONE >>>>> THAT IS NOT CAPITALIST MIGHT BE PRINT - WHICH PROVIDED A MAJOR MEANS FOR >>>>> THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM. >>>>> ICT IS THE MOST CONTRADICTORY TECHNOLOGY CAPITALISM HAS PRODUCED. ALL >>>>> SERIOUS LEFT WRITERS ON IT EITHER RECOGNISE OR EVEN SEARCH OUT ITS PRESENT >>>>> AND IMMINENT DANGERS. THEY THEN, HOWEVER, GO ON TO CONSIDER ITS AMBIGUOUS >>>>> OR EMANCIPATORY POTENTIALS (AND CURRENT USES). CHECK THE NICK >>>>> DYER-WITHEFORD CHAPTER I POSTED THIS VERY DAY - EVEN IF HE DOES NOT HERE >>>>> SHOW ANY GENDER SENSITIVITY. >>>>> >>>>> Agreed >>>>> >>>>> *But the idea of an Internet Social Forum carries much deeper >>>>> political contradictions than this.* >>>>> *Technologies are never culturally neutral but embody value systems >>>>> within them. Recent List discussions in favour of an Internet Social Forum >>>>> overlook this by embracing wholesale a form of colonisation by the >>>>> commodity society, fully opposed to the alter-global social critique that >>>>> WSF is building on.* >>>>> COLONISATION AND COMMODIFICATION ARE FULLY RECOGNISED BY EMANCIPATORY >>>>> ACTIVISTS AND THEORISTS. SO THERE IS HERE NO WHOLESALE EMBRACE BUT A >>>>> SELECTIVE USE INTENDED TO SUBVERT AND SURPASS COLONISATION AND >>>>> COMMODIFICATION. >>>>> >>>>> No I think you are not quite grasping the full meanings of >>>>> ‘commodification' and 'colonisation' as materially and culturally embodied >>>>> in this manufactured instrument the Internet. That reflects perhaps your >>>>> marxist schooling, which tradition has leaned towards an assumption that >>>>> technologies are neutral. >>>>> Here it seems important to emphasise the difference between a >>>>> technology and a tool. The latter is a relatively simple object. The >>>>> former >>>>> brings - and commits us to - a whole fandangle of social relations. >>>>> >>>>> SECONDLY, IT IS QUITE UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT TECHNOLOGY WOULD, FOR YOU, BE >>>>> COMPATIBLE WITH 'ALTER-G' (A TERM I NEVER USE BECAUSE OF ITS DEPENDENCE ON >>>>> THE G-WORD. I PREFER 'GLOBAL JUSTICE AND SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT'). >>>>> >>>>> A globally just technology would not damage the planetary ecosystem >>>>> that we all depend on for our very existence. The Internet has massive >>>>> costs in terms of toxifying water - just as we approach “peak water”. It’s >>>>> global warming impacts alone should be enough to stop WSF activists in >>>>> their tracks. >>>>> Then there are the medical effects of electromagnetic radiation on >>>>> human bodies. >>>>> >>>>> WOULD THIS IMPLY A RETURN TO THE CHASQUIHUASI SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION >>>>> USED IN THE ANDES BEFORE THE SPANISH INTRODUCED THE HORSE. >>>>> >>>>> WELL THAT QUITE REMARKABLE SYSTEM (OR RUNNERS AND STAGEING POSTS) >>>>> ENABLED COMMUNICATION OVER 5,000 KM. BUT IT WAS AN IMPERIAL SYSTEM, USING >>>>> A >>>>> PRE-ALPHABETIC MESSAGING UNDERSTOOD ONLY BY THE RULERS. >>>>> FURTHER IT MUST BE POINTED OUT - AND HAS BEEN IN THIS AND OTHER >>>>> EXCHANGES - THAT WSF INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS HAVE BEEN THE >>>>> MOST UNDEVELOPED ASPECT OF ITS ACTIVITIES. >>>>> >>>>> Important to avoid lapsing into ideological assumptions, like the >>>>> Social Darwinist notions of “development” or “going backwards”. It is part >>>>> of the capitalist mythos that history is linear and upwards, whereas in >>>>> fact ever new forms of idiocy and barbarism arise all around us as we >>>>> speak. >>>>> >>>>> *It is ironic that a Canadian hosted WSF emphasising indigenous >>>>> knowing and being, as well as economic models based on de-growth, should >>>>> tie itself to an instrument of global military domination and social >>>>> homogenisation.* >>>>> NO IT IS NOT IRONIC. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WOULD HAVE NO INTERNATIONAL, >>>>> POSSIBLY NO INTERCOMMUNAL NETWORKING IF NOT FOR ICT. >>>>> >>>>> I am not so sure that this is true, Peter. Peoples have travelled >>>>> across land and sea and made cultural exchanges for centuries. >>>>> >>>>> THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH 'DE-GROWTH' (ANOTHER NEGATIVE TERM I DO NOT >>>>> CARE FOR, THO I AGREE WITH THE GENERAL ARGUMENT IT EXPRESSES). THAT IS >>>>> THOSE ASPECTS OF PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION AND DUMPING WELL PORTRAYED IN THE >>>>> ITEM YOU ATTACHED. ANY HOLISTIC EMANCIPATORY ITC STRATEGY HAS TO >>>>> PRIORITISE >>>>> THIS INCREASINGLY BURNING ISSUE. MY GUESS IS THAT SOMEONE IS DOING SO. >>>>> ANYONE BETTER INFORMED THAN ME ABOUT THIS? >>>>> >>>>> We share these reservations about the de-growth movement. It is a very >>>>> tentative step towards eco-sufficiency and global justice on the part of >>>>> folks in the global North. >>>>> >>>>> *Yes, we are already using the internet here for our communications, >>>>> but that should not imply some kind of historical inevitability. For >>>>> example, I drove a car for 3 decades, then decided to refuse the >>>>> technology >>>>> - one small step towards eco-sufficiency.