Re: [ox-en] Digital Utopianism
- From: crox iac-research.ch (Christoph Reuss)
- Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:08:35 +0100
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
Christoph Reuss wrote:
Dmytri Kleiner quoted and wrote:
Oekonux imagines that we can help the robbed without costing the robbers!
No, I think you misinterpret that quote. Simply exchanging roles by
letting the formerly oppressed-ones rule (and oppress) the former
oppressors is not a solution, as it perpetuates the conflict itself. A
solution needs to take into account everybody.
I think you misinterpret both Dmytri and me. Who suggested that "simply
exchanging roles" was the goal? The goal of P/P is certainly not that
producers should become predators. AFAIK, "simply exchanging roles" is
not the goal of ANY class dichotomy. It would be a contradiction, because
every dichotomy declares one class as negative, not to be converted to,
but to be abolished as such. Workers becoming apparatchiks may have been
the practical outcome in some cases, but (hopefully) not the theoretical
goal of class struggle.
This sums up very well also why the Producer/Predator debate on Oekonux
was doomed to fail. The robbers must be pleased.
I don't agree on that one, either (as you may remember). The whole
Producer / Predator dichotomy was rather shallow, and didn't allow to
transcendent definitions of oppressor and oppressed (or whatever
vocabulary you choose).
Why would it be necessary to transcend that? (beyond acknowledging that
every individual has components of both, albeit to very different degrees,
which P/P does acknowledge, thereby sort of transcending it...)
How do you see the relationship between Oekonux and the OpenSource movement?
It seems to me Oekonux is as diverse and heterogeneous as is the bunch
of people somehow involved into FLOSS.
This doesn't answer the question about the relationship between the two
Contact: projekt oekonux.de