Hi Hans-Gert,
I'm just preparing a workshop "sustainability and technics" to address
such questions with two topics "environmental informatics" and
"sustainable energy concepts". My main observation: there is a huge
debate about "sustainability" addressing questions of our relation to
nature (first nature in Marx' notation) and also to restructuring
society (second nature in Marx' notation), but the in my view main
question is almost not addressed - the requirements of the reproduction
of the cultural-technical environment and the transition needs "after
Fukushima", the major area where "human labour" has to be applied and
that capitalism tries to exploit "for free", since the
cultural-technical environment is the result of human labour. Moreover
people like me, the MINT people (MINT = mathematics, informatics,
natural sciences, technical sciences), have almost no voice in those
debates. A second observation - we (the MINT people) are speaking a
different language, that politicians hardly understand.
We had already a similar workshop in sept 2011 with a very instructive
basic text, that is available also in english, see
http://www.hg-graebe.de/Texte/2011-09/Laitko-00.pdf.
By the way, all those questions have to be answered also within
capitalism, since they are on a nowadays schedule. But they are on a
100..400 years time scale (as explained in Laitko's paper in detail). I
will come back to that (a particular problem within the "limits of
growth") in a later posting.
Great. When and where is the workshop? In what language is it? Can I
attend it if it is in english (I don't speak German). I can also make a
presentation. I think the question of ecology lies in the heart of p2p.
I agree that these questions should be answered within capitalism too,
here and now. For example the fact that German government tries to replace
many of current polluting sources of energy with solar energy is a good
thing. But these problems cannot be solved within capitalism. Why? Because
capitalism is driven by accumulation of abstract value (money) and indeed,
there is no limit to it. If it does not increase the scale of accumulation
it will be in crisis. So the final sollution of environmental proplems
requires the end of capitalism. So green capitalism is impossible. But this
does not mean that we should not fight for provisional sollutions within
capitalism. We should fight for ecological reforms within the capitalist
system. But we need to connect this fight for partial ecological reforms
within capitalism to a universal fight which aims at abolishing capitalism
and replacing it by a production system which is by nature ecological. And
this production is peer to peer production.
So for you p2p is mainly a question of access ("global commons") and not
of infrastructure and reproduction (what is a "mode of production" for
you)?
Indeed, it also requires the macro infrastractures are transfomed
to commons too. The dsirtibution of strategic means of producticn whethe
natural (raw material and energy) or macro technical ifrastructure
(telcommunication) in the form of global commons is a requrement for
establishing of a fully fledged p2p.
All the best
Jakob
Hans-Gert Gräbe<hgg hg-graebe.de> 03/22/12 9:42 AM >>>
Hi Jakob,
Am 14.03.2012 12:48, schrieb Jakob Rigi:
2-, the question of making strategic-macro resources whether natural or
technical commons is not hypothetical issue of future. It is the most
pressing need of our own present time. This urgency stemms in the first
place from the current ecological crisis.
I'm just preparing a workshop "sustainability and technics" to address
such questions with two topics "environmental informatics" and
"sustainable energy concepts". My main observation: there is a huge
debate about "sustainability" addressing questions of our relation to
nature (first nature in Marx' notation) and also to restructuring
society (second nature in Marx' notation), but the in my view main
question is almost not addressed - the requirements of the reproduction
of the cultural-technical environment and the transition needs "after
Fukushima", the major area where "human labour" has to be applied and
that capitalism tries to exploit "for free", since the
cultural-technical environment is the result of human labour. Moreover
people like me, the MINT people (MINT = mathematics, informatics,
natural sciences, technical sciences), have almost no voice in those
debates. A second observation - we (the MINT people) are speaking a
different language, that politicians hardly understand.
We had already a similar workshop in sept 2011 with a very instructive
basic text, that is available also in english, see
http://www.hg-graebe.de/Texte/2011-09/Laitko-00.pdf.
By the way, all those questions have to be answered also within
capitalism, since they are on a nowadays schedule. But they are on a
100..400 years time scale (as explained in Laitko's paper in detail). I
will come back to that (a particular problem within the "limits of
growth") in a later posting.
The fact that it is also a
requiredment for fully feldged p2p mode of production, it shows how a
p2p revolution is timely. I think, having a clear vision aout making
these resources global commons is exactly part of what describe as
having a clear vision about a fully-fledged p2p mode of production.
So for you p2p is mainly a question of access ("global commons") and not
of infrastructure and reproduction (what is a "mode of production" for
you)?
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
tel. : +49 341 97 32248
email: graebe informatik.uni-leipzig.de
Home Page: http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~graebe
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal