Message 00688 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00680 Message: 10/13 L1 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] Journal report - 19 August 2011



[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Mathieu,

Thanks for the reply. Whether the islands will grow into an ocean, making capitalism small vanishing islands, is a matter of struggle. And what we do,  including myself in your community this time  I use we instead for you, is a small step in that direction. Of course there is no guarantee. But who knows, may be in 30 years it will be a different world. 

If some state {or who ever} supports  the P2P production, that is simply a good news. But the de-centered network based logic of p2p production clashes, ultimately,  with the top-down logic of the state which is also the logic of management of the capitalist enterprises. In a society where p2p production is the dominant mode of production there is  no place for the top-down management of either people (state), or people and things (capitalism). American and the European states, beside the knowledge capitalists,  have been the main enemy of p2p production. The draconian copy right laws past since 1980s, actually in order to suffocate commons of knowledge,  have even provoked the protest of liberals such as Lessig and Benkler , who otherwise has no problem either with the state or capital.

Dear members, I hope that I do not appear too invasive  in the first day of my membership. I really like discussing.

all the best
Jakob

Mathieu ONeil  08/19/11 4:36 PM >>>
[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Jakob,

I can see you will fit right in with some people on this list. ;-)

I
really like your slogan "productive negation" but as for whether this
will play a significant role in bolstering p2p production against
capitalism, or whether peer production stands a chance against
capitalism for that matter, I'm not as sanguine, though it does of
course constitute an interesting alternative. 

I can see how
you can practically grow commons : just make more commons and encourage
others to do it. So the islands are getting bigger, they may become
huge, look at FLOSS and WP, new islands might be created. But if there
is to be "spreading [of a] new communist consciousness which aims at
generalization of p2p production to all branches of production" then it
will have to cease being an essentially elite form which, unless
connected to a mass of people, will have limited impact. 

So
I agree 100% with you when you say that what would be necessary is to
"make a broad alliance with other movements and convince them that p2p
production offers solutions to many problems that are created by
capitalism." A possibly related question may be, what difference would
it make if state bodies started to actively support peer production?
There are things happening in India, I think, but I don't know much
about it. It is certainly something that seems worth exploring.
StefanMn may know more as there was talk of organising an Oekonux
conference in India. 

cheers,

Mathieu

On 08/20/11, Jakob Rigi   wrote:
Hi Mathieu and all,

First I do not know about the procedures, I am just new. But I can tell you about my emprical and theoretical interests. I became interested in p2p production via studying intangible commodities. I tried to theorize knowledge-sign capitalism. Then, I came across p2p production which is a decommoditization of knowledge.  I came to the conclusion (which some other people had reached before me)that p2p is a new communist mode of production. This mode of production consists of small Islands within the capitalist mode of production. Its relation to capitalism includes a dialectic of articulation and negation.Capitalism also  had this  relation of articulation/negation with  pre-capitalist modes of production. The major difference is that in the communist-capitalist articulation the communist mode of production is the negating force, while capitalism was the main negating force in the precapitalist-capitalist articulation. Theory of articulation is well known among Maxists. The n
 eg
 ation of the capitalist mode of production by the emerging communist mode of production includes p2p productive activity, but cannot be limited to it. It requires, spreading a new communist consciuosness which aims at generalization of p2p production to all branches of production. Moreover, the political activists of p2p production need to make a broad alliance with other movements and convince them that p2p production offers sollutions to many problems that are created by capitalism. In brief we need a new social revolution that replaces capitalism with p2p production. Although the p2p productive activity is the core driving force of this revolution, political activity, and theoretical work is also essential. 

I have submitted a long article on these issues to NEw Left Review, waiting for their reply.
 I think you are  doing  a pioneering work which is not only intellectually exciting but will play a significant role in bolstering p2p production against capitalism. You are a force of productive negation. So I am  excited to join you.
all the best
Jakob



Mathieu ONeil  08/19/11 14:14 PM >>>
[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Hi Jakob, all

Pleasure to meet you! 

Your arrival raises an interesting question : how does one become a member of our SC? The criteria for inclusion are along the lines of "must be a member of a scientific institute, and have expertise in issues around peer production". 

So, you seem to fit the criteria, but what makes you a member of our SC? 

Until now, people were invited informally. But now that this SC has been in place for a while and that a smaller number of people have taken on extra responsibilities, such as editing special issues, I think it would be good to clarify this point which - I think, could be wrong - someone once grumbled about anyway.

So, do we want to have the editor inviting people pretty much as before, based on personal assessment that the person would be a worthwhile addition as a reviewer and participant?

Or do we say that anyone who is editing an issue can make that decision, still based on the criteria mentioned above?

Or do we want to use a more collective method, through this list for example?

I have not completely worked out my own position yet, so I'm curious as to what people think about this?

cheers,

Mathieu


On 08/19/11, Jakob Rigi   wrote:
Thank you very much Johan and Mathieu,

It is really exciting to be part of the group and learn from you, I will also do my best to contribute to the debates.
cheers
Jakob

Mathieu ONeil  08/19/11 03:49 AM >>>
[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Journal report - 19 AUGUST 2011

Hi everyone, a number of issues for the journal project.
If you want to address a specific issue it might be best to start a new thread to avoid confusion - thanks.


