[p2p-research] Building Alliances
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Fri Nov 6 18:40:48 CET 2009
I personally like the idea of guaranteed income as a transition plan. I see
little difference between the categories you list for justification of such
a system, but I'm sure the authors mentioned go into it at length. The
Speenhamland System was the basis for a joke on my last name when I was in
grad school. I never thought I'd encounter it again. It was
innovative--some would say the first true welfare system. I'm told by
Nordic folks that they had earlier systems of that sort long predating
English poor laws. The US didn't really move in this direction as a state
until the Progressive Era. Typically, the abatement of poverty was more P2P
in the sense that churches handled it.
In general, a true Speenhamland type system (though its implementation was
far from perfect and was typically corrupt) would be a great way to
introduce the sort of robotic utopia that people like Paul F. here envision
occurring over the next 30 years or so. Personally, I am always interested
in transition systems. People can see an end point and can agree where we
are, the tough part in my policy discussions is envisioning A-->B. That is
the major area where I am interested in P2P. I wonder about how systems move
from here to there. Most here, I think it is fair to say, see a path
through a sort of socialism/communism. I do not. Kevin, as I understand
it, sees the evolution of a stateless society--which of course would be
radically different than a communist/socialist system. People like Paul and
I suppose myself see the evolution of a technocracy/utopia where
institutions dissolve (like Kevin's view) but are replaced by large-scale
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Phoebe <pvm.doc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 'Presenting a Case for Guaranteed Income and its Advantages'
> Lynn Chancer has asked the question--one that has been on people's minds
> not least since the Speenhamland Law: why guarantee income? 'Are the
> benefits of this notion only that it is redolent of a broader concept of
> entitlement, or are there reasons to advocate this particular policy over
> full employment or other strategies focussed on jobs'?
> The case for a guaranteed income falls into four categories of advantage:
> Cosma Orsi presents his ideas on the Partner State and basic income (not
> only here but this is one paper):
> Also see Robert Theobald, The Guaranteed Income (Doubleday & Co. 1966)
> including Erich Fromm's 'The Psychological Aspects of the Guaranteed Income'
> in this text; Stanley Aronowitz and Jonathan Cutler, Post-Work (Routledge
> In terms of cultural spaces and social improvement, see Joshua Cohen and
> Joel Rogers, What's Wrong with a Free Lunch? (Beacon Press, 2001) and Steve
> Shafarman, Healing Politics: Citizen Policies and the Pursuit of Happiness
> (Xlibris, 2000).
> Yours, Phoebe
> 2009/11/6 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> HI Kevin,
>> I absolutely agree that you have the right intuition here, and that this
>> is a very fruitful way to argue for partner state models regarding 'free
>> cultural spaces'.
>> Perhaps phoebe has encountered such arguments in her labour research?
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Kevin Flanagan <kev.flanagan at gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Hey Paul,
>>> State support for the arts is common in europe.
>>> Im most familiar with the Irish and UK Arts Councils.
>>> Im not advocating further state support for 'artists'.
>>> Im interested in putting together an strong argument for state support
>>> for free culture and hacker spaces.
>>> Using already in place institutions and infrastructure such as arts
>>> I support the idea of a basic income for all.
>>> But Im suggesting what I see as a practical and achievable short term
>>> If we could specifically get these institutions to recognise the
>>> social value and put in policy the importance of commons oriented
>>> production for free culture and hacker spaces then maybe in time we
>>> can get the state to recognize the value and importance of commons
>>> based production on a broader scale.
>>> Lets get these arts councils to expand their remit to support
>>> specifically free culture and hacker spaces.
>>> Surely we can show how the skills developed in hack labs are useful
>>> and transferable and worth state economic investment. Hacker spaces in
>>> in disadvantaged communities could be a great outlet for young people.
>>> I dont have time to look up a good links at the moment because I have to
>>> go now.
>>> For example it would be nice to see some research on how Brazil has
>>> got on with its effort in supporting acces to digital technology.
>>> Brazilian minister for digital culture Gilberto Gill supporting the
>>> creation of 650 cultural spaces giving citizens access to computers
>>> cameras to share music and culture.
>>> Ok Im off for now.
>>> Kevin F
>>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Paul D. Fernhout
>>> <pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
>>> > Kevin-
>>> > As I see it, more support for the arts is a good idea, but a
>>> > As you say at the end, we could look at expanding it to all sorts of
>>> > production, but it is hard to judge what is "worthy". A "basic income"
>>> > all is probably a better general solution than trying to decide what
>>> > projects a person wants to do are worthy of support. References:
>>> > http://www.basicincome.org/bien/aboutbasicincome.html
>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
>>> > http://www.usbig.net/whatisbig.html
>>> > A basic income just for "artists" is possible:
>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_in_the_Netherlands
>>> > but in the end, is a mother or father any less an artist for helping
>>> > a young life than someone who works in clay and sculpts statues? And,
>>> it is
>>> > hard to judge a person's worth or a project's worth at the time. It may
>>> > become clear 1000 years later if something is "worthwhile". And
>>> > worthwhile to whom? Maybe it is enough that an individual's life is
>>> > worthwhile to themselves?
