hi pat, I wasn't reacting to public banking at all, which I support though I would prefer multi-stakeholders arrangements for their governance if not ownership, sorry for the misunderstanding,
just generally speaking, both the left and the social-populists are still in nation-state centric vaguely neo-keynesian modalities, and it is high time to inject more commons thinking and practice .. not to abandon the nation-state, but to add both (trans)local and trans-national elements to their strategies, centered around the creation of strong and shared commons Michel On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:22 PM, pat commonfutures < [email protected]> wrote: > Touche. > > But we are talking at cross purposes Michel. You make valid points and > raise concerns that are vitally important but you misunderstand the case I > am making. > > Public banking need not necessarily be neo-Keynesian. Yes commonly and > almost always in social democratic traditions this has been the case. Post > Keynesian ideas are different and relevant to Post Capitalism and that it > is in this vein I am making this case. > > The Bank of Canada during its radical days before 1973 and from 1938 > financed infrastructure by creating interest free money and finance. This > was not in the restricted neo-Keynesian song book. > > This other short piece by Zoe Williams in the Guardian and again on the > Magic Money Tree and on People's QE (that Corbyn took up but then dropped > as a hot potato) shows up the wall of ignorance and on how peaceful social > investment is being totally blocked as this is a Taboo subject. > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/04/ > printing-money-jeremy-corbyn-quantitative-easing-peoples-qe > > Pat > > On 01 February 2018 at 12:13 Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I know this is going to sound arrogant and self-serving, but seriously, > after ten years of research and engagement in two intense projects at > nation-state and city level, I think we have a pretty good handle of the > inter-relationship between commons, market and state; we pretty much know > the most important elements of this relationship ... it's more a question > now of making more things happen that exemplify it, > > as a reminder, in Ecuador we looked in-depth at how to create national > knowledge commons, with the instutiional, regulatory and material > conditions to make it happen, offering a specific methodology, and in > Ghent, an institutional framework for public-commons cooperation at the > city level, focusing on material provisioning systems, > > if you put the two together, and add John Restakis' developments on the > same theme , focusing on the social economy, we have the basics at hand, > > this is why I think it is now vital to bring these insights to > social-populist politicians, to give them a way forward beyond > neo-keynesianism, > > at the P2P Foundation, feeling confident about the basic logic of > commons-market-state cooperative institutions, we are now moving to the > underlying social and ecological conditions that underlie such an > institutional structure > > one is commonfare and the reform of social protection so that it can > protect autonomous workers (and the care economy); the other is > bioacapacity-based supply chains and accounting, > > it's gonna be at least a five year plan <g> > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:52 AM, pat commonfutures < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Mike, Michel, Dirk, Stacco and Margie for the supportive feedback. > > We need to fit together the commons, co-op and partner state jig-saw > pieces. But how and Now? > Let me widen the analysis and think how to turbocharge the superb > bootstrap grassroots work in Barcelona, Ghent, Bologna and Preston. Bear in > mind that Bruno Roelants is now head of the ICA and he supports the > solidarity economy and has a growing interest in commons and co-op commons > especially. > > From an utter state of dire poverty and crisis, Preston is making a > co-operative fight back. There are many post industrial towns in Northern > France and other parts of southern and Eastern Europe precisely in this > dire state today and without a commons co-op Plan supported by social > investment they will continue to be lured by the far Right. > > Councillor Matthew Brown in Preston has been inspired by the Evergreen > Co-ops in Cleveland, Ohio and the work of Ted Howard at the US Democracy > Collaborative. Ted has been to speak in Preston 2 or 3 times in recent > years. > > On the need for monetary and banking reform to complement the Preston set > of ideas , here in Wales we ran a very successful Build a Co-operative > Country conference last June and simply allowed the Community land trust > groups, the social co-op groups for care services, the renewable energy > co-ops, the housing co-ops, freelancer co-ops and others like this to tell > their stories in a big plenary. This worked wonderfully well because the > different co-op and commons innovators are so busy ploughing their own > separate fields, they were not well aware of what their other comrades in > arms were doing and succeeding with. If they were not aware, the wider > pubiic is even less aware of a practical What if vision? > > The politicians in attendance were very impressed with these commoner > stories. All these projects are lacking in strategic investment badly and > none has the scope to move from micro-level success to upping