well, if I'm not mistaken, Orsan is the only one who depends directly on the capitalist marketplace, but I do not believe that is what motivates his opposition, I find that a reductionist interpretation,
neither would I explain the non-binary approaches from the opposite reasoning, i.e. that these views are held because of a relative independence to the marketplace these reasonings may work on aggregate for structural explanations, but they can't explain individual choices Michel On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Anna Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > It often seems to me that the need to justify ones own position as opposed > to, rather than in addition to, or including others, comes from the > structural imperative to earn a living, which necessitates offering > something different and therefore of value in > > the market place. This is the inevitable concomitant of a capitalist > economy which requires people to have something of value which they can > sell to earn a living - labour, intellect, care, etc. > > > Anna > > > On 3 Aug 2016, at 21:31, Bob Haugen <[email protected]> wrote: > > One of your comments resonated with me. We have pretty much abandoned > seeking funding and have also stopped responding to request from other > people to help them with funding. That leaves holes. But I think we > gotta figure out how to support our own activities as much as > possible. I know, not always possible. > > We could try dues...that's what the old Nonpartisan League did and > they took over North Dakota and created the state bank, among other > things. > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Orsan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Well I was expecting you and Peter would make this warning. And this > argument is about the methodology of analysis, or as Madron put it, and > Fabians would totally agree 'operational complexity management'. I think at > the current point of time complexity managers has more advanced tools and > infrastructures to manage the complexity that opposition forces added on > the complexity created by the intra-elite struggle. On the one hand there > emerges an alliance of 'delayists' (around next system project, new economy > alliance, de-growth so on) and on the radical left 'acclerationists' are > forming a constellation (around Negri and so on). Some from left like > Michael Aalbert, and parecon, David Harvey and rabel cities, negrists or > cognitive captalists 'platform cooperatvism', Eric Olin Wright and real > Utopias.. are counted in the next system alliance. On the driving seat, as > John Restakis prompted sometimes ago, there are networks which are funded > by OAK foundation of UK Royal-state, Rockefe > > llar, Ford, Soros foundation so on. These formed a founder alliance called > Edge Funders, whom Michel thinks are radicals. They fund all sort of > spaces, from WSF, to Left Forum, from the events Michel and Pat mentioned, > to Ripess -Synergia people (social solidarity economy discourse), from TNI > to all sort of movement building hubs. Yes There are contradictions every > where, there is a chaos too, but also there are some orders and > regularities that are telling us something, and most worrisome is no one is > talking about with the fear of not getting any funding and suffer > economically. That state of 'being determines the consciousness'. The more > no one is willing to talk about these openly the more things go worse. That > is all I wanted to say.. > > > Orsan > > > On 3 aug. 2016, at 22:03, Bob Haugen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I snipped the previous contents, they were overloading my email > > viewer. And deleted the WSF from the distro list so they stop > > complaining at me. > > > Dear Orsan, I agree that alliances with aspects of the powers-that-be > > pose dangers. And co-optation happens. Fortunately, they don't want to > > ally with me anyway, otherwise I would need to thread some of those > > needles. > > > I would, however, repost what I understood from Peter's message. If we > > are dialectical materialists, we gotta do a dialectical analysis of > > all these forces and their contradictions and also and maybe > > especially their internal contradictions. > > > And even after the revolution or transformation or whatever, there > > will still be contradictions. That's life. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
