Message 05469 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT05272 Message: 36/96 L6 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: The nature of apple trees (was: Re: [ox-en] apples and moonfruits)

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
what is p2p insertion in these political program?


I have not done yet any serious work at integrating a firm political
program, but am collating various proposals at

Here are the KEY Principles which I think should inspire a p2p approach to

Appendix 3: A legal and regulatory framework for the participative society

1) In the immaterial sphere

a)      diminish artificial scarcities in the informational field so that
immense social value can be created, and immaterial conviviality can replace
the deadly logic of material accumulation.

b)      Public authorities adapt Partner State policies that enable and
empower the direct creation of social value

2)  In the sphere of materiality

a) introduce true costing in the material field so that the market no longer
creates negative exernalities in the natural environment; dissociate the
marketplace from the system of infinite material growth

3) create more distributed access to the means of production (peer-based
financing, distributed energy production, etc…) so that the peer to peer
dynamic can be introduced in the sphere of material production as well.

and HERE is a more detailed set of theses:

Appendix 1: *: Summary theses on the emergence of the peer to peer
civilization and political economy*

1. Our current world system is marked by a profoundly counterproductive
logic of social organization:

a) it is based on a false concept of abundance in the limited material
world; it has created a system based on infinite growth, within the confines
of finite resources

b) it is based on a false concept of scarcity in the infinite immaterial
world; instead of allowing continuous experimental social innovation, it
purposely erects legal and technical barriers to disallow free cooperation
through copyright, patents, etc…

2. Therefore, the number one priority for a sustainable civilization is
overturning these principles into their opposite:

a) we need to base our physical economy on a recognition of the finitude of
natural resources, and achieve a sustainable steady-state economy

b) we need to facilitate free and creative cooperation and lower the
barriers to such exchange by reforming the copyright and other restrictive

3. Hierarchy, markets, and even democracy are means to allocate scarce
resources through authority, pricing, and negotiation; they are not
necessary in the realm of the creation and free exchange of immaterial
value, which will be marked by bottom-up forms of peer governance

4. Markets, as means to to manage scarce physical resources, are but one of
the means to achieve such allocation, and need to be divorced from the idea
of capitalism, which is a system of infinite growth.

5. The creation of immaterial value, which again needs to become dominant in
a post-material world which recognized the finiteness of the material world,
will be characterized by the further emergence of non-reciprocal peer

6. Peer production is a more productive system for producing immaterial
value than the for-profit mode, and in cases of the asymmetric competition
between for-profit companies and for-benefit institutions and communities,
the latter will tend to emerge

7. Peer production produces more social happiness, because 1) it is based on
the highest from of individual motivation, nl. intrinsic positive
motivation; 2) it is based on the highest form of collective cooperation,
nl. synergestic cooperation characterized by four wins (both the
participants in the exchange , the community, and the universal system)

8. Peer governance, the bottom-up mode of participative decision-making
(only those who participate get to decide) which emerges in peer projects is
politically more productive than representative democracy, and will tend to
emerge in immaterial production. However, it can only replace representative
modes in the realm of non-scarcity, and will be a complementary mode in the
political realm. What we need are political structures that create a
convergence between individual and collective interests.

9. Peer property, the legal and institutional means for the social
reproduction of peer projects, are inherently more distributive than both
public property and private exclusionary property; it will tend to become
the dominant form in the world of immaterial production (which includes all
design of physical products).

10. Peer to peer as the relational dynamic of free agents in distributed
networks will likely become the dominant mode for the production of
immaterial value; however, in the realm of scarcity, the peer to peer logic
will tend to reinforce peer-informed market modes, such as fair trade; and
in the realm of the scarcity based politics of group negotiation, will lead
to reinforce the peer-informed state forms such as multistakeholdership
forms of governance.

11. The role of the state must evolve from the protector of dominant
interests and arbiter between public regulation and privatized corporate
modes (an eternal and improductive binary choice), towards being the arbiter
between a triarchy of public regulation, private markets, and the direct
social production of value. In the latter capacity, it must evolve from the
welfare state model, to the partner state model, as involved in enabling and
empowering the direct social creation of value.

12. The world of physical production needs to be characterized by:

a) sustainable forms of peer-informed market exchange (fair trade, etc..);

b) reinvigorated forms of reciprocity and the gift economy;

c) a world based on social innovation and open designs, available for
physical production anywhere in the world.

