Message 04252 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04171 Message: 10/40 L3 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

[ox-en] Re: [ox-en]Re: [ox-en] Re: Material peer production (Part 0: Traits of PeerProduction)





On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:51:16 [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], Dmytri Kleiner <dk telekommunisten.net>
wrote:

   Where things are not commons, they generally matter as  _possession_
   (something that can be used), not as _property_ (something that can
    be sold).

[...]

I strongly agree with these points.

Actually, just a point of clarification on my agreement with this point. I
agree that 
possession matters in peer-production, and that property does not (as a
commons is mutual
property). 

I disagree with the the definition of property "as something that can be
sold."

The definitive aspect of "property" is that can owned even when not
possessed, property is 
"control at a distance." This is the control required by Capitalism in
order to own the
instruments of production being employed by direct-producers (who obviously
have possession).

And it is this feature of property, that it must be controllable at a
distance in order to 
appropriate the productive output of the direct-producers, which requires
the monopoly
on violence that manifests as the State .


-- 
Dmytri Kleiner
editing text files since 1981

http://www.telekommunisten.net


_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de



Thread: oxenT04171 Message: 10/40 L3 [In index]
Message 04252 [Homepage] [Navigation]