GOAT Book Club: Session 1 on Sat, May 18

Session 1: Networks, Peers & the Virtual Class

This Saturday is the first session of the GOAT Book Club that we’ve been talking about since approx. forever. To kick it off, we’ll look at a couple classic texts from the first couple decades of the Internet era, plus one slightly more recent excerpt.

The first “classic” is from Yochai Benkler, legal scholar and faculty co-director of the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard. In The Wealth of Networks, Benkler lays down the canonical definition of commons-based peer production, a kind of third way for 21st century political economies, made possible by ubiquitous computing and the world wide web.

Then we’ll take in a less sanguine view of the emerging “dotcom neoliberalism” of the 1990s with Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron’s 1995 article for Mute magazine, “The Californian Ideology.” They take dead aim at the prevailing techno-determinism of the age and its assumed liberatory (or right-libertarian) potential. They point out how what some were hailing as the new “virtual class” of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and innovators was a pipe-dream that overlooked the hidden social costs of utopia.

Finally, we’ll read an excerpt from Peer to Peer: The Commons Manifesto published by Michael Bauwens, et al. from the P2P Foundation. Written in 2019, it can be seen as an effort to reclaim the ideal of Benkler’s commons-based peer production from the wreckage of surveillance capitalism and the ever greater consolidation of tech monopolies.

Prompts

I hope we can just get into some organic conversation, but to prime the pump a lil, here’s some things to think about:

  • How do these authors define “the commons” and where do their definitions diverge/converge? E.g.:
    • What types of resources can be part of the commons and who decides?
    • What role do “the state” and “the market” play in the creation and maintenance of “the commons”?
  • According to each of the authors, to what degree and in what ways does technology determine society, and vice versa?

How to Join

  • When: 2024-05-18T18:00:00Z2024-05-18T19:00:00Z
  • Where: Jitsi Meet
  • Who: Anyone! Try to do the reading, at least one, but don’t let it stop you if you don’t have time.

For those who make it, we’ll try to schedule another one for next month, so if you can’t make this one, stay tuned! The recommended readings for the next 5 sessions are listed in the original post, though it’s always open to changes and suggestions.

Recommended Reading

Read-time estimates via thereadtime.com.

Further Resources

3 Likes

Thank you @jgaehring for also including the time commitment!!! Even if I double it because I am a slow reader it seems doable. I will do my best to come but just for an hour - community garden opening day ya know. :green_heart: #whycantwebetwoplacesatonce Also: This is how I do books too.mp4 - Google Drive so thank you for the linkies!!!

2 Likes

Oy, I realize we neglected to choose a time and date for the next session on the commons (w/ selections from Elinor Ostrom, David Bollier & Silvia Federicci). What are folks thinking? Should we do a poll?

And @julietnpn, would you still have an interest in facilitating? Happy to co-facilitate and do the leg work if it helps.

Booting this back up with the ~notes~ I took at book club session 1 & never posted!

Wealth of Networks:
"It suggests that the networked environment makes possible a new modality of organizing production: radically decentralized, collaborative, and nonproprietary; based on sharing resources and outputs among widely distributed, loosely connected individuals who cooperate with each other without relying on either market signals or managerial commands.

“The salient characteristic of commons, as opposed to property, is that no single person has exclusive control over the use and disposition of any particular resource in the commons.”

“This enables some of its users to identify problems and others to fix these problems without asking anyone’s permission and without engaging in any transactions.”

Heard an interesting comment yesterday from an FSA officer - the most important thing for FSA is designating a farm or tract as belonging to & managed by a single individual. that’s what they’re there to define.

to me, this means that no matter what the results are for the ‘climate-smart’ practices that we’re tracing in this program, to the extent that they’re dependent on collaboration & mutualism, that will necessarily be erased & obscured by the state structure through which we are recording them.

if the goal of our project is to show the potential for agricultural interventions that benefit rather than harm the ecosystems we’re a part of, we’re doomed to fail from line one of data collection.

long shadow of elinor ostrom ‘you notice that after someone dies, their digital footprint changes’
Juliet has a ton of Ostrom background from grad school

North American Digital Agricultural Working Group - forming an IP working group (with commons as framework)

Question for the group: What’s your singular motivating obsession in this space?

  • what’s equitable resource management? coming from a natural resources lens (for sustainability & regenerative practice for collective health) - within capitalism & economic model is really hard 2 do when people are trying to make a living!

  • inequity and mismanagement of the physical resource - when talking about making the data part equitable without what the data represents - real obsession is about data & semiotics - is this what informatics is? since data is a more flexible space, certain antagonisms can emerge

  • thinking about documenting the undocumentable, representing the unrepresentabe - spaces of failure as also spaces of possiblity

  • commoning as a process of translating (relationships, resources, knowledge) - turning things into shared resources - transformation through processes, converting into shared use - this happens in spaces that are not governed explicitly in other ways - " how to turn capitalistic products in to commons"

Transvestment - P2P Foundation - taking things from one mode of production & reallocating to another
this has the potential to put farmers who are already in a precarious position into more of one

California Ideology:
“Almost every major technological advance of the last two hundred years has taken place with the aid of large amounts of public money and under a good deal of government influence.”

“Americans have always had state planning, but they prefer to call it the defense budget.”

“In American folklore, the nation was built out of a wilderness by free-booting individuals - the trappers, cowboys, preachers, and settlers of the frontier. Yet this primary myth of the American republic ignores the contradiction at the heart of the American dream: that some individuals can prosper only through the suffering of others.”

P2P:

“peer production is a prototype of a new mode of production, rather than a full mode of production today. This means that currently peer production is in a mutually dependent relationship with capital, which uses both the processes and virtue of peer production for its own gain.”


Discussion:

  • question of legibility that necessarily invisibilizes the commons
  • three buckets across these pieces - state, market, & commons
  • role of surveillance & ‘classic panopticon shit’
  • specific conception of the liberal state that he learned about & encountered in the 90s - surprised by outcome that says we need the state & state resources
    Platform Socialism text - tension between nationalizing vs worker-owned utilities
  • recent concept of ‘entrepreneurial state’ x ‘myth of the free market’
  • so what’s the relationship of the entrepreneurial state & farming? tension between public funding & business mindset

USDA is such a concrete place to examine this -

  • heard so much in 2017-2018 about how much the USDA was gutted - so many departments that were just shuttered - that conversation has now dropped off - what’s the status?
  • seems to still be a giant dearth of people, frequent reshuffling - those changes are having generational impact
  • disassembled & moved offices - still has a lot of repercussions
  • 2018 farm bill had a lot of repercussions for data release back to the public
  • can you argue that the state actually ‘has’ this data when it never leaves a filing cabinet?

assumption of techno-determinism…
profound concern for sharing between individuals and government entities - how can you actually have permissioned data without exposing it?

how is permission, accountability governed by the commons? is it different from the state or the market?