their game > big time. We do not have the democratic financing infrastructure in place > to do this. For example a recent report on renewable energy co-ops in Wales > showed that they cannot aggregate easily to attract low cost patient > capital from public sector pension funds that are looking to invest in > non-fossil fuel alternatives. This got us thinking about how to put in > place such a bridge. > > During the Great Depression public banks like the early Bank of Canada > created new money to invest in public services, housing, health services, > rural revival, electrification etc. It worked. > > Over the past 18 months we have been working on a public bank for Wales > that could create money out of thin air and invest in the commons and co-op > sectors big time. All the politicians of most parties say There is no magic > money tree for social investment. This short article from Zoe Willams in > the Guardian reveals the massive ignorance of MPs of all parties about how > money is created. A good one this for the Common Transition Plan. > > https://www.theguardian.com/global/shortcuts/2017/oct/29/how > -the-actual-magic-money-tree-works > > We held a public meeting on a public bank for Wales last October and got > to attend the Minister for Local Government and Finance and the chief > economist for Welsh government. The research we had stimulated came out > before this meeting and is getting on side our thinking. We are soon to > complete another report on the public bank and money creation that the > Minister has invited us to send him. > > Ellen Brown at the Public Banking Institute in the US has joined our > Public Banking action group and has been twice to Wales to talk. > > Public banks that really create new money are a key piece of the jig-saw > for commons. In our forthcoming report we are advancing the case for the > creation of £1 billion of new money by a Welsh public bank from year 1 on a > ratio of 5:1. That is five times new money created for patient social > investment to the core capital in the new bank that we are inviting local > governments in Wales to put up from say 5% of their annual capital budgets. > Leverage this and you can get take-off locally and thereafter regional. > > We need to operationalise Magic Money Trees at local government area > levels across Europe. > > Pat > > On 31 January 2018 at 17:58 Michael Lewis < [email protected]> wrote: > > This is a brilliant article Pat. Thanks for sharing. > > On Jan 31, 2018, at 6:21 AM, pat commonfutures < > [email protected]> wrote: > > In the UK it would be great if we had a supportive mayor somewhere like in > Barcelona or the work in Ghent. One local government though that is going > down this road is Preston. This article in the Guardian today tells the > story. > > https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/31/presto > n-hit-rock-bottom-took-back-control > > Pat > > On 30 January 2018 at 20:01 Holemans Dirk < [email protected]> > wrote: > > Me too, I just bought a second-hand version of Henry’s book online > > Michel: we can share it! > > > *Van: *<[email protected]> namens Michel Bauwens < > [email protected]> > *Datum: *dinsdag 30 januari 2018 14:10 > *Aan: *pat commonfutures <[email protected]> > *CC: *Simona Levi Xnet <[email protected]>, emanuele braga < > [email protected]>, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]>, David Bollier <[email protected]>, George > Papanikolaou <[email protected]>, Daniel Chavez <[email protected]>, > Stacco Troncoso <[email protected]>, Fiona Dove <[email protected]>, > Hazel Henderson <[email protected]>, John Restakis < > [email protected]>, Holemans Dirk <[email protected]>, Alex Foti < > [email protected]>, p2p-foundation <[email protected]>, > Geert Lovink <[email protected]>, Margie Mendell <[email protected]>, > Michael Lewis <[email protected]> > *Onderwerp: *Re: My review (bauwens) of Alex Foti's General Theory of the > Precariat > > > looking forward to Henry's book! > > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:59 PM, pat commonfutures < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Michel > > Thanks for this link. Just to let you know that the communitarian thinker > and former UK civil servant Henry Tam is compiling a book on Reinventing > Government. I am contributing a chapter on ideas like those I have shared > and Anna Coote at New Economics Foundation is also doing a chapter on > social commons. She is drawing from your work and David Bollier's. > > Henry's book will come out later this year. > > Pat > > > On 29 January 2018 at 13:27 Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> > wrote: > > thanks a lot Pat, very useful! > > > keeping track of 232 current commonfare initiatives here for just that > reason: > > https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Category:P2P_Solidarity > > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 1:33 PM, pat commonfutures < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Dirk. Alex and Michel > > We need to be aware that public services as we know them had their origins > in pioneering class struggles by commoners that developed the fundamental > social economic innovations. We forget this out of ignorance and at our > peril. > > A great book on the history you ask about Dirk is Eric Hopkins' > Working-class Self-Help in nineteenth century England. By 1900 there were > 27,000 friendly societies providing a wide range of mutual aid services for > funerals, for sick pay and also for small pensions. They date back in > formation to the 18th century and many early trade unions before they were > legalised after 1825 operated clandestinely as friendly societies. Also > early co-ops used friendly society laws to form legally. > > Alex you are right that social democracy emerged decades before 1945 and > those who studied closely over a century ago mutual aid, friendly > societies, co-ops and trade unions, like the Fabian socialists Beatrice and > Sidney Webb, advocated that the emerging Labour parties should seek to > collectivise the best practices of friendly societies and co-ops via > welfare state practices to provide sick pay, retirement pensions, > industrial injury payments and primary health care. The 1911 National > Insurance Act in the UK provided these services in collective ways via the > state in a three way contributory system into social insurance funds with > the workers paying in a third, employers a third and the government a > third. This was the deal with the state and from 1911 until 1948 - when the > National Health Service widen coverage and health services comprehensively > - the friendly societies were involved in the administration of the 1911 > Act. > > As Michel points out, trade unions in Belgium and in countries in > Scandinavia still to this day play a key social security delivery role. > > From 1948 as friendly society roles diminished as the state took all the > roles over, the numbers in the UK have reduced now to only about 200. > > Interesting to see that the Broodfonds or Bread Funds in the Netherlands > developed after 2006 as 21st century friendly societies when the Dutch > state ended access to sickness benefits for self-employed people. So where > markets fail and states leave gaps as is increasingly the case since 2010, > mutual aid re-emerges. > > You are right Dirk, the dialectical tension between waves of commons > movements and the state and how relationships are forged for better or for > worse is key for developing strategies for the new commons movement. > > Given that the public services required commons innovation and the current > commons innovations need to spread, what the deal is with the state and > especially municipalities is crucial for the emergence of a democratic, > social and ecological economy. > > Pat > > > On 29 January 2018 at 08:43 Michel Bauwens < [email protected]> > wrote: > > by the way, I just want to mention that the p2p foundation maintains a > closed 'visioning' discussion list, in which high quality discussants are > very welcome, > > > Stacco can add you to the list, > > > Michel > > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Holemans Dirk < [email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear all, > > > Many thanks for this inspiring dialogue. As ecologist (director of green > foundation Oikos and city councillor in Ghent), I see I can learn a lot > from your contributions, and authors like GDH Cole and Clifford Douglas. > > > Being inspired by Polanyi, I am trying to connect his lines of thinking > with the historical research on the three waves of commons in Europe since > the Middle Ages. To reduce complex research to this simple line, one could > argue that the democratic second movement of Polanyi correspondents with > the second wave of the commons. By this I am very interested in what Pat > writes on the “23,000 mutual friendly societies set up over decades of > social movement struggles and almost all promoted and supported by diverse > trade unions for their members”. Are there specific articles or books that > documents these pre-war social movements in the UK? > > > Already many thanks > > Dirk > > > *Van: *pat commonfutures <[email protected]> > *Beantwoorden - Aan: *pat commonfutures <[email protected]> > *Datum: *zondag 28 januari 2018 13:31 > *Aan: *Alex Foti <[email protected]>, Michel Bauwens < > [email protected]> > *CC: *Simona Levi Xnet <[email protected]>, John Restakis < > [email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Hazel > Henderson <[email protected]>, Fiona Dove <[email protected]>, > Holemans Dirk <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]>, emanuele braga <[email protected]>, > p2p-foundation <[email protected]>, George Papanikolaou > <[email protected]>, Geert Lovink <[email protected]>, Daniel Chavez < > [email protected]>, Margie Mendell <[email protected]>, Michael > Lewis <[email protected]> > *Onderwerp: *Re: My review (bauwens) of Alex Foti's General Theory of the > Precariat > > > Hi Michel and Alex > > The commons work in Ghent is great to see. Also the Bologna regulations > work of Christian Iaione are needed to help commons and local government > partnerships and social contracts to be negotiated. > > Why GDH Cole and guild socialism ideas are relevant to the present is that > Cole proposed in 1919 in his book on Guild Socialism Restated that guild > congresses for economic democracy should complement local government and > regional and national governments and that social economic actors involved > in production and reproduction could be a co-operative economic counterpart > to parliamentary democracy. Therefore economic democracy would become a > separate form of democracy complementary to political democracy. A system > of checks and balances. > > Garden city ideas where all the land would be commonly owned and economic > rent captured for residents transparently was a foundational concept for > Cole for the guild assemblies locally. > > Remember