Issue 86 focuses on economic issues. Of particular
interest is a typology of economic development by Wim Nusselder, but
see also the entries on complementary currencies and on a Corporate
Digital Commons initiative. How do all these elements fit together
with my own P2P Theory? For that, see the editorial which provides for
a broader framework of intersubjective modes of production and
exchange where P2P is an important, but not the sole element.
ISSUE 86, Table of Contents
P/I:
PLURALITIES/INTEGRATION
A newsletter about participation in multiple worlds, multiple visions,
but one humanity ; a monitor of P2P developments
-
Archive at http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
Compiler: Michel Bauwens, michelsub2003@yahoo.com ; P/I is an
emanation of the FOUNDATION FOR PEER TO PEER ALTERNATIVES
ISSUE 86: September 15,
2005: Why this newsletter? Why the title?
The title refers to the enduring tension between a multitude
of worldviews, and their eventual integration. For a full explanation of the
rationale behind the newsletter, see issues 1 and 2. An alternative name could
be "P2P and Empire" because in practice I mostly focus on a analysis of the
crisis of the current system on the one hand, and the emergence of a more
participative worldview, which I call "peer to peer", on the other.
Preferred themes: the
networked society, cognitive capitalism, Empire and its
discontents,emancipatory processes among the `multitudes' and the possible
emergence of a peer to peer civilization, truth-building as a collective and
`dialogical' effort, the challenges posed to traditional religions and humanism
by spiritual P2P experiencing and technological transhumanism.
The P2P meme
map (i.e. related, but not necessarily completely similar terms: peer to peer,
many to many, edge to edge development partnerships, distributed networks,
egalitarian networks, protocollary power, user innovation communities, social
networking, smart mobs, filesharing, grid computing, theWriteable Web (or
Read-Write Web), FLOSS i.e. Free, Libre, Open Source Software, CPBB or
Commons-Based Peer Production, the alterglobalisation movement as a network of
networks, free software and open sources as a 'third mode of production', the
coordination format, non-representationality, the rhizome, parallel and
distributed computing, object oriented programming, object-oriented sociality,
the Information Commons, the GPL Society, the hacker ethic, folksonomies and
tags, the long tail, Napsterization, cooperation studies, collective
intelligence, synergetics, wirearchy, peer governance, common-property regimes
If you like this project, please suggest any
interesting links! We would be very happy to list you as a contributor. Thanks
to John Dermaut, Christophe Lestavel, John L. Petersen, George Dafermos, Jim
Hightower, David Spillane, Larry Penslinger, Nik Baerten, Maurice Nsabimana,
Tattoo Mabonzo, Philippe Van Nedervelde, Pascal Houba, Jaap van Till, and the
Multitudes mailing list for regular suggestions.
Recommended: JamesBurke of Lifesized, http://lifesized.blogspot.com/; Kris
Roose, at http://www.noosphere.cc/
How to subscribe: Write to compiler Michel
Bauwens at michel@noosphere.cc or at
michelsub2003@yahoo.com.
QUOTES
- CNN uses citizen journalism as
complements to its coverage
-
On
'preceptorships' in American psychiatry
"American
Psychiatric Association (APA) -- Stephen S. Sharfstein, MD of Baltimore --
officially
admits that the APA's current model has become the "bio-bio-bio model"
dominated
by a "pill and an appointment. "If we are seen as mere pill pushers
and employees of the pharmaceutical industry, our credibility as a profession
is compromised." He especially denounces a growing practice where drug
sales representatives actually sit on on meetings between psychiatrists and
their patients to give advice. The marketing trick is called
"preceptorships."
(source:
cited in MindFreedom newsletter, from http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/40/16/3
)
-
Katrina drives
viewers online
"Hurricane Katrina not only drove people away from
the Gulf Coast, it drove millions online.
According to PaidContent.org CNN had 10 million unique visitors and 9
million video downloads on Sunday. Compare that to their impressive 2.3 million primetime cable viewers that day."
Source: http://www.hypergene.net/blog/weblog.php?id=P292
CONTENTS
The last two months did
not allow for a lot of time to rewrite ameliorate the fundamentals of the
present version of P2P theory. Nevertheless, for those who are interested, this
is the larger framework in which I am thinking:
The four sections below
are based on Alan's Fiske fourfold typology of intersubjective relationships. I
summarise the relative place of P2P within that larger scheme under the phrase
of "For a Commons-based society within a reformed market and a reformed
state". This leaves the out the aspects of reciprocity-based cooperative
production covered by gift economy theory, but can be understood, in this
context, to be a part of the Commons.
