Dear Kevin, the times when guilds and commons associations in the countryside provided these solidarity mechanisms, were highly unequal periods; and a patchwork of independent guilds would quickly lead to highly unequal outcomes (the monopoly game) ; this is why we need democratic polities to insure overall equality;
as far as I understand the evolution of the guilds, they started differentiatiing, merchant guilds became the strongest, and families detached themselves from the guilds to become early capitalists I think the difference between us is whether a society exists separately as a field seperately from private agreements between autonomous players : I think it does and so we need a democratic polity to address common 'territorial' and other issues. On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 3:57 AM, Kevin Carson < [email protected]> wrote: > I think there will likely be analogues of the Basic Income even in a > non-state framework, provided by post-capitalist equivalents of > medieval guilds, commons rights in open field villages, and the like. > As states and corporations become fiscally exhausted and retreat from > the social field, and both state- and employer-based safety nets > erode, people will fill the void by creating a wide variety of primary > social units on a multi-family scale for pooling income, costs and > risks -- much like the self-sufficient units that emerged during the > collapse of the Western Roman Empire. Micro-villages, extended family > compounds, neighborhood associations and co-housing arrangements, > urban communes.... A growing share of people will be born into such > primary social units as the new norm, with an automatic right to an > aliquot share of arable land and/or access to machines in the > community shop, and some minimum (probably quite modest by our > standards) required number of hours producing for common consumption > in return for guaranteed sustenance to children, the aged and those > unable to work. > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Michel Bauwens > <[email protected]> wrote: > > except you cannot ever institute a basic unconditional income outside of > the > > collective institution that is the state .. so there is a choice to be > made, > > where do you put your energy ... achieving the basic income would require > > significant social mobilization and energy. > > > > continuing to work on the commons economy on the other hand, is > something we > > can, and even must do, in the context of increasing market and state > > failure, > > > > Michel > > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Anna Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> All of these proposals are not intrinsically opposed to each other. They > >> can all run, indeed should run alongside each other. These are all > possible > >> solutions. Why waste time arguing which one is better? Being creative > means > >> using all of them at different times, in different circumstances. > History > >> cannot prove to us that what failed before will not at some future date > be > >> successful. We may see trends now, but we cannot predict with certainty > that > >> these will become strong enough to replace the current capital system, > or > >> that elites will give up their power without violent resistance. > >> > >> Anna > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 17 Jun 2016, at 02:25, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> I agree Ellen that this is also a very important third aspect, but also > >> requires major political and social power to achieve it. The present > land > >> and water commons are declining rather than becoming stronger. > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Ellen Friedman < > [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> I think Jakob speaks to something I noticed after reading Michel’s > >>> original piece that began this discussion. Michel wrote, "Overcoming > the > >>> capitalist form of the market, means interfering in capital > accumulation. > >>> This can and must be done in two ways.” > >>> > >>> There’s a third way that’s essential to interfering with capital > >>> accumulation. This third way is to liberate the land, waters and all > life. > >>> The life blood of capitalism is the living planet. Privatization of the > >>> land, water and all life must end. Land and water must be liberated > from the > >>> social construct of property. Life should never be property. > >>> > >>> One way I see this happening is by creating a polycentric system of > >>> planetary commons trusts formed around ecosystems so they can be > stewarded > >>> both locally and globally. In order to right the wrong of > dispossession and > >>> create reparations, local stewardship could be led by indigenous > peoples. > >>> Once the living planet is in a trust, corporations and governments > should be > >>> charged rent for using the land, water, minerals and more. This would > end > >>> externalization of costs. The trusts could set limits on what is taken > in > >>> order to restore the planet to health and steward the living land and > waters > >>> in perpetuity. Funds raised in this