********************************************

NEW MEMBER
Johan suggested that we invite Jakob Rigi of the Central European University in Budapest to join our SC, as he expressed a strong interest in our journal and related work. I have subscribed Jakob to this list.

@Jakob: welcome aboard, please feel free to join in debates and get involved as you see fit!

********************************************

MISC. ADMIN ISSUES

- ISSN number
- Inclusion in Google Scholar

It was suggested to me a couple of months ago that it would be useful to obtain these things. If anyone knows how to do this quickly, or feels like doing this, could you please let me know - thanks.

********************************************

SECOND ISSUE ON "PEER PRODUCTION IN GENERAL"
RELEASE: DECEMBER 2011
 
-Research papers section 
3 papers submitted through the contact form on the website are at various stage of being completed and reviewed.

-Reports/Reviews section
In the first issue we had two conference reports. This time I think it would be good to have some book reviews. I could try to do one or two. If anyone has any suggestions that would be good. 

In particular if anyone has read Christian Fuch's latest book "Foundations of Critical Media and Information Studies"? I have not read it but I think it would be highly relevant to review it for CSPP.

Finally if someone is interested in being "Book review editor" that could a good way to develop this - any takers? 
We can start a new thread about this.

-Debate section
Nothing yet - see below for a suggestion.

********************************************

SPECIAL ISSUE ON "BIOHACKING"
RELEASE: JUNE 2012

From what I have heard from Johan and Alessandro they have had a ton of submissions - well done.

@Johan and Alessandro: you can update the list periodically on how you are going, if you like.

********************************************

SPECIAL ISSUE ON "ORGANISATION / CLASS"
NO RELEASE DATE YET

Mayo and I have been working on a CFP. I have been slack about this and will focus on it now so we can release it soon.

********************************************

SPECIAL ISSUE ON "FLOSS"
NO RELEASE DATE YET

Still waiting to hear from Maurizio and Vincenzo on how they want to address the criticism by StefanMn that they are not properly addressing the issue. So far StefanMz has expressed support for StefanMn. This is an edited version of what I wrote on the issue on july 21: 

"I understand what you say about peer production being a new phenomenon, but I don't see how it can be separated from the 95% rest of the world economy which is capitalistic. PP is both dependent on and enmeshed within this wider order. For me the interesting thing scientifically is precisely to work out the relationship between these two orders and - possibly from a more activist perspective - to work out how to extend the commons and peer production (...) if you want to get your point across effectively IMHO it would be best to submit a paper to the journal for our upcoming issue on peer production theory - that way you can explain what new tools and concepts are needed etc. A whole issue on Oekonux can be envisaged for later, we don't have the writing and editorial resources right now. The peer production theory issue can be released next December. Is an article possible?"

Matthew Allen then agreed with this (sort of) see:
http://www.oekonux.org/journal/list/archive/msg00670.html


********************************************

SUGGESTION 1: DEBATE ON FLOSS/PEER PRODUCTION

Perhaps a productive way to move this issue forward would be to articulate the different positions in a formal "Debate" section which would appear in the next issue, in December. There could be a statement by StefanMn and/or StefanMz on why he/they think peer production transcends current analytical categories and Maurizio and/or someone else could write a response.

This would have several advantages:
- There would be a Debate section in the next issue ;-)
- There would be a text by people in Oekonux in the journal
- There would be a clarification of how the FLOSS/peer production issue can be approached 

********************************************

SUGGESTION 2: INVITED COMMENTS

Our first issue had two research papers (including one by the editor...), and the next "general/theory" one will have three. This is not a very high number. Then with the upcoming special issues we should have more.

I thought a way around this would be to have a couple of "invited comments" whereby we ask people who are knowledgeable about peer production to articulate their understanding of it. These invited comments would not be peer reviewed and would be around 4,000 words (?). They could be a remixed version of a text published elsewhere. I got the idea from the Journal of Science Communication which Alessandro edits which also has invited comments.

For the general issue on peer production of CSPP here are some people who I thought could be approached. Some are already involved in the journal:

-Christian Siefkes 
Christian did an interesting piece on "commonism" in the recently published okcon conference proceedings, which he has agreed to adapt for the next issue of CSPP.

-Michel Bauwens

-Stefan Meretz

-Stefan Merten

@Michel, StefanMn, StefanMz - if there is a medium-sized text (around 4,000 words?) which summarises some of your main ideas regarding peer production and the work you have been doing it could be useful for the P2P Foundation and Oekonux projects. In my view as it would not be peer reviewed it doesn't matter if it has been previously published in a different form.

Of course if StefanMn and/or StefanMz decide they want to do this instead of start a "Debate" then that does not help the abovementioned Suggestion 1. Ideally they could do both? The Debate paper does not have to be very long (1,000-3,000 words).

-Finally there is a very stimulating French author, Jean Zin, who often writes for EcoRev. I was thinking I could contact him and offer to translate one of his texts.

********************************************

Well, glad you made it to the end! ;-)
What does everyone think?

cheers,
Mathieu


[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal

______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal


--
****
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]anu.edu.au
web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php


[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal

______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal


--
****
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]anu.edu.au
web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php


[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal



[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal



Thread: joxT00680 Message: 10/13 L1 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00688 [Homepage] [Navigation]