Polanyi showed that the capitalist system is oppressive and > structured historically because people, money and land have been enclosed > and commodified. What was interesting about the guild socialist ideas in > the early 1920s that Bertrand Russell, RH Tawney and GDH Cole were working > on is that the garden city ideas and socialist planning would take land out > of the market for new housing, workspace, commons spaces etc, workplace > democracy advancing then and across Europe would end wage labour and the > further step would be pursued as Clfford Douglas argued by taking money out > of the market by issuing social credit as a national dividend that would be > locally managed by monetary authorities that could be part and parcel of > the guild economic congresses so that underconsumption would no longer be > addressed by more capitalist debt issuance by banks but by transparent > monetary reform to democratise money. > > Tawney and Cole did not push for what Douglas was arguing for which was a > pity. Polanyi only wrote about the tripartite need to take people, money > and land out of the market in his Great Transformation in 1944. But these > three reforms are the bedrock for a commons mode of production to pursue > structurally the paradigm shift to advance economic democracy and to secure > co-operative commonwealth. Sadly Massimo De Angelis only mentions Polanyi > in passing in his latest book and missed all this. Otherwise his book is > excellent I think. > > On your query about mutuals and co-op innovations and the doubt you have > Alex about the state replicating these. Keynes's gets his ideas of 'cheap > money' which is not the same as social credit from Clifford Douglas and > Silvio Gesell. See the last chapter of the General Theory by Keynes. > > In 1943 when the National Health Service was being designed, co-operative > and mutual health services in the UK were patchy but being then provided by > 23,000 mutual friendly societies set up over decades of social movement > struggles and almost all promoted and supported by diverse trade unions for > their members. There was an effort to incorporate these mutuals into the > NHS but authoritarian socialists refused to allow this to happen. > > Also if you look at the reconstruction of housing and new towns after 1948 > in the UK, they used co-op Garden City ideas for guidance for public land > and public housing design but left out the ecological dimensions and > pursued post War reconstruction from the top down. > > Pat > > On 27 January 2018 at 19:40 Alex Foti <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Pat, > > > thanks for your observations on mutualism and the ecological and social > rights to the city. i'm a big gdh cole fan, btw. the weekend has > overwhelmed me with obligations. i ll try to come back to in more detail > tomorrow with more time. however the only thing i m doubtful the fact that > mutualism is replaced by the welfare state which was a way of neutralizing > and institutionalizing the commonist and separatist tendencies of the > working class. at least since 1919 it seems to me social democracy opted > for state intervention rather than self-reliant mutualism (or worse, > syndicalism). > > > best ciaos! > > > lx > > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 7:27 PM, pat commonfutures < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Michel and Alex > > My two cents...... > > Enjoyed reading your review Michel and hearing loud and clear the comments > from Alex. Glad to see you recognise strategically the role for economic > democracy organisations to come together to develop commonwealth solutions. > Challenge is to animate and mobilise co-ops, trade unions, mutual aid > organisations and commons movements and other actors to cross connect. > > Capital needs to be on tap not on top. Labour needs to hire capital. Thus > economic democracy is the operative mantra. But how.....? > > I think the analysis of Massimo De Angelis in Omnia sunt communia that > focuses on commons solutions for provisioning to address precarious > housing, precarious work, precarious social services, etc. is the way to > increasingly Walk the Talk. > > But so much of the infrastructure needs aligning to develop a generative > system to build the new to replace the toxic old. In the period from 1910 > to 1948 it was the working class self-organisations and partnerships with > municipalities that co-developed a turn key system for affordable housing, > mutual insurance services for access to health care, patient finance > instruments, etc. As you highlight Michel, without this proving of the > possible, the Post 1945 welfare states would not have been practical. > History has airbrushed out of memory all the working class achievements > leading up to social democracy's action to rebuild war torn Europe with > guidance from Keynes. Keynes himself took credit for what commoners had > innovated and brought into being over many decades. > > But we are back to the same situation again. > > To pursue pluralist commonwealth post capitalist futures, the facts are > similar at least as a pattern to 1945... > > Many good solutions that emerged out of commoner struggles since the 1970s > now exist as viable and proven models. Examples include Community Land > Trusts for housing and workspace, social co-operatives for care services, > community renewable energy, freelancer co-ops, etc but we lack the general > assembly of protagonists to plan and co-ordinate them