way could provide the means for > >>> planetary restoration and a basic income for humans. > >>> > >>> There’s a movement to create a fifth missing international crime > against > >>> peace- ecocide. Corporations who have committed ecocide should be > >>> prosecuted, their assets seized and their charters revoked. Seized > assets > >>> could be used to remediate the harm and provide additional operational > funds > >>> for the trusts. For example, BP’s assets could be used to create a > trust for > >>> the Gulf of Mexico and the people of the area. Exxon’s assets could be > used > >>> to combat climate change and provide funds for resettling refugees. > >>> > >>> Ellen > >>> Austin, Tx. > >>> > >>> On Jun 16, 2016, at 6:03 AM, Jakob Rigi <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Michel, > >>> > >>> You simply avoid to answer my questions. Capitalism emerged by > >>> dispossessing immediate producers from their means of productions and > >>> transforming these producers into waged labourers. Capitalism > reproduces > >>> itself by paying wages that are enough for the reproduction of labour > power. > >>> Thus the worker remain dispossessed. Land and nature as the main > source of > >>> life are private property of capitalists. No one will ever be able to > build > >>> a new collective mode of production without collectivising first land > and > >>> other means of production and this requires expropriating capitalists: > a > >>> social revolution. You avoid to answer the questions by the rhetoric > that > >>> the Marxist strategy has failed. If by the Marxist strategy you mean > the > >>> Soviet case, it had some achievements but failed. But, that failure > does > >>> not imply that the historical project of expropriating capitalist has > >>> failed. The industrial capitalism first emerged in Italian city states > but > >>> was aborted there. Later, in more mature condition it took not only > root in > >>> Britain but become globalised. Generalising the soviet experiment in > >>> rhetorical way as you do into a law is very mechanistic and > deterministic. > >>> The failure of the Soviet experiment is by no means prove that a new > effort > >>> in our time for expropriating the expropriators will also fail. We > need to > >>> judged the success and failure of the Soviet case in its historical > >>> conditions. > >>> Jakob > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of > >>> Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: 15 June 2016 17:25 > >>> To: Jakob Rigi > >>> Cc: Orsan Senalp; Commoning; [email protected]; > >>> p2p-foundation > >>> Subject: Re: [NetworkedLabour] A note on the post-capitalist strategy > of > >>> the P2P Foundation > >>> > >>> Jakob, > >>> > >>> capitalism can only reproduce itself through commodity labor and > workers > >>> as consumers, this gives us powerful leverage. > >>> > >>> if we don't have the power, nor a social consensus to 'expropriate', > the > >>> building of counter-hegemonic power is essential to get there ... > merely > >>> mobilizing counter-power within the capitalist system, i.e. dependent > labor, > >>> has not worked for 200 years, and I see few signs that it can. The > diverse > >>> forms of property that exist, and protected by the state, can be used > by > >>> commoners to mutualize capital and means of production. Obviously, > powerful > >>> social movements can set rules to limit monopolistic control of > resources, > >>> but then you still have to deal with the impotence of nations to do > this, > >>> and they most likely will smash you, as they are doing with greece and > >>> venezuela and elsewhere. This brings to the fore the other aspect of > our > >>> strategy, which is to built counter-hegemonic power at the global > level. > >>> Just screaming "I hate capitalism and I will smash you" is not going > to do > >>> it. > >>> > >>> The strategy we describe worked for capital and for all the previous > >>> transitions (read Karatini), while the marxist strategy of taking > power and > >>> change everything once we have that power, has been a dismal failure. > So I > >>> think that continuing in that vein after 200 years of failure, that is > the > >>> wishful thinking. It hasn't worked for previous transitions, and isn't > >>> working for this transition, so what is your evidence ? Our strategy is > >>> based on the necessary prefigurative construction of counter-power, > which is > >>> how past transitions were successful > >>> > >>> Michel > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Jakob Rigi <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Mitchel > >>>> The idea that commoners and cooperative worker can challenge > capitalism > >>>> by working for themselves and make the state their partner is a > wishful > >>>> fantasy- is not realisable. > >>>> Capitalism is in the first place the private ownership in means of > >>>> production. And the state is in the first place the power and > institutions > >>>> that protect the private property in means of production. > >>>> No cooperative production can become the dominant mode of production > >>>> unless land and other strategic means of productions have been > transformed > >>>> into commons. > >>>> Do you agree with this statement? If not what are your counter > argument? > >>>> > >>>> If yes, then how land other strategic means of production can be > >>>> transformed into commons? > >>>> I argue that this require expropriating capitalists. If you disagree, > >>>> what are your counter arguments? > >>>> If you agree, then, making the production of commons the dominant > mode > >>>> of production requires confronting the sate not becoming its partner. > >>>> Capitalist did not needed always to expropriate the feudal > landowners since > >>>> the latter started to lease their land to capitalists. But, > capitalists > >>>> expropriated small owners the means of production-the so called > primitive > >>>> accumulation. The emerging Feudal class did not expropriate the slave > >>>> owners since salve owners themselves became feudals. But, capitalist > having > >>>> expropriated the majority of the population and thereby have > monopolised the > >>>> strategic means of production. Transferring these means of production > to the > >>>> majority, meaning making them universal commons of humanity requires > >>>> expropriating capitalists. But, state would not allow us to do that. > It will > >>>> tell you that capitalist ownership is guaranteed by the law. And the > law is > >>>> the holiest of the holy. We-the state- will not permit anyone to > break the > >>>> law even if it will be necessary to shed blood. Our monopoly right > our > >>>> violence is here to protect capitalist property in means of > production . > >>>> So the commoners mus confront such a state and smash at least its > >>>> coercive and violent institutions and expropriate the expropriators > for the > >>>> benefit of the humanity as whole and transform their property int > universal > >>>> commons. > >>>> > >>>> Jakob > >>>> Jakob > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ________________________________ > >>>> From: NetworkedLabour <[email protected]> on > >>>> behalf of Orsan Senalp <[email protected]> > >>>> Sent: 15 June 2016 10:47 > >>>> To: Jakob Rigi; Michel Bauwens > >>>> Cc: Commoning; [email protected]; p2p-foundation > >>>> Subject: Re: [NetworkedLabour] A note on the post-capitalist strategy > of > >>>> the P2P Foundation > >>>> > >>>> There are many overlapping aspect between Cox, and Van Der Pijl's > >>>> 'transnational historical materialist' analysis and what you have put > >>>> together Michel.So I share the vision, I only would add a > direct-action, > >>>> political confrontation axe which needs to be built based on what can > be > >>>> imagined as 'peer to peer social network unionism'. As supportive > element in > >>>> terms of organizing power, and broader alliance building, hence > >>>> collectivization of working alternatives and to defend them against > ruling > >>>> class violence and use of force. Not to precede what you suggest or to > >>>> replace it but simultaneously empower the counter hegemonic > transnational > >>>> trinity (of as in Cox Institutons-material capabilities-ideas / > >>>> capital-state-nation). > >>>> > >>>> Orsan > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 15 Jun 2016, at 03:56, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> some of you may be interested in this short note: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Post-Capitalist Strategy of the P2P Foundation > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Discussion[edit] > >>>> > >>>> Michel Bauwens: > >>>> "A note on the post-capitalist strategy of the P2P Foundation > >>>> Following Kojin Karatini, we agree that the present system is based > on a > >>>> trinity of capital-state-nation, which represents an integration of > three > >>>> modes of exchange. Capital represents a particular market form based > on the > >>>> endless accumulation of capital, the state is the entity that keeps > the > >>>> system together through coercion, law and redistribution (Karatini > calls > >>>> this function ‘rule and protect’), and the nation is the ‘imagined > >>>> community’ that is the locus of the survival of community and > reciprocity. A > >>>> post-capitalist strategy must necessarily overcome all three in a new > >>>> integration. > >>>> Overcoming the capitalist form of the market, means interfering in > >>>> capital accumulation. This can and must be done in two ways. First of > all, > >>>> the capitalist market requires labor as a commodity, and therefore, > >>>> overcoming capitalism means refusing to work for capitalism as > commodity > >>>> labor. Hence the stress on open cooperativism, i.e. commoners work for > >>>> themselves, in democratic associations and create autonomous > livelihoods > >>>> around our commons, protected from value capture through membranes > such as > >>>> reciprocity-based licenses. Measures like the basic income also > >>>> substantially remove the compulsion for workers to have to sell their > labor > >>>> power, and would strengthen the capacity to create alternative > economic > >>>> entities. However, we must proceed with the reality that exists > today, and > >>>> create our own funding and resource allocation