-
Market
theory: how can we
think either about a 'market without capitalism' or at the very least about a
'deeply socialized capitalism'. Since I believe that the present format of
neoliberal capitalism is unsustainable both in natural and psychic resources,
and given that some form of market is both acceptable and necessary, how do we
formulate a new market theory? A market within society has almost always
existed, and is acceptable, but what is not acceptable is a 'market society',
where everything is determined through a market.
-
Hierarchy
theory or state theory:
This covers both the state, issues of leadership, and in particular corporate
leadership. How do we achieve forms of leadership which promote participation
rather than aim at the extension of their own monopolies? I should be looking
in particular to theories and practices of servant leadership. How do we get a
state that is not beholden to monopolistic corporate interests, but can offer a
fair arbitrage, in the public interest, between market-, gift economy, and
P2P-based alternatives and that minimizes the bureaucratic logic. One of the
weaknesses of the contemporary left, and strengths of the right, is that it's
drive for deregulation answers to a deep-seated desire to be freed from
bureaucracy; a need that can't be answered by simply defending public
authority. How do we achieve a 'servant state' (as per analogy to servant
leadership), which is subordinated to civil society, not to private monopolies?
How to develop peer governance and multistakeholdership? How do we achieve new
redistribution mechanisms such as the universal wage?
-
Gift
Economy theory: how
can we reinstate/reinforce material production based on reciprocity and
cooperative relationships. The key here is to investigate 'complementary
currencies' and cooperative production generally.
-
P2P
Theory: Along with
complementary currencies, the key enabler that would free a maximum amount of
people to directly produce use value (rather than exchange value), is the
universal wage. I am therefore increasingly seeing both complementary
currencies and the universal income as key enablers for a P2P economy. While
complementary currencies are the outcome of autonomous social processes, the
universal income is directly dependent on relative political power and hence
the existence of a social movement in favour of it. In my opinion, monetary
reform and complementary currencies belong to gift economy theory, while the
universal income, which does not require any reciprocity, as it is
unconditional and de-linked from work, is a Peer to Peer format.
My plan is the
following: to finish the present version of the manuscript in October, November
at the latest; to take a period of 2-3 months of 'free reading'; to resume the
writing of a second manuscript starting in March/April, which will focus on
exploring complementary currencies and the universal wage, as it relates and
complements P2P processes. Any body who can assist in this research is more
than welcome.
The ultimate aim is to
arrive at a new and coherent formulation of a theory of social and political
change, adapted to our epoch, that has a chance of being realized (i.e. a 'Real
Utopia', as defined by Erik Olin Wright), not necessarily tomorrow, but in the
coming 3 to 5 decades. P2P Theory can only be a fraction of such a theory,
which should encompass strategies for reforming the state and the market, as
well as on the promotion of reciprocity based schemes.
Jaap van Til has converted the very latest version of my
manuscript, one that is not yet online, in PDF, making it much more readable,
and 190 pages long. I recommend this version for its extensive collection of
valuable endnotes, which function as a true record of our times, and the
emergence of P2P in many social fields. Feel free to post it anywhere, but I
would appreciate if you would let me know.
I have also finished the first French-language essay on P2P.
If you have difficulties in English, and want direct access in your native
language to the P2P ideas, then this essay is available for email distribution.
It is about twenty pages long.
-
Latest online version of the essay is still located at http://integralvisioning.org/article.php?story=p2ptheory1
-
I've written a P2P essay for a new book on the world
information society (WSIS conference), edited by Jan Servaes, it will be
printed in 3 weeks, see at http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/ppbooks.php?isbn=1841501336
-
My entry for the upcoming Re-Activism conference, on the 'political
economy of peer production' in Budapest
on mid-October at http://mokk.bme.hu/centre/conferences/reactivism/submissions/bouwens
-
A longish and well-done
summary of the main P2P ideas, by a blogger at http://innovationcommons.blogspot.com/2005/08/p2p-and-human-evolution.html
P2P
BOOK OF THE WEEK
As a reminder, the P2P-related book on The Play Ethic, a companion to
Pekka Himanen's Hacker Ethic, is out in paperback. A short interview about the
work is here at http://www.odemagazine.com/article.php?aID=4132. Check out his websites:
www.theplayethic.com and www.patkane.com
. The author is Pat Kane.
