Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox] Re: Oekonux and politics
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:57:35 +0200
Hi FranzS, lists!
Yesterday franz schaefer wrote:
there is much confusion about the "left" at seems a lot of people have
different definition of what this word means.
Actually I don't think so. Most people reacted as if they have at
least a very similar concept of the left as me. To me it seems there
are "only" different opinions about how Oekonux should deal with this
concept in showcases like its conference.
But nonetheless we can really stop that. My opinion is, that in the
showcases I described in my theses Oekonux should maintain an
independent shape because that is important to keep the picture of an
open platform. If you read the mail about the license question in the
kernel I just sent to the German list you will have an idea of what I
mean. At the moment we have some support in the Free Software
community - which is really not self-evident. This support is vital
for Oekonux and IMHO it could be more. Putting this support at stake
is IMHO wanting to kill Oekonux. As I explained this applies to people
from other non-leftists areas similarly.
never said that oekonux should prominently wear the lable "left".
Good. I'd add it should prominently wear the labels "independent" and
"open" (which must not be confused with "anything-goes").
thing that it has to be aware off: in the definition that people commonly
have for "left" oekonux will fit in (as soon as they know about it).
I'm not so sure about this.
I remember well how the OHA discussion started more than 1 1/2 year
ago. I dared to cite a systematic sociologist. Have I been bashed on
the German lists! From the start there were all kinds of suspicions
against me and my intentions. If there is one important debate on
Oekonux which may receive the label "closed-minded" then it is this
one. IMHO it is not by chance that this is on a classical topic of the
I think this has changed a bit now but there is still *a lot* of
scepticism only to admit other ways of thinking about
OrganizationDominionAnarchism than the traditional left (may be more
the anarchist currents).
At least I'm sure other political currents could easily identify with
some of the things I said. Actually *this* is what I think makes
Oekonux an open project instead of a left one. In a left project of
the size of Oekonux I would not have dared to even pose the question.
There are other aspects also. IMHO the developers of Free Software
share some features with entrepreneurs. When I say Free Software
transcends capitalism then this is one of the aspects of this
transcending. This aspect, however, is something which traditionally
is valued far more by liberal positions. You can continue this list.
However, I believe there is a misconception of what social fora all over
the world are about. Especially in Germany their deliberate pluralism was
attacked for its "trans-left" character by keepers of the holy marxist
This might be the case. Their topics are very traditional, however.
<disclaimer> This does *not* mean these topics are uninteresting. They
are just not Oekonux topics. Oekonux does not cover the whole world
and IMHO it would be a mistake to even try that (at least for the
foreseeable future - which may be different tomorrow ;-) ). Oekonux
has a topic and IMHO it should stick to that. </disclaimer>
here we are at the core of the problem: as i and others argue: when the
topic is "the basis for a new society" then the "whole world" is to some
degree the topic. take one random topic that you labled as "traditional
left" and then think for a second if oekonux theory could be applicable
there... i am sure you will come up with something.
Indeed: Oekonux theory does not apply.
Why think about financial markets when the GPL society does not have
exchange as a basis? For Oekonux this is a completely void question.
Why think about war when in the GPL society there is no more need for
states which wage war and people do not need to fight any longer for
resources? For Oekonux this is also a rather void question.
You can continue this list.
As I stated above: These are all important questions if you build
dams. If you build dams you need to know how to move earth in high
quantities and make it as hard as possible, compute all the angels as
good as possible and so on. The very most of these questions are
completely meaningless when you want to build ships.
For sure there are many people in the Oekonux project which also have
an interest in building dams. No problem. There are numerous
opportunities in this world to think about this and do something about
this. And we have [chox] where all these things can be debated in a
special environment in the Oekonux realm.
others will come up with
even more. people actually working in the field will come up with even more.
I'm starting repeating myself: This already happens here. It's just
not the fields you have in mind.
the application of the theory to all this fields is what i am talking
about with the word "practice". and this kind of practice could push the
Graham always claims that Oekonux to a high degree is already working
after the principles it claims to have found. So if you want you can
see the whole Oekonux project as the practice to its own theory.
so you are talking about the kind of contacts like "organisation A announced
to support organisation B". the kind of contact that you declared obsolete
in the paragraph above? no. we do not need this kind of contact. what it
nees is that people mingle... do cooperation on a personal level and not
just send some official speaker. this is why i wanted the oekonux at the
social forum in the first place..
I'm wonder whether I should become bored or angry.
Until now Oekonux *never* sent an official speaker somewhere. How
should this work? Invitations of Oekonux such as yours go to
individual people or directly to [pox]. If someone has time and energy
enough to accept the invitation then it happens - otherwise it
doesn't. Simply as that. This is cooperation on a personal level -
In the contrary: If we would have put the Oekonux conference to the
ASF a cooperation on an organizational level would have replaced and
overlayed this personal cooperation. If you decide to make the ASF at
the same time as the Oekonux conference you may prevent this personal
cooperation to some degree - in both directions I may add. Since
Oekonux decided long ago about the date of the conference as well as
the place it should take place it is you who is preventing personal
Once and for all: You are free to invite Oekonux to the ASF. If
someone from Oekonux wants to do something there - good. What this
someone does exactly can hardly be determined here. If you, however,
say: If the Oekonux conference does not want to be part of the ASF
then Oekonux should not happen at all at the ASF then simply do not
I find the second position absolutely arrogant but frankly: That is
what I'm used to from the traditional left: If you do not comply
completely then you are not our friend.
Mit Freien Grüßen