>>> > For me, a big changeover point is if everyone could get laws about a
>>> > income passed everywhere. So, rather than have artists fighting against
>>> > mothers and fathers and mimes and songwriters and so on over who should
>>> > the most subsidies, we have both working together, as an alliance, to
>>> have a
>>> > basic income for artists, mothers, fathers, writers, journalists,
>>> mimes, and
>>> > everyone else, even rich CEOs.
>>> > It's been said:
>>> > http://quotationsbook.com/quote/31495/
>>> > "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the
>>> poor, to
>>> > sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets and to steal bread. "
>>> > Well, a basic income, in its majestic equality, allows both the rich as
>>> > as the poor to paint local bridges, to mime in the streets, and to give
>>> > home-baked bread. :-) Maybe financially obese people won't want to do
>>> > things compared to poor people who know how important those things are,
>>> > with a basic income, rich people could. :-)
>>> > See also:
>>> > "[p2p-research] Basic income from a millionaire's perspective?"
>>> > Is it possible you could make some freely licensed art about that
>>> issue? :-)
>>> > --Paul Fernhout
>>> > http://www.pdfernhout.net/
>>> > Kevin Flanagan wrote:
>>> >> Hello,
>>> >> It was great to finally get to meet some of you in person at media
>>> >> ecologies.
>>> >> I have some suggestions and questions regarding building alliances
>>> >> that Id be interested in thrashing out here on the list.
>>> >> My question here is how can we incentivize government to support the
>>> >> building and protection of the commons?
>>> >> My suggestion is this -
>>> >> As an artist Ive been involved in and worked with several artist led
>>> >> organisations. Most of these organisations could not survive without
>>> >> government subsidy through bodies such as arts councils. Naturally
>>> >> there is pressure from government on arts councils and hence on
>>> >> artists and arts organisations to be accountable for this investment.
>>> >> In order to receive financial support artists and arts organisations
>>> >> are required to fulfill certain criteria to prove the social value of
>>> >> their work. So the better an organisation is at proving the social
>>> >> value of their work the more likely it is that they will receive
>>> >> support. This means that lots of artists end up working to governments
>>> >> agenda through Public Art and Community Arts projects. Maybe this
>>> >> sounds a bit harsh but sometimes I think of community arts as a kind
>>> >> of goverment funded social band aid for disadvantaged communities. The
>>> >> criteria for funding are usually that such projects support , social
>>> >> inclusion, multiculturalism, intercultural relations. Often what is
>>> >> produced in the creative process if immaterial affect so its not
>>> >> always easy to show how these arts projects fulfill these criteria.
>>> >> What Im wondering is can free culture centers, hack\fab labs, maker
>>> >> clubs, do this better. I think so. The added advantage of such centres
>>> >> is eductaion in transferable skills. Goverment likes transferable
>>> >> skills that help peoples job prospects. Whether in electronics,
>>> >> programming, media. Some research into how the EU and UNESCO promote
>>> >> social inclusion through culture would be useful. Are these policies
>>> >> IP biased? Can we as advocates of free culture and the commons propose
>>> >> ammendments or new policies that incentivize governments to provide
>>> >> financial support for free culture spaces, hack labs and to recognize
>>> >> the intercultural importance of the shared commons oriented production
>>> >> of these spaces? Any ideas who might already be working on this?
>>> >> Existing models perhaps that can be used as examples?
>>> >> How might dialogue about the commons interface with current thinking
>>> >> on multiculturalism? Does breaking down financial barriers to entry
>>> >> promote social inclusion locally, nationally, internationally? Of
>>> >> course but how do we measure this?
>>> >> I dont know how this sounds or even if its interesting but I thought
>>> >> Id just put it out there.
>>> >> Maybe the the current system of support for the arts is one to look at
>>> >> expanding for supporting the commons based production? Maybe alliances
>>> >> can be built with existing cultural organisations?
>>> >> Best
>>> >> Kevin F
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> p2presearch mailing list
>>> >> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> >> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > p2presearch mailing list
>>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research:
>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
> Employment profile: http://www.espach.salford.ac.uk/page/Phoebe_Moore
> JCEPS--my recent article: UK Education, Employability and Everyday Life
> Media Ecologies workshop, Nov 2009, Manchester
> Manchester Film Cooperative: http://www.manchesterfilm.coop/
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the p2presearch