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68403,00.html?
I
have little technical understanding of the following, but it seems to say that
the promise of Java, i.e. "making the network the computer" and
becoming independent of operation systems, is in process of being finally
realized. Any comments on this would be welcome.
"Software experts say recent innovations in web design are
ushering in a new era for internet-based software applications, some of the
best of which already rival desktop applications in power and efficiency.
That's giving software developers a wide open platform for creating new
programs that have no relation to the underlying operating system that runs a
PC.
Evidence of this evolution has been popping up everywhere in
recent months, with examples that include Google's online map rendering
software and its Gmail service, Amazon's A9 search engine and
NetFlix's DVD rental platform.
All highlight a dramatic rethinking of web applications, using a programming
technique dubbed AJAX (for asynchronous
JavaScript and XML) that significantly improves how web pages interact with
data, for the first time rivaling programs that run natively on the
desktop."
A more technical
explanation of Ajax,
at http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/8/22/182159/251
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,68361,00.html?
"There's more to online social networks than matchmaking,
and South Korea's
Cyworld is showing the way. The
online service blends homepage building and social networking with a host of
other online activities, including Sims-like role-playing. Owned
by South Korea's
SK Communications, Cyworld
is a cyberphenomenon. According to the service, Cyworld jumped from 10 million
to 13 million users in 2004. A quarter of the country's 48.2 million people
have signed up, including 90 percent of the 24- to 29-year-old age group, the company
claims.
"I was very reluctant to use Cyworld at first, very against
it," said user Charlie Shin. "I said it was just a Friendster copy.
Now, if someone were to shut down my page tomorrow, I'd have to hunt them
down." Users get their own page, a virtual living room called a minihompy
where they can create diaries, publish images, network, host legal background
music and more. Members personalize
their minihompy
with virtual objects they purchase from Cyworld, and enhance it with up to 10
tracks of background music they can buy and play for visitors. Universal Music
International sells 100,000 tracks a day though Cyworld, according to Adam
White, Universal's vice president of communications. Basic services are free, but Cyworld's
online stores accounted for 80 percent of Cyworld's $54 million revenue in
2004, selling such digital goods as virtual furniture, page backgrounds and
avatars. The service has its own
currency called dotoris
(acorns) and its own slang and social obligations.
It is highly addictive. Many users call themselves
"Cyholics," spending hours every day in Cyworld -- enough user time
to produce 3.8 billion page impressions a week. "The word Cy in
Korean means 'relationship,'" said Cyworld executive Rick Kim.
"Cyworld, therefore, literally means 'relationship world.' It underscores
our commitment to creating an environment where wholesome, friendly
relationships are created and maintained."
http://www.antenna.nl/wim.nusselder/schrijfsels/economics.htm
This is an economics based
on Robert Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance, Lila). It's fourth section contains an interesting account of
economic development, towards a 'quarternary economics'. I believe it fits in
with P2P theory, which is also about value-based production (in the sense of
associating with people with similar values, in order to create new types of
use value). Next week, I will discuss the differences in approach, but here I
focus on the elements of convergence.
Here's my 1) own short
summary, 2) followed by the extensive quote, and.3) some commentary
about 'Value and P2P'; 4) a graph which attempts to fuse my own
understanding, the fourfold intersubjective typology of Alan Page Fiske and the
'type of dependence' typology of Wim Nusselder
The primary economy is based on reciprocity, which
derives from common ancestry or lineage. It is based on families, clans, tribes
and exchange mostly operates through gifts which create further obligation. The
division of labour is minimal and most often related to gender and age. The key
question is 'to belong or not to belong'. Social groups are based and bounded
by real or symbolic lineage. Wants are defined by the community. Leadership is
in the hands of the lineage leadership. Power is associated with a natural
order (man are physically stronger, older people are wiser, etc.., some
people are blessed by the gods,...) which cannot be challenged.
The secondary economy arises together with power
monopolies which engender coercion as a means to force cooperation. We
enter the domain of class societies, and production is organized by the elite
in power, which holds together through the symbolic power which transforms
power into allegiance. Respect for power, in the form of tribute, taxes, etc..
is normative. Distribution depends on your place in this chain of symbolic
power. Wants are defined by the symbolic power with symbolic markers
monopolized. The key question is: 'to deserve power or to deserve subjection'.
Social groups are bound by allegiance to power. Leadership is political and
religious.
The tertiary economy arises with the entrepreneur and
capitalism. It is based on 'equivalent', i.e. 'fair' exchange, which is
normative. Power arises from relative productivity, relative monopoly over a
needed good, and from the wage relationship, all of which create dependence. Social
groups are loose, and wants are determined by advertising and mimetic desire.
Cooperation is no longer correlated to belonging.
The quarternary economy is based on 'ideological leaders'
which can frame common goals and common belonging and is based on membership
and contribution. Contributing to the best of one's ability to common goals is
normative and the key question becomes: to follow an existing group or to
create one's own, i.e. to convince or be convinced. Contributions to many
groups can overlap making the decision over wants a more autonomous process.
Power is dependent on the power to convince, on influence, and varies
depending on one's relative place in the different groups.
- Excerpts from Wim Nusselder:
"For most of human history political economy has been
the exclusive domain of political and religious leaders. A basic fact of
economics is, that almost anything people want can be got more easily if (more)
people co-operate. (More co-operation does not imply larger scale
organizations! The best
way of getting a lot of things is organizing people in a lot of small scale
organizations that are usually self-sufficient, but that collectively back up
each other if need be.) Leaders organize co-operation. A leader tells or shows
people what they want and how to get it, if ... they co-operate in a specified
way. For most of human history being member of the same society meant following
the same leadership.
The oldest form of economy is organized around (real or symbolic) family
relationships. Genealogy provides meaning. To belong or not to belong, that is
the question. Reciprocity is normative. You help someone else who needs help
because you are related. Receiving help strengthens the relationship
and enhances the obligation to do something in return in the future. Leadership
often correlates with age and a male gender role, because it requires building
a web of reciprocal relations with oneself as the 'spider in the web'. Older
males are in most societies in the best position to do (or have done) so.
The defining characteristics of such primary societies (e.g. nuclear families)
is that there is supposed to be no choice whether one 'belongs' or 'doesn't
belong' to a society. 'Given' characteristics decide who 'belongs' and who is
to be excluded from the benefits of 'belonging'. These benefits include access
to communal resources and sharing in the results of pooled labour. Pooling
labour and allotting roles, primarily according to age and gender, allows for
(limited) division of labor, specialization, economies of scale and satisfying some
wants that can hardly be satisfied alone (like hunting mammoths). Primary
economy can consist (simultaneously) of families (all living relatives), clans
(people whose ancestry can be traced to the same remembered ancestor), tribes
(people who trace their ancestry back to the same symbolic or
mythological/legendary ancestor), nations (people who
deduce from common history, language etc. that they must have common ancestry)
and theoretically even of humanity as a whole.
A second form of economy originates (in addition to the primary form, not
necessarily instead) wherever leaders enlarge their influence beyond those who
automatically 'belong'. They do so by monopolizing some kind of power. This
power can be of different types. It can be magical, the ability of
shamans to manipulate fear for that which is not understood. It can be
military, based on weapon technology and on the ability to mobilize and
organize people against other people. It can also be democratic, based on the
convention to let a popularity contest determine who gets for a couple of years
the law enforced right to tell others what to do (within restrictions).
Coercive relations are added to family (like) relations. Additional meaning is
provided by supposed virtues like 'nobility',
'culture' (in a strict sense) and 'civilization'. To deserve power or to
deserve subjection, that is the question. Enlarging society by those in power
by coercing extra subjects into cooperating allows for the pooling of more
resources, more division of labour, specialization, economies of scale etc. The
norm is 'fair' distribution of the costs (e.g. by taxes) and benefits of
enlarging society, i.e. distribution in proportion to virtue. Leaders recruit
the resources needed to exercise power (and mostly so from those who 'deserve'
to be taxed heaviest). They use -wherever possible- the benefits of their
exercise of power to consolidate their position by maintaining and enhancing
their power. That requires giving their subjects what they want, at least those
they depend on for their power. The defining characteristic of this second form
of economy compared to the first form is the enforcement of social boundaries
(however they are defined: geographical, ethnical etc.). 'Secondary societies'
can also have different sizes. Because of the need of leaders to monopolize
power in order to stabilize their position, the coexistence of several
overlapping secondary societies is never stable however. It is most stable if
the size of coexisting secondary societies is clearly different (e.g. local and
national) and if the type of power their leaders exercise is clearly different
(e.g. religious versus military).
The third form of economy is added by a new type of leader (not political or
religious any more): the entrepreneur. It is organized with exchange
relationships. Productivity provides additional meaning. To produce (value for
others that entitles you to remuneration) or to depend (on others for your
livelihood) that is the question. Fair dealing (equivalent exchange) is normative.
The defining characteristic of this third form of economy compared to the
second form is, that an economic leader, an entrepreneur, does not (pretend to)
lead (and organize the satisfaction of wants for) a society as a whole. The
boundaries of the social group that is led by an entrepreneur are not
clear-cut. That group normally consists of employees, but it can also contain
suppliers, customers or others that enter into exchange
relationships with the enterprise. Strong economic leaders make others dependent
on what they produce (or on the income they provide by buying other people's
labor or products). It is the inequality of the mutual dependence of exchange
partners that determines relative power over what the other can get and thus
the limits of what he/she will want. An enterprise that is the only source of
employment in a region or almost the only producer or buyer of a particular
type of goods or services has a lot of power over the wants of its (potential)
employees, customers or suppliers. Additional ways in which an entrepreneur can
make others want what he/she wants them to want are advertising and
standardization, among others. 'Tertiary societies' contain a lot of
overlapping and complementary groups organized by different economic leaders.
The boundary of such a group lies between those who are dependent but only for
a few wants and those who are not dependent at all on their leader. With the
rise of tertiary societies political economy is not the exclusive domain of
political and religious leaders any more. 'Tertiary economies' can pool even
more resources, enable more division of labour, specialization, economies of
scale etc. than secondary ones, because co-operation doesn't depend on the
ability to feel a sense of 'belonging together' with those one co-operates with
anymore.
The fourth type of economy is organized by ideological leaders. It is organized
with relations of membership and contribution. Common goals and common
interests provide additional meaning. To convince (others that your way of
reaching goals or serving interests is the best way) or to follow
others, that is the question. Contributing to the best of one's ability to
common goals and interests is normative. The defining characteristic of this
fourth form of economy compared to the earlier forms is the voluntary choice to
'belong' or 'not to belong'. Ideological leaders make their followers identify
with their group by convincing them. 'Belonging' or 'not belonging' to groups
depends on the strength of identification with their common goals and shared
interests. 'Quaternary societies' contain even more overlapping and
complementary groups. 'Belonging' to different groups at the same time is
enabled by
complex, multi-layered identities. Boundaries are even less clear-cut. They can
be determined by asking whether someone contributes or not to the common goals
and shared interests, however little.
'Quaternary economies' can pool even more resources, enable more division of
labour, specialization, economies of scale etc. than tertiary ones, because
people can participate in several different roles at the same time. One can be
a specialist in one field and in other fields a layman, who can only
follow what others propose to contribute to reaching common goals and serve
shared interests.
Our present economy is of course a mix of all these forms."
Dutch-language essay on the evolution of various forms of
power, and how the left needs a new 'grand narrative', at http://www.waterlandstichting.nl/bestanden/nusselder.pdf
-
Commentary: what can we say about value, P2P
and the new process of socialization/recognition ?
The above has motivated me
to think about 'value' in P2P', here are some very preliminary ideas.
First of all, P2P is geared to the production of use
value, without going through the intermediary of producing exchange value for a
marketplace. This relates to the kind of value as discussed in economics.