* >>>>> I ALSO GAVE UP MY CAR, ARIEL. AND I HAVE ARGUED THAT THE STANDARD WSF >>>>> MODEL IS ANTI-ECOLOGICAL IN REQUIRING AIR TRAVEL OVER LONG DISTANCES. AND >>>>> WITHOUT RECOGNISING ANY CONTRADICTION HERE. BUT ARE YOU ALSO GOING TO GIVE >>>>> UP AIR TRAVEL? >>>>> >>>>> The environmental costs of jet-setting to WSFs should be eased >>>>> somewhat by the Polycentric WSF model. >>>>> As a slightly tongue in cheek suggestion: Australians and Pacific >>>>> Islanders are both small populations and remote from other continents - so >>>>> perhaps a principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" might >>>>> apply in this case! >>>>> >>>>> *Political security and cultural homogenisation aside, reliance on the >>>>> Internet also has neocolonial impacts, human health costs, and severe >>>>> environmental effects - as the following article explains.* >>>>> OK, THE ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT HERE IS THAT OF CULTURAL HOMOGENISATION. >>>>> THIS HAS BEEN WELL UNDERWAY WITH TV OVER MAYBE A 50-YEAR PERIOD. THIS WAS >>>>> A >>>>> MAJOR ISSUE AMONGST LEFT MEDIA CRITICS/ACTIVISTS IN LATIN AMERICA. TV, >>>>> LIKE >>>>> RADIO, LIKE CINEMA IS PRIMARILY A ONE-TO-MANY MODE, AND IT WAS, INDEED, >>>>> COMMODITISATION, THAT WIPED OUT THE INTERNATIONAL WORKER (ACTUALLY >>>>> COMMUNIST) FILM AND RADIO MOVEMENTS. >>>>> >>>>> ICT IS BASED ON THE LOGIC OF FEED-BACK AND IS, INCREASINGLY A >>>>> MANY-TO-MANY MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. >>>>> >>>>> Radio is very much a two-way technology, of course - as for TV, I’ve >>>>> never had one. >>>>> >>>>> THE PEER TO PEER MOVEMENT IS, PRECISELY CONCERNED TO ENSURE THAT IT >>>>> BECOMES SO, THAT IT IS DE-COMMODITISED, AND THAT P2P IS NOT CAPTURED FOR >>>>> ITS OWN NEFARIOUS PURPOSES BY CAPITAL, STATE AND PATRIARCHY. >>>>> >>>>> This strikes me as illusory - and rests on a quite thin notion of >>>>> commodification. P2P cannot possibly manufacture the global infrastructure >>>>> itself but will needs rely on some kind of capitalised industry to do so. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *There is a huge dilemma here for WSF - and one that cannot be >>>>> answered simply by ensuring "democratic consultation" and “protecting >>>>> human >>>>> rights” in the digital sector. * >>>>> IT IS NOT LIMITED TO THESE TWO AIMS OR VALUES. >>>>> >>>>> Well actually I think it is, as long as cultural, medical, >>>>> environmental aspects are continually backgrounded by Left and Right >>>>> alike. >>>>> A >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *At the very least, future WSF meetings - polycentric and otherwise - >>>>> must carefully Workshop these critical questions.* >>>>> AGREED. >>>>> >>>>> Ariel >>>>> BEST, >>>>> P. >>>>> >>>>> 1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: >>>>> Itinerary of a Long-Distance Internationalist. >>>>> >>>>> <http://snuproject.wordpress.com/2015/01/02/1987-e-reader-ed-by-peter-waterman-on-labour-social-movements-and-internationalism-the-old-internationalism-and-the-new/>http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism >>>>> _to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ >>>>> >>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/> >>>>> (Free). >>>>> >>>>> 2. 2014. Interface Journal Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social >>>>> Movement Internationalisms'. (Free). >>>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/> >>>>> * <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* >>>>> 3. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's Others', in >>>>> Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of Movements: >>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/>Struggles >>>>> for Other Worlds (Part I). >>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/the_movements_of_movements/> (10 >>>>> Euros). >>>>> 4. 2012. EBook: Recovering Internationalism >>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/>. [A >>>>> compilation of papers from the new millenium. Now free in two download >>>>> formats] >>>>> 5. 2013. EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum: >>>>> Critical Explorations >>>>> http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ >>>>> 6. 2012. Interface Journal Special (co-editor), November 2012: *For >>>>> the Global Emancipation of Labour >>>>> <http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/>* >>>>> 7. 2005-? >>>>> >>>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf> >>>>> Ongoing. Blog: http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.???. >>>>> Needed: >>>>> a Global Labour Charter Movement (2005-Now!) >>>>> >>>>> <http://interfacejournal.nuim.ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Interface-1-2-pp255-262-Waterman.pdf> >>>>> 8. 2011. Under, Against, Beyond: Labour and Social Movements >>>>> Confront a Globalised, Informatised Capitalism >>>>> <http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/>(2011) (c. >>>>> 1,000 pages of Working Papers, free, from the 1980's-90's). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetworkedLabour mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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/ >> > > > _______________________________________________ > NetworkedLabour mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour > > -- 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
