Message 05903 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT05903 Message: 1/2 L0 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Visions of a full-scale peer production (was: Re: [ox-en] Re: Fundamental text by StefanMn and StefanMz - Part 3)



Hi Raoul and all!

15 months (478 days) ago Raoul wrote:
Since this is a little big long, you may find a printer-friendly version at
http://dorax.club.fr/080616_on_fund_text.rtf

@Raoul: Thank you for you great comment. I largely agree with
StefanMz' reply so don't feel the need for an own. Especially I love
it how you show the contradictions in my own thinking over time by
pulling out older quotes from me :-) . I'd call my contradictions over
time learning ;-) .

However, there was one chapter which I think should be discussed
further. Because it is nicely separated from the rest I consciously
broke the thread starting a new one. I also quote large parts of your
text first and then comment on a few parts.

2 - Can we imagine what could be peer material production?

Part 3 of the text reads:
"Today it is hard to see how material production can be organized
according to the logic of information goods...  It is perfectly
possible that in a dominance or restructuring step the problem on
how to embed material production in the peer production mode of
production is on a basis which can not be imagined today."

Maybe that statement is a consequence of the doubts about the
possibility of making common material goods non-rival. In any case,
I think it is far from obvious. Of course we cannot imagine the
concrete details or even important aspects of such a mode of
production, but we can imagine what a general framework could be.
[...]
We can imagine some general aspects of what could be the cycle of
material production, that is including the distribution and
consumption aspects (I'll come back later on that inclusion)
according to peer production principles. Since production is
orientated exclusively towards the satisfaction of human
needs/desires (instead of profit) and the final user is the source
of innovation, lets start by "the end", when the user gets the
product.

For most of commonly needed products, we could imagine sorts of
"super-markets" (we should say "super non-markets") where goods are
free/gratis. These might also be Internet sites. The nature and
quantities of the products taken (instead of bought) would be
instantaneously registered and the data sent by Internet to centers
at different levels (villages, local, regional, worldwide).

That data would be permanently processed at different levels by a
set of softwares in order to generate a list of consumption
requirements, including as much information as possible:
geographical localization, quantity, qualities, etc. The softwares
would be constantly developed and improved integrating the
final-user desires, systematically collected, elaborated, processed
at all levels. That list would be made available to anyone in the
planet, giving an instantaneous and permanent list of all the common
consumption "itches" that humans "need to scratch".

On the productive side, any center of production would thus have a
real and large choice to decide what it prefers to produce, having
the security that its product will be useful and used/consumed. It
could also make propositions of new solutions to present or future
needs/desires.

Every production center, in his turn, would express permanently its
needs in order to realize its projects and, as for consumption,
through Internet, these would be instantaneously collected,
processed and put at public use. 

These needs/desires include raw material, machines and, of course,
human work (not labor).  Raw material and machines needs would be
processed as the consumption "itches" and put at disposal of the
centers of production. Human work needs would also be permanently
and instantaneously put at disposal of all human beings. Any person
wishing to participate in social production has thus the possibility
to choose what she wants to do, or something close to it, as in Free
Software. (voluntary self-aggregation).

At that level, the first necessity to create a peer society is the
capacity to transform any productive task in a pleasure for the
person who does it. (Pleasure does not exclude "effort": playing
soccer is exhausting, for example). Automation is here a key element
in order to eliminate or transform what today are repulsive tasks.
As producers are  the "end users" of the means and ways of
production, they should be the permanent masters of innovation at
that level, orientated towards Selbsentfaltung development. 

Even if many questions remain open, as the distribution on goods
which can not be made abundant or "governance" systems, for example,
some fundamental aspects of what could be the application of peer
production principles to the material sphere can be seriously
imagined, and their superiority to capitalist ones easily
demonstrated.

One may object that, even if such a vision may seem coherent and
materially feasible, it does not say what would be the transition to
that full-developed peer society. That is true. But, if you want to
imagine a transition you need to know from where to where it goes.
If you don't have any idea about the end of it (or at least a very
advanced point), you cannot even think it.

The old formula: "From each according to his ability, to each
according to his needs/desires" may summarize what a full-developed
peer society should be based on, since it also summarizes what the
peer production principles are. Today we can and must give to that
abstract goal a more concrete image.

Thank you for this vision. Indeed it is a very great vision worth
spelling out in more detail. And I share that it is about time to
create a more concrete image - see the drawing board initiative.

What came to my mind when reading this was a comparison with the plan
based economies in the states of the so-called real socialism. And
also a comparison with market based economies would be interesting. I
think it would be interesting to create such a comparison in detail.

Now for some comments.

For most of commonly needed products, we could imagine sorts of
"super-markets" (we should say "super non-markets") where goods are
free/gratis.

In German we once had the nice word play of the "kassenlose
Gesellschaft" (society without cash desks) instead of the "klassenlose
Gesellschaft" (classless society). Unfortunately this doesn't work in
English :-( .

These might also be Internet sites. The nature and
quantities of the products taken (instead of bought) would be
instantaneously registered and the data sent by Internet to centers
at different levels (villages, local, regional, worldwide).

Technically you could solve this in various ways.

The important point is that consumption is registered at the point of
distribution. That is a very fine-granular method of gathering this
data. In fact nowadays it is probably common in shops where the cash
desk recognizes exactly the product you are just buying.

In fact this is a sort of real-time gathering of data which was not
available to the plan economies. They had to base their plan on the
a-posteriori data.

That data would be permanently processed at different levels by a
set of softwares in order to generate a list of consumption
requirements, including as much information as possible:
geographical localization, quantity, qualities, etc. The softwares
would be constantly developed and improved integrating the
final-user desires, systematically collected, elaborated, processed
at all levels. That list would be made available to anyone in the
planet, giving an instantaneous and permanent list of all the common
consumption "itches" that humans "need to scratch".

Such an overview would certainly by useful. In fact with the raw data
you can make lots of evaluations of all kinds.

On the productive side, any center of production would thus have a
real and large choice to decide what it prefers to produce, having
the security that its product will be useful and used/consumed. It
could also make propositions of new solutions to present or future
needs/desires.

Every production center, in his turn, would express permanently its
needs in order to realize its projects and, as for consumption,
through Internet, these would be instantaneously collected,
processed and put at public use. 

You could even go one step further. If you know the "productive input"
required to produce each product you can recursively calculate the
total "productive input" required for a single end consumer product.

These needs/desires include raw material, machines and, of course,
human work (not labor).  Raw material and machines needs would be
processed as the consumption "itches" and put at disposal of the
centers of production. Human work needs would also be permanently
and instantaneously put at disposal of all human beings. Any person
wishing to participate in social production has thus the possibility
to choose what she wants to do, or something close to it, as in Free
Software. (voluntary self-aggregation).

Here is a big difference to Christian's vision which requires people
to choose. Of course I prefer your vision :-) .

And seeing it that way the urge of humans to abolish work can be used
far better: If you look at these needs you have a strong urge to
automate away these needs or at least make them pleasant. I think it
is very important to release this power!

One may object that, even if such a vision may seem coherent and
materially feasible, it does not say what would be the transition to
that full-developed peer society. That is true. But, if you want to
imagine a transition you need to know from where to where it goes.
If you don't have any idea about the end of it (or at least a very
advanced point), you cannot even think it.

Very important!


						Grüße

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



Thread: oxenT05903 Message: 1/2 L0 [In index]
Message 05903 [Homepage] [Navigation]