But what about the value as we understand it in the
ethical sphere? There are different ways to frame this. As explained above by
Nusselder, the very choice of a P2P project to collaborate on, is determined by
the fit between common values and personal values. Once we adhere and
contribute to a project, we derive 'value', i.e. a more meaningfull life, from
it. This value is also expressed in a more or less objective way, i.e. the
proven use value interacts with the personal value that can be derived from it,
and which is basically the match between the common and the singular, the
collective and the individual. Two criteria are important:
-
the relative
success of the project in the overall 'marketplace' of P2P projects. Is the
resulting use value used or not, and to what extent? This kind of value translates
in the relative reputation and recognition of the project as such, and the
participating individuals partake in it
-
one's relative
contribution to the project itself, eventually measured through social
accounting tools, adjudicates 'reputation' and 'recognition' within the project
-
both aspects
will be associated when the internal reputation translates in an assocation
between the persons involved, and the project
This is the Wisdom Game to which I refer to in my
manuscript (the concept was inspired by Shumpei Kumon); it is of great
importance since in a P2P environment, social recognition is no longer derived
from physical power, from financial power, but precisely from this kind of
reputation.
-
Table: The
Quarternary Economy and Peer to Peer
|
Intersubjective Mode of
Production
|
Main type of Exchange
(Fiske typology)
|
Community Type
|
Individual/collective
dynamic
(Nusselder typology)
|
|
PRIMARY ECONOMY
Gift Economy
|
Reciprocity
(Equality Matching)
|
Lineages: families, clans, tribes
|
Interdependence without autonomy
(Belonging)
|
|
SECONDARY ECONOMY
Tributary Economy
|
Coercion
(Authority Ranking)
|
Manor / Kingdom/Empire
|
Dependence without autonomy
(Subjection)
|
|
TERTIARY ECONOMY
Capitalist Economy
|
Wage relationship
(Market Pricing)
|
Entreprise / Nation-state
|
Autonomy with Dependence
(Dependence)
|
|
QUATERNARY ECONOMY
Peer to Peer
Economy
|
Peer production
(Communal Shareholding)
|
Cyber-enabled collectives
Post-national supra-regional networks
|
Autonomy with interdependence
(Influence)
|
http://uazu.net/money/lietaer.html
Excerpts from an interview
with Belgian author B. Lietaer, former director of the National Bank and now a
strong advocate of complementary currencies, through the Access Foundation of Boulder, Colorado.
I recommend in particular the passages on the system in place in Bali.
"Let's define what a currency is, because most
textbooks don't teach what money is. They only explain its functions, that is,
what money does. I define money, or currency, as an
agreement within a community to use something as a medium of exchange. It's
therefore not a thing, it's only an agreement --
like a marriage, like a political party, like a business deal. And most of the
time, it's done unconsciously. Nobody's polled about whether you want to use
dollars. We're living in this money world like fish in water, taking it
completely for granted. Now the point is: there are many new agreements being
made within communities as to the kind of medium of exchange they are willing
to accept. As I said, in Britain,
you can use frequent flier miles as currency. It's not a universal currency,
it's not legal tender, but you can go to the supermarket and buy stuff. And in
the United States,
it's just a question of time before privately issued currencies will be used to
make purchases. Even Alan Greenspan, the governor of the
Federal Reserve and the official guardian of the conventional money system,
says, "We will see a return of private currencies in the 21st century."
RD: In other words, private currencies are coming back.
How would that change the circumstances for poor people, for the Third World?
BL: I gave you that first example-a commercial loyalty
currency-only because it would be familiar to most of your readers. But in
addition to those commercial private currencies, there are now more than 4,000
communities around the world that have started their own currency for social purposes
as well.
For example, there are about 300 or 400 private currency systems
in Japan
to pay for any care for the elderly that isn't covered by the national health
insurance. They are called "fureai kippu" (caring
relationship tickets). Here's how they work: let's say that on
my street lives an elderly gentleman who is handicapped and cannot go shopping
for himself. I do the shopping for him. I help him with food
preparation. I help him with the ritual bath, which is very
important in Japan.
For this help, I get credits. I put those credits in a savings account, and
when I'm sick, I can have other people provide
such services for me. Or I can electronically send my credits to
my mother, who lives on the other side of the country, and somebody takes care
of her. Here is an agreement within a community to use as medium of payment
something other than national currencies, to solve a social problem. And it
makes it possible for hundreds of thousands of people to stay in their homes
much longer than they otherwise could. Otherwise, you'd have to put most of
these people into a home for seniors, which costs an arm and a leg to society,
and they're unhappy there. So nobody's winning. In contrast, Japan has
created a currency for elderly care.