all and bring them > together into a viable system. Neoliberalism continues to repress and > marginalise these Cinderella Liberties that if nurtured and united could > tackle the multiplying wants that make no sense among economies of plenty > perversely allocated. > > The Garden City movement pioneers developed socialist planning guidance in > 1906 which played a key role to unite the fragments. We need to revive > democratic planning again and make this participative to set in train > evolutionary urban and rural reconstruction and to help animate, activate > and co-ordinate economic democracy in action. Garden cities were on the > right road as they sought to unite urban and rural life in ecological > resilient ways. > > The guild socialist ideas of GDH Cole in the early 1920s are worth > revisiting. As Danny Dorling shows in his book on the 1%, between 1918 > and1978 social and economic inequality reduced across developing countries > and indeed as forms of socialism advanced stage by stage. > > Today socialism needs to be planned and re-implemented with deeper > democracy methods and on a co-operative and ecological economics > foundations to produce commonwealth via a commons mode of production. I > look forward to reading your book Alex. > > Thanks to you both for the joint inspiration. > > Pat > > On 26 January 2018 at 12:38 Michel Bauwens < [email protected]> > wrote: > > hi alex, > > > very happy to engage, and I fully understand the legitimacy of your > strategic choices, though your vision of a successful new new deal is also > a sign of optimism in itself .... I agree we have to fight for it > > > this is a very good overiview of the other polarity, I think at the p2p > foundation, we are somewhere in between, even as we are very liberally > cited in this overview of commons-based relocalization: > https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Networked_Cities_as_Resilient > _Platforms_for_Post-Capitalist_Transition#Excerpt > > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Alex Foti < [email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Michel, Dear Friends, > > a trillion thanks for this thoughtful and appreciative review. i look > forward to co-developing a veritable post-capitalist strategy by embodying > the commons-based approach and i find your criticism of an excessive > capitalist realism justified (lost a few nights' sleep about it, but i am > very fearful of cryptofascist reaction, and think we can force liberal > capitalism into a social compromise - which you're right would make funding > and reclaiming the commons a central feature of society - and also i guess > i wanted to avoid excessive utopianism given that current historical > reality is so dystopian). again thanks for taking the time to read and > engage with the book's arguments. > > best milanese ciaos, > > lx > > > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Michel Bauwens < [email protected]> > wrote: > > see also link here at https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net > /General_Theory_of_the_Precariat#Evaluation > > > "This book is essential reading for all commoners that want to think > through the right strategy for social change. It squarely places itself > from the point of few of the new social groups (or class in formation, as > Foti would have it) that have grown under the conditions of neoliberalism > and its decline, or in other words under the emergence of cognitive > capitalism or 'informationalism'. This key group are the various > constituent parts of the precariat, all the people who can no longer work > with dependable classic labor contracts and the steady income and > protection deriving from it. > > This book should be read through its end, i.e. chapter five, because its > first four chapters on the precariat are only set in a more complex > geopolitical context in that last chapter. To be honest, I was quite > reactive at times during the reading of the first four chapters, because > two very important structural elements were missing in his analysis. First > is the commons itself, the other side of the antagonistic struggles of the > precariat; and second is the ecological crisis, the very material > conditions under which this struggle must occur today. Foti indeed calls > for economic and monetary growth, and sounds like an unabashed > neo-Keynesian but only in the last chapter stresses that this growth should > be thermodynamically sound (i.e. he calls for monetary growth, but not > growth in material services). Foti also almost completely ignores the role > of the commons and 'commonalism' in the first four chapters, only > acknowledging in a few parts of chapter 5, that it is a vital constituent > part of the precarious condition. If you don't read chapter 5, you could be > mistaken for seeing Foti's analysis as an exercise in re-imagining the > class dynamics and compromises of the New Deal and post-WWII european > welfare states, and has simply replaced working class with precariat, > working class parties with social populism, and the New Deal with a social > compact for green capitalism. > > So, the fact that this is a remarkably thought out book about contemporary > strategy for social change, should be tempered by a few paradoxes that the > author has not completely resolved. > > Indeed at the heart of the book lies also an enduring paradox: Foti calls > for the most radical forms of conflict, and identifies with the more > radical cultural minorities, acknowledging