13. The best guarantor of the spread of the peer to peer logic to the world
of physical production, is the distribution of everything, i.e. of the means
of production in the hands of individuals and communities, so that they can
engage in social cooperation. While the immaterial world will be
characterized by a peer to peer logic on non-reciprocal generalized
exchange, the peer informed world of material exchange will be characterized
by evolving forms of reciprocity and neutral exchange.

14. We need to move from empty and ineffective anti-capitalist rhetoric, to
constructive post-capitalist construction. Peer to peer theory, as the
attempt to create a theory to understand peer production, governance and
property, and the attendant paradigms and value systems of the open/free,
participatory, and commons oriented social movements, is in a unique
position to marry the priority values of the right, individual freedom, and
the priority values of the left, equality. In the peer to peer logic, one is
the condition of the other, and cooperative individualism marries
equipotentiality and freedom in a context of non-coercion.

15. We need to become politically sensitive to invisible architectures of
power. In distributed systems, where there is no overt hierarchy, power is a
function of design. One such system, perhaps the most important of all, is
the monetary system, whose interest-bearing design requires the market to be
linked to a system of infinite growth, and this link needs to be broken. A
global reform of the monetary system, or the spread of new means of direct
social production of money, are necessary conditions for such a break.

16. This is the truth of the peer to peer logical of social relationships:
1) together we have everything; 2) together we know everything. Therefore,
the conditions for dignified material and spiritual living are in our hands,
bound with our capacity to relate and form community. The emancipatory peer
to peer theory does not offer new solutions for global problems, but most of
all new means to tackle them, by relying on the collective intelligence of
humankind. We are witnessing the rapid emergence of peer to peer toolboxes
for the virtual world, and facilitation techniques of the physical world of
face to face encounters, both are needed to assist in the necessary change
of consciousness that needs to be midwifed. It is up to us to use them.

17. At present, the world of corporate production is benefiting from the
positive externalities of widespread social innovation (innovation as an
emerging property of the network itself, not as an internal characteristic
of any entity), but there is no return mecachism, leading to the problem of
precarity. Now that the productivity of the social is beyond doubt, we need
solutions that allow the state and for-profit corporation to create return
mechanisms, such as forms of income that are no longer directly related to
the private production of wealth, but reward the social production of

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Diego Saravia <diego.saravia>wrote:

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
is socialism with free markets  possible/good ?

no exploitation (no capitalism)
participative democracy
no monopoly (at least private ones)
no herency/legacy (I dont know english word)
al capital dividends go to state

what is p2p insertion in these political program?

Just a few quick thoughts :
Maybe because many can seem to stop trying to get more of it ?
If we used apples instead, then maybe it would be easier to realize that,
enough is enough !^^!

“Only when the last tree has been felled, the last river poisoned and
the last fish caught, man will know, that he cannot eat money”.
                                             # Old Indian Chief (unknown)

I don't see anything better to replace money as of now, but there are
definitely problems
in regards to money don't you think ?

Has anyone seen the document "let's make money." ?

the problem of capitalism is exploitation, "money trickery" and "money
extrange loops" are part of that problem, but you can have other money
in other forms of exploitation or cooperation

cant agree more. i defenitely can do without capitalism (as an attitude
exploit others to make more and more money); but while exchange and
certainly have their drawbacks, it has contributed also quite a bit
development of mankind. imv, money is a very pragmatic and effective
get whats needed and it depends on the people what and how the tool is

im wondering on basis of what real world evidence one can be so 200%
that a world without money and exchange is more effective, desireable
better?!? on basis of wikipedia (it exists for how many months now and
quite actively calling for financial suppport?) or open source software
(e.g. drop the financial support of the googles, ibms und suns and what
useful piece of software is left?!?)

for me its seems a more logical way to modify and improve an existing
exchange based system, which has drawbacks, but also proven itself over
and contributed to overall progress of mankind.

btw, ive been supporting os and cc over the past 7+ years, have
lots of time for and energy into it and most certainly want them to

Contact: projekt

  Amine Chadly
Contact: projekt

Diego Saravia

[2 text/html]
Contact: projekt

Working at - -

Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:  - -

Monitor updates at

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,

[2 text/html]
Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT05272 Message: 36/96 L6 [In index]
Message 05469 [Homepage] [Navigation]