On the Naravan Banjar system in
Bali
BL: I think it is a useful tool to solve a number of our
problems. It makes it possible to truly create a more gentle society. I spent
last summer in Bali. People are remarkably
artistic in that island. Their communities are unusually strong. They have
festivals that are totally mind-blowing, and can last a month. They're having a
good time. It's a comparatively non-violent society. And what I found
is that it isn't a simple coincidence that they have been using
a dual currency system for many centuries. All these unusual characteristics of
Bali turn out directly to be nurtured by their
dual money system. I am publishing a detailed paper on how this
mechanism works in the forthcoming issue of Reflections, the journal of the
Society of Organizational Learning at MIT.
RD: How does the money system lead to those outcomes?
BL: Practically all Balinese participate in a dual currency
system. The first is the conventional national currency (the Indonesian
Rupiah); the second is a time currency where the unit of account is a
block of time of approximately three hours. This second currency
is created and used within the "banjar." This is a community entity
consisting of between 50 and 500 families. It is in each banjar that
the decisions are made democratically to launch any big
community project. It could be to put on a festival or build a school. For each
project, they always make two complementary budgets: one in the
national currency, and one in time. That second currency-called
"narayan banjar" (meaning work for the common good of the
community)is created by the people themselves. They don't have to compete in
the outside world to obtain that second currency, and it fosters cooperation
between the members of the community. I call it a yin currency-it's more
feminine in nature. And it complements the national currency, which is a
competitive currency and therefore of a yang, or masculine, nature. Here's why
it works: poor communities don't have a lot of national currency, but they tend
to have a lot of time. In rich communities, the opposite tends to be the
case-people have more national currency, but less time. In either case, each
banjar is capable of creating extraordinary events just by budgeting and using
more of the kind of currency-national or time-in which they are rich. This
balance is a key contribution to the unusually strong community spirit that
prevails in Bali. And it's not just because
they're Hindus. There are almost a billion Hindus in India, and they don't behave that
way. Here is an example of how a currency can make a difference."
More Information:
Introduction to Community Currencies by Bernard Lietaer
http://www.transaction.net/money/cc/cc01.html
More papers by Lietaer and associates at the Access
Foundation site, http://www.accessfoundation.org/papers.html
Very good explanation of the different 'design features' of
both national and complementary currencies, at http://www.transaction.net/money/
-
The Access Foundation
URL = http://www.accessfoundation.org/
"The ACCESS Foundation will implement a comprehensive
series of strategic initiatives designed to promote greater understanding of
the implications inherent in our current money system. These initiatives will
introduce financial innovations that will address the variety of pressing
social, economic and environmental problems of today. These projects and
programs build one upon the other in a modular fashion. Additionally, these new
money strategies, rather than redistributing existing wealth, create new
resources and new prosperity for the betterment of those in need and for the
world-at-large."
http://www.digitalspace.com/about/launch.html
Larry Hagerty is an
amazing figure, combining experience in launching SMEs, working in
multinational, with an engagement in progressive social causes and an interest
in both psychedelics and the promise of cyberspace, see his book The Spirit of
the Internet below. Apart from the psychedelics, his lifepath has an uncanny
resemblance to my own.
He also co-launced this
interesting intiative, a way for entrepreneurs to build common social capital.
This is of special
interest to me, as Lorenzo (his new persona after attending Burning Man)
represents an interesting mix of engagement in progressive causes (see his
monitoring of 'america's
wars' on his blog), but also remaining an entrepreneur. In other words a mix of
left and libertarian elements, common on the Westcoast but rare elsewhere, but
entirely compatible with the P2P ethos.
(An example from his
lifepath that struck me is the following, as it would be impossible for any
European 'progressive' to even contemplate: as a lawyer, he starts realizing
that the current system does not offer any legal assistance to poor people. As
a reaction, in order to honour his ideal of equality, he goes to work in a
company that wants to help poorer people achieve financial success, i.e. extend
the capitalist ethos to the poorest.)
Here's his take on the
Digital Commons for corporations:
"A "Commons" is a reformulation of the
Corporation, returning to the original principles and models of
companies that go back to their origins in marketplaces and guilds. The Commons
does not issue shares to any person or institution but instead provides
collective ownership to its active participants through a license and statement
of rights and responsibilities. A Commons acts as an internal entrepreneurial
marketplace allowing motivated and highly skilled individuals to build their
businesses and social capital with other licenseee/members. A Commons is
characterized by transparency, both financially and in terms of the performance
and reputation of its participants. And lastly, a Commons exists to push the
state of the art of innovation and set a standard for excellence in products
and services to its customers and partners.