their anticapitalist and > anarchist ethos, yet calls for mere reformism as a focus and outcome. This > is therefore not a book about transforming our societies to post-capitalist > logics, this is a book about a new reformism. This is a book against > neoliberalism, not against capitalism. At times, it is plain 'capitalist > realism', as Foti explicitly acknowledges he sees no dynamic value creation > outside of capitalism. For Foti, it is clear, if sufficient conflict and > precariat self-organisation can occur, then a new regulation of capitalism > can occur. He justifies this by a detailed analysis of the different > regulatory modes of capitalism (smith-ism, fordism, jobs-ism) and how they > relate to the kondratieff economic cycles, drawing on the insights of > Carlota Perez and others. Foti distinguishes crises of demand, where there > is too much accumulation of capital, and not enough distribution. These > crises he says, are essentially reformist crises, as people mobilize to > restore balance in the redistribution, but not against the system per se. > The crisis of the 30's and the crisis after 2008, are such crises, he in my > view convincingly shows. Other crises are caused by a failing supply, due > to over-regulation of capital and falling profit rates, such as the crisis > of the 70s, and these crises, which are inflationary, are revolutionary. > This distinction between crises of accumulation and crises of regulation, > is in my opinion very insightful, and true. This recognition may of course > be troubling, but if true, we have to take serious stock of it. We are > simply not in revolutionary times, right now, but rather in a struggle > between national populism and social populism. From this analysis, Foti > then argues that the first priority is for the precariat to re-regulate for > a distribution of wealth, much like the old working class achieved after > WWII. > > But even if we acknowledge this conjuncture, I would argue that Foti > insufficiently balances his outlook between reforming capitalism and > constructing post-capitalism, beween antagonistic conflict and positive > construction of the new. He argues that without income, there can be no > such construction. This is very likely true, so we need to rebalance > redistribution, in a way that income growth can lead to immaterial growth > that is compatible with the ecological limits of our planet, and use these > surpluses to transform societal structures. Foti calls for social (or 'eco' > populist movements and coalitions as the political means to that end, > pointing to Podemos and En Comu, and perhaps Sanders and Corbyn, as such > forces, supported by to be created Precariat Syndicates. He also puts > forward the thesis that the enemy is national populism, an alliance between > retrograde fossil fuel capitalism and the salariat, with on the other side > a possible alliance of green capitalism (a real effort not a marketing > ploy) with the precariat, with the former fighting for top-down coalition > and the second for bottom-up regulation. This division of the working class > is in my view way too stark, and perhaps even defeatist. I would very > strongly argue to seek alliances and develop policies that can give hope to > the salariat. The thrust of our work for the Commons Transition aims at > precisely that. (elsewhere in the book, Foti does call for an alliance with > progressive middle classes, but if these are not the workers with jobs, > where are these then ?) > > Now Foti correctly critiques in my view, people like Mason and Rifkin for > failing to problematize the post-capitalist transition, they make it seem > like an inexorable process if not affirming that we are already > post-capitalist, as some others do, but in my view then in his turn he > fails to pay proper attention to it. What if the re-regulation of > capitalism doesn't work for example ? Then at some point, say in about 30 > years, as Kondratieff cycles would indicate, we would still face a crisis > of over-regulation, and a more revolutionary moment. For Foti, we have to > take it on faith that green capitalism will be a successful new regulatory > mode of capitalism. What if it turns out to be a unworkable compromise and > that more drastic action is needed. But Foti has no faith in alternatives > to capitalism, which means that the only alternatives would then be > eco-fascism as a new feudalism with only consumption for the rich, lifeboat > eco-hacking, a situation akin to that of medieval communes, or dictatorial > eco-maoism, say Cuba on a global scale. > > Contra this 'capitalist realism', our contention at the P2P Foundation is > that post-capitalism is both necessary and possible, even if we recognize > that today is a possible reformist moment in that evolution/transformation. > In that context, the construction of seed forms, the recognition of other > forms of value creation (which can be monetized!), of other forms of > self-organization is absolutely a vital side of the coin in the dialectic > of construction and conflict. Foti seems to forget that the traditional > working class did not simply 'fight', but constructed cooperatives (both > consumer coosp and producer coops), unions, parties, mutualities and many > fraternal/sororal organizations. The very generalization of the welfare > system was an extension by means of the state, of the solidarity mechanism > of the working class, which had taken decades to develop. Also vitally, the > identity