Re: [ox-en] There is no such thing like "peer money"
- From: "Michel Bauwens" <michelsub2004 gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2008 11:25:05 +0700
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
I think it is really useful to distinguish between capitalism and markets.
Capitalism, as infinite growth system, will need to be constrained
substantially from the very beginning, as a survival strategy for the
biosphere. But markets, as a legitimate desire by people to trade their
production in a open way, will have to be respected, in a 'pluralist
economy', for an indefinite time period ... If it dies out because people
feel other methods are better, that would be up to them ...
In that sense, cooperative production may operate either on such an open
market, freely exchanging goods without coercion, or they may find it more
suitable to practice 'resource-based economics' or any other scheme that
society will invent.
Michel
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Raoul <raoulv club-internet.fr> wrote:
Hi Paul, Hi all,
Sorry for the delay.
Paul Cockshott wrote:
Raoul wrote:
But, what about money? If symmetric exchange is absent from the main
economic mechanism in the peer sector, is it absent from the whole society
in transition? As I said in the first part of this text, there will be
inevitably a coexistence of the peer sector and the remaining of capitalist
and even pre-capitalist forms. The exchange between the different sectors
will certainly tend to be, at least at the beginning, a symmetric exchange.
And thus, a mean of exchange, a sort of money will be required.
Why do you assume that capitalist production remains?
I am considering a period of transition. The 4th step in the Five step
model. The germ form is becoming the dominant one. More and more material
means of production are becoming part of the commons and are collectively
managed according to peer principles. Whatever the shape this process takes:
progressive evolution or abrupt revolutions (most probably both), it will
take some time to spread all over the world. It seams realistic to think
that for a period of time (the shortest the best) geographical zones,
countries will remain under the old capitalist relations of production.
Why not assume that some form of cooperative production remains?
It depends on the meaning you give to "cooperative production". Usually
cooperatives are defined as something within capitalism, within markets. "A
business owned and controlled equally by the people who use its services or
who work at it" (Wikipedia). Cooperatives change the relationships in the
organization of their internal activities, but they buy their input and sell
their output. In fact, cooperative producers are "their own capitalists", as
said Marx. As such, they are not contradictory or exclusive to capitalist
remains.
Raoul
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de
--
The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
alternatives.
Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
[2 text/html]
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de