As a licensee/member of the Digital Space Commons you have the
ability to develop your current consulting or contracting practice in an environment
which attracts more business opportunities than would typically flow to an
individual or small company. In addition, costly and time consuming activities
such as contracting, collections, accounting, and intellectual property
protection are handled by the Commons, freeing you to focus on what you are
uniquely good at. And most important of all, the Commons is a community of
like-minded professionals who subscribe to the same license and values you do,
so you can be assured of great people to work with to get the job done and
advance the state of the art."
In summary, as a licensee/member you will have access to the following
benefits:
- Access
to the Commons marketplace, a web-based database which presents a dynamic
listing of all incoming opportunities for projects, sales, content
development and other services, as well as listing of all other
licensee/members, available tools and other intellectual assets,
customers.
- The
right to organize with other licensee/members around any opportunity, to
present a statement of work, budget, proposal or any other kind of bid on
opportunities and fulfill projects or support sales of Commons products.
- Rights
to develop or derive products and tools utilizing Commons intellectual
assets including community source code for a wide variety of applications
in voice, text chat, messaging, 3D, animation, web publishing, and
databases.
- Use
of centralized business services at reasonable rates, including:
contracting, money handling (receivables and payables), project accounting
and report preparation, and intellectual property protection.
- Employment
of customary Commons "gift exchange" with other licensee/members' time and
expertise in programming, web and graphic design, product testing,
marketing, and other forms of expert guidance.
- Access
to the Commons' class A server facility with all major operating systems
and facilities available for projects.
Lorenzo's
Blog at http://www.matrixmasters.com/hagertyhome.shtml
-
The Spirit of the Internet,
at http://www.matrixmasters.com/spirit/html/html.html
This is a very clear 'e-book' introduction to the
possible connections between the evolution of consciousness, the internet, and
both spiritual and technological transhumanism. It explains the origins and
meaning of all the terms of the debate such as noosphere, gaia, the
singularity, etc..
http://trustyfiles.com/corp-marketing.php
Here's
how internet consultancy Razorpop promotes P2P for marketing purposes. Below is
information about their proposed 'P2P meta-network', a way to search, and
influence, all the existing filesharing networks in one go.
"Use P2P to promote! Every time a file is shared it's free
promotion and a potential new customer for you. When P2P
users try and love your music,
video, photos, shareware, and other files they become
fans. ... And fans buy CDs, DVDs,
books, subscriptions, programs, and merchandise.
Use P2P to market!
P2P communities provide an ideal platform to brand, advertise, promote,
and sell. If you're Pepsi, giving away a free MP3 with Apple is nice. But it's
only one touchpoint with your customers. In comparison TrustyFiles P2P
communities provide a platform where you can touch your customers hundreds of
times a day ... day after day!
RazorPop, the developer of TrustyFiles, is a P2P digital service
enabler. Our unique business, marketing, and technology expertise allows
consumer marketers, advertisers, entertainers, and tech companies to tap into
the fast growing market of over 80 million file sharing users. We help a
variety of clients from Internet portals to kiosk providers to global churches
to integrate and capitalize on P2P in their business.
Our flagship consumer product is TrustyFiles 3.0 software with
Ultimate P2P, the leading multiple network P2P file sharing software with
millions of downloads. Other P2P software limits users to just one network, a
small part of the P2P universe. TrustyFiles uniquely connects to ALL the major
P2P networks. Which platform do you want to be on?
2. Trustyfiles as meta-P2P
network?
URL = http://www.trustyfiles.com/
"RazorPop released TrustyFiles 3.0 last
week. TrustyFiles 3.0 with Ultimate P2P uniquely connects to and simultaneously
searches and downloads from the major P2P networks (eDonkey, Overnet, Bit
Torrent, Gnutella, Gnutella 2, and Kazaa/Fast Track) and the web.
I've seen TrustyFiles download a file from 3 different networks
at once. Sure, it's cool and very hard to pull off. Obviously it will let users
search more of the universe of all P2P users currently online and download more
files and faster. But the long-term significance is much greater. It ushers in
a meta-P2P network."
Search
Tools: