Message 01004 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00985 Message: 11/24 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] p2p and market

Hi Michel,

Am 01.04.2012 14:47, schrieb Michel Bauwens:
So your clear rule to cope with hostility is <>? What's
about <>?

what makes you conclude from the existence of enemies, that an eye for an
eye is the adequate way to deal with them. I disagree with you, and as I
said, it's a matter of finding broad enough commonalities with broad social
forces. I don't thin, your philosophy of an eye for an eye, will get very

It were you that used the word "enemy" and I tried to understand what you are meaning with that, since I'm convinced that one cannot think deeply about p2p if the word "enemy" is around there. There is nothing "to disagree with me" since I did not dispose any own position on that matter so far.

We can close down that debate, although it is quite central for me, if you feel inconvenient with that, but I don't like the approach to put your words in my mouth and then say, I'm completely wrong:

So you think that to cope with such all day differences the notion of
"enemies/allies" is appropriate?

of course not, as I said in my previous emails and just repeated above, why
would you think this is appropriate?

You will easily discover your own words about that reading your previous mailings.

Since you favour conceptualization: Do you have a concept on "common
ground with your enemies" (that the "old hegemony of labour movements"
clearly doesn't have)? Do you have, within your "Gramscian concept of a new
hegemony" that has by construction a built in "majority principle", a
subconcept of the "legitimate needs of minorities"?

I favour pluralist organizing forms which allow for such diversity to
exist; the occupy movement is a good example of how this can be done, and
has been well documented. Why would you not favour such diversity?

Probably I could not explain my question clearly enough, since you even do not try to catch my point.

Sorry, I have the strong smell that you are coming with a very traditional
marxistic concept that you aren't even aware about.

Hans-Gert, I'm not a marxist. Why are you?

I'm not a Marxist, too, but a Marxianist, as I explained earlier in detail, so there is no need to repeat that here.

Do you think that there are concepts that unconsciously drive you? If so, are you interested to discover those, and if also that, how would you proceed?

I hope my replies will convince you that your rhetorical strategies are not
working, and I'm stopping this dialogue  with you forthwith.

Thanks nevertheless having that dispute here. I think it is quite important better to understand p2p.



  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: joxT00985 Message: 11/24 L7 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 01004 [Homepage] [Navigation]