itself of the working class was not just as a part of capitalism, > but as a movement for another type of society, whether that was expressed > through socialism, social-democracy, anarchism, and other variants. When > that hope was lost terminally, that was also the end of the strength and > identify of working class movements. There can be no offensive social > strategy without a strong social imaginary, and mere reformist designs > won’t do. So commonalism is not just something that we do when we come home > from work, or tired from our conflictual organizing against an enemy from > whom we want mere redistribution. On the contrary, it is vital part of the > class formation and identity, this is why we stress our identity not just > as precariat, which is a negative formulation that characterizes us as the > weaker victims of the capitalist class, but as commoners, the multitude of > co-constructors of viable futures that correspond to contemporary > emancipatory desires. We cannot just trust green capitalism, we vitally > need to build thermodynamically sound and mutualized provisioning systems > as commons even if we have to compromise with capitalism. Post-capitalism > should not be essentialized as something occuring 'after the revolution', > but as an ongoing process, dynamically inter-linked with political > self-organizing and conflict. Foti in this book, is only really good at > conflict. Even if we look at conflict, I would argue that the strength of > the reformist compromise after WWII was very much linked to the fear of the > however flawed alternative that existed, and that the forms of compromise > were the result of decades of invention of new forms. > > If we take that view, then I believe the contradiction in Foti's book can > be resolved. Indeed in that case we do not have to ask the radical > precariat to give up it's values for a reformist compromise, but to > productively combine radically transformative post-capitalist practice. > > There is another issue with Foti's book. He very much stresses the > superdiversity of the precariat, and the key role of gender and > race/migration unity in their struggles. He also mentions en passant the > need for a potential eurasian alignment between Europe and China , now that > the Atlantic unity has been broken by Trump. But , at the same time, this > is really a very eurocentric book, calling for a new compromise in Europe > and 'advanced western states'. Obviously, since in the Global South it is > the salariat and proletariat which is growing, there is a theoretical > difficulty here. But what if a thermo-dynamically sound economy would > require a cosmo-localization of our global economy, as we contend at the > P2P Foundation, combining global sharing of knowledge with substantial > relocalization of physical production (as even big bank reports now > recognize) ? Only if we recognize this, can we actually have a new global > view of solidarity, as both elements benefit workers, salaried and > precarious, in the whole world. > > So, in conclusion, I find Foti's book to be an excellent first half of a > book, which would have been much better and sound, if it had more > extensively struggled with the commons equation of the precariat. The > commons is not something we do 'afterwards' , after a successful New Green > Deal, it is is something that is as ongoing and vital. Theoretically, in a > few paragraphs at the end of the book, Foti seems to recognize it, but it > is not integrated in his strategic vision, or only marginally. > > Readers who miss this aspect, could look at the ten years of research and > analysis we have conducted on that other half of the equation, at the P2P > Foundation. We may have the other weakness though, and in fact we purposely > have focused not on the conflict part, which is the natural inclination of > the left and needs no help, but in pointing out how any self-organization, > and construction of the commons, which inevitable comes with conflict, is > just an essential part of the programmatic alternatives of the precariat. > Not just as proposals of electoral parties and syndicates, but as > expressions of actual practice. Our orientation is to try to achieve a > greater understanding by emancipatory forces, of both the salariat, the > precariat, and progressive entrepreneurial groups, of the importance of > integrating the commons as a programmatic element in their struggles, and > their proposals. We will probably stick to this bias towards the > constructive side of the equation, tempered by a full awareness that this > is by itself insuffient, and requires the kind of understanding of > struggle, and its attendant strategies, as provided by Foti. > > In conclusion, Foti's enduring quality is to have worked out > systematically, what the conflict part of the equation entails, and that is > a very important achievement. Bearing in mind what we think is missing in > this book, there is much to be learned, and I believe the different > perspectives and different weaknesses in the approaches of people like Foti > and the P2P Foundation (and other) commons-centric approaches, there is > room for a lot of convergence and mutual enrichment." > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > > > -- > > 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/ > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > 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/ > > -- 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
