Message 04321 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04265 Message: 52/69 L4 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: Oekonux and class struggle (was: Re: [ox-en] The Ideology of Free Culture and the Grammar of Sabotage)

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Hi Stefan,

I'm curious to know more about your concept that class struggle does not

Certainly I would agree that the old socialist way of framing politics is no
longer operational. But that doesn't change that people have different
sociological and structural positions in a mode of production, not just in
capitalism, but before and presumable, for a long time after.

For example, I pay attention to social tensions within emerging peer
production models, here at

That does not mean of course advocating a position of class hate, but rather
to simply recognize that platform users and platform owners have both
converging and diverging interest. For example, what I call the netarchical
platform owners have a common interest in promoting certain open models,
while at the same time they seek partial enclosure to create market
scarcities. Knowing this, i.e. having a certain type of insight into social
or 'class' dynamics, helps define more optimal strategies.

Personally, I have been an entrepreneur, and while I deplore the systemic
destructive aspects of the current economic system, I would not at all focus
on branding any particular person as evil, merely because he/she is an
entrepreneur, especially because positions have become so fluid in our
contemporary format (many workers own shares, many knowledge workers switch
positions several times over their lifetimes, etc...). So I have a definite
predilection for attitudes which seek for common interests in open/free,
participatory, commons oriented developments, independent of social

Curious to hear your views on this,


On Feb 5, 2008 3:42 AM, Stefan Merten <smerten> wrote:

Hash: SHA1

Hi Dmytri!

The post I'm replying to is again one of your bad pieces. Other posts
showed you can do better which I - and probably all here - really
value. Please try to hold your horses before sending a reply. AND
looses nothing if your heat gets out to the public one or two days

Last week (7 days ago) Dmytri Kleiner wrote:
A refusal to engage with the challenges of creating peer production is
a service to the movement, but a disservice.

May be the challenges people here see are just different from yours.
Who are you that you claim definition power?

That is the fact that oekonux
& co can not face and why they must brand all critical voices as being
unhelpful, rude, etc,

Your postings show that you know the difference between rude and
friendly very well.

and surround themselves in a fog of insulating
fallacies that allow false beliefs to be retained dispute clear and
repeated refutation.

May be it's better that each one of us keeps there own fallacies and
you stop whining about the stupid ignorance of the people here?

It is becoming more and more clear to me that oekonux is about wide-eyed
and vague boosterism and delusion

So you should probably better leave before you get infected...

and not a genuine engagement with the
facts of class struggle

Well, Oekonux has nothing to do with class struggle in any meaning I
know of. If that is fundamental to you you'd better leave. And I think
it's at best a waste of time to harass peer production with your
outdated concepts.

and the real-world challenges of building a
commons-based movement within the context of a violent rentier society.

This is quite unfortunate.

No. It's *the* chance for a real change.

Class struggle is deeply entangled and intertwined with capitalism.
Your point that the workers should make profit and not some big
capital shows this perfectly: You are absolutely thinking in the terms
of the capitalist system and you just want to make things more just -
whereby justice comes from your definition. On exactly that base class
struggle has been fought for 200 years - and failed. If there were any
questions about this they have been answered in 1989. I can not see
what has changed today that this outdated concept now suddenly should
become more successful.

And IMHO this is for a reason: You can not fight a mode of production
with a slightly modified version of it. This is what happened in "real
socialism" and failed. You need a completely new mode of production
which in many respects operates *beyond* the old terms - as a
synthesis rather than the anti-thesis of class struggle.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <>

Contact: projekt

The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer

Wiki and Encyclopedia, at; Blog, at; Newsletter, at

Basic essay at; interview at

KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,

[2 text/html]
Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT04265 Message: 52/69 L4 [In index]
Message 04321 [Homepage] [Navigation]