mechanisms. The second > way is > >>>> to withdraw from capitalism and capital accumulation is by removing > our > >>>> cooperation as consumers. Without workers as producers and workers as > >>>> consumers, there can be no reproduction of capital. The latter means > the > >>>> invention and creation of new forms of consumption that are derived > from the > >>>> creation of open cooperatives. Workers mutualize their consumption in > pooled > >>>> market forms such as community-supported agriculture and the like. To > the > >>>> degree that we systematically organize new provisioning and > consumption > >>>> systems, outside of the sphere of capital, we undermine the > reproduction of > >>>> capital and capital accumulation. In addition, we create > ‘transvestment’ > >>>> vehicles, which allow the acceptance of capital, as disciplined by > the new > >>>> commons and market forms that we develop through peer production, this > >>>> creates a flow of value from the system of capital to the system of > the > >>>> commons economy. Faced with a crisis of capital accumulation, it is > entirely > >>>> realistic to expect a stream of value which seeks a place in the > commons > >>>> economy. Instead of the cooptation of the commons economy by capital, > in the > >>>> form of the netarchical capitalist platforms which capture value from > the > >>>> commons, we coopt capital inside the commons, and subject it to its > rules. > >>>> > >>>> I believe we can achieve similar effects with the state. Our strategy > >>>> for a ‘partner state’ is to ‘commonify’ the state. We strive to > transform > >>>> state functions so that they actually empower and enable the autonomy > of the > >>>> citizens as individuals and groups, to create common resources, > instead of > >>>> being ‘consumers’ of state services. We abolish the separation of the > state > >>>> from the population by increasing democratic and participatory > >>>> decision-making. We consider the public service as a commons, giving > every > >>>> citizen and resident the right to work in the commonified public > services. > >>>> But we don’t ‘withdraw’ completely from the state because we need > common > >>>> good institutions for everyone in a given territory, which creates > equal > >>>> capacities for every citizen to contribute to the commons and the > ethical > >>>> market organizations. > >>>> > >>>> In another article we have argued that the capital-state-nation > trinity > >>>> is no longer able to balance global capitalism, because it has > created a > >>>> very powerful transnational financial class, which is able to move > resources > >>>> globally and discipline the state and the nations that dare rebalance > it. > >>>> Our answer is to create trans-local and trans-national civic and > economic > >>>> entities that can eventually rebalance and counter the power of the > >>>> transnational capitalist class. This is realistic because peer > production > >>>> technologies create global open design communities that mutualize > knowledge > >>>> on a global scale, and because we can create global and ethical market > >>>> organizations around them. Even as we produce locally, we organize > >>>> trans-local productive communities. These trans-local productive > communities > >>>> are no longer bound by the nation-state and project and require forms > of > >>>> governance that can operate on the global scale. In this way, they > also > >>>> transcend the power of the nation-state. As we explained in our > strategy > >>>> regarding the global capitalist market, these forces can operate > against the > >>>> accumulation of capital at the global level, and create global > >>>> counter-hegemonic power. In all likelihood, this will create global > >>>> governance mechanisms and institutions that are no longer > inter-national, > >>>> but trans-national, but are not transnational capitalism. > >>>> In conclusion, our aim is to replace the capital-state-nation trinity, > >>>> which is no longer functioning, and to avoid global domination of > private > >>>> capital, by creating a new integrative trinity, Commons-Ethical > Market- > >>>> Partner State, that is not confined to the nation-state level, but can > >>>> operate trans-nationally and transcend the older and dysfunctional > trinity. > >>>> Through these processes, citizens develop cosmopolitan subjectivities > but > >>>> also allegiance to local and trans-national commons-oriented > communities of > >>>> value creation and value distribution." > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> 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 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> 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/ > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Commoning mailing list > >>> Commons-Institut e.V. Germany > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.schokokeks.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/commoning > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> 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 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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
