Message 00945 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00859 Message: 15/21 L7 [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] A response to Michel and Jakob

Hi Michel,

I cannot follow the speed of your conversation, so some more remarks to mails that are already several days old. The new ones I will read step by step.

HGG wrote
No, its a political decision with short wave and long wave
consequences. "Design" means for me, they understand what they do
in the sense as it is required from a technician to understand what
she does not to be accused not to deliver work as "state of the

MB wrote
ok, you have a particular notion of design, fine with me, for me it
means, making decisions about the rules, protocols that will govern
the workings of a particular system; if you want to call that a
political decision, which of course they are, that is fine; so we
move the discussion to the possibility to make different political
decisions about the structures and rules of money. Your semantic have
changed, the problem remains the same.

My point about "design" is not "making decisions about ..." but making _the right decisions_ - whatever that will mean (reminder to my quotation from H.-P. Dürr). For me, rationality starts just there.

MB wrote
Jakob I fully agree with your description here and hans, this is the
answer to your question about proto-mode ... indeed without the
change described it cannot become a full mode ..

bu there's an important amendment ... the full mode needs to be
prefigured ... this is why the hacks proposed by Kleiner and David
de Ugarte, combined by me in a strategic proposition for a new
hegemony, are important ... we can't wait for a hypothetical victory,
we have to build and project power right now, on whatever scale we
can achieve, and this will facilitate the phase transition ... a
victory without any workign models would be extremely chaotic

My point was - a proto-mode of what? Of something that transzendents capitalism, of Open Capitalism or what else? What is the time scale you are speaking about? If 20 years, its the proto-mode of a "digital society", surely a turn within capitalism. If 50..100 years it would be another story, but I see no claims in that direction at all. Since any such claim should address the question that during such a period capitalism will change itself as the last 50..100 years proved.

Am 14.03.2012 05:16, schrieb Michel Bauwens:
I have no  doubt that cognitive capitalism (phase 1 of the network age,
dominated by vector power as decribed by Wark's hacker manifesto) was
already different than the industrial model, and similarly that the
emerging form of netarchical capitalism (where vectoral power no longer
works because there is no way to protect distribution monopolies) is yet
different. What is important however, is not just description, but action,
how do we achieve emancipation, autonomy, within the existing
contradictions, continuously and relentlessly

As far as I understand history, compared to middle age "achieving emancipation, autonomy" was one of the central aims of capitalism all the time, and through the different waves of capitalism emancipation and autonomy expanded all the time. Note that at Marx' times there were "Stände" in Germany with different weights in voting, women had nothing to say at all, the right for a woman to decide about having a profession without asking their husband was set up in western Germany as late as only in 1977 etc.

So what are you about? Anti-capitalism? The story is not about "emancipation, autonomy" but the struggle of social underpinning of those - and this is a story of struggles _within_ capitalism. All real attempts to set it up as "anti-capitalism" were dreams about Cockaigne and ended up with another capitalism, didn't they? Aren't this the facts?

Many consequences of design decisions or what you call political decisions
are unforeseen ...

So a _rational_ story telling should have modes to cope with the "unforeseen". The same H.-P. Dürr postulates in the 2005 "Potsdam Denkschrift" "A New Orientation is Necessary" and rates for a turn "From the materialistic-mechanistic worldview to a mental-vital cosmos".

I suspect ... this is far from engineering practice though ... do
you really think Nixon knew all the consequences of his actions when he
abolished the gold standard? do you think the european austerity czars know
all the consequences of what they are doing?

No, but these questions had no standard answers at those times. My point was about the reliability of the engineer's work - you have not to make it explicit in a treaty that the engineer has to deliver a solution "state of the art" but can get him nevertheless judged if not. Try the same with a politician ...

So much for today.

Best regards, hgg


  Dr. Hans-Gert Graebe, apl. Prof., Inst. Informatik, Univ. Leipzig
  postal address: Postfach 10 09 20, D-04009 Leipzig
  Hausanschrift: Johannisgasse 26, 04103 Leipzig, Raum 5-18	
  email: graebe
  Home Page:


Thread: joxT00859 Message: 15/21 L7 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00945 [Homepage] [Navigation]