How to drive the commons into the mainstream.

It will ;)

I'm all for this new term. However, the bottom line, regardless of term, is that people understand that we focus on worker/owners, coops, localization and self-sufficiency. I'm with Richard Wolff in that the wokplace should be "democratized" along with our economy which includes as always the citizenry. The idea of "ownership" needs to change to one that basically is synonymous with "needs met". If I own a home with a well stocked fridge and you don't, your needs are not being met. So, you bend over backwards trying to own this stuff so you can live. If everyone "owned" this stuff, the idea of "ownership" goes out the window. If we all own a TV, how can we even say we "own" it. Ownership implies "have" vs. "have not". Further along, we find that most laws are created expressly for the purpose of perpetuating the division between the "haves" and "have nots". So, by letting everyone have what they need, public health increases dramatically across the board - both personal health and security. It's no-brainer. What is needed is for "petri dish" communities to be developed with this in mind. Also, it can be seen that this model has already been in place for some time in Hutterite and Amish communities. Just remove the religious aspect, if necessary, and keep it moving.

Hi @johnrhoads -- which is the new term you are all for? "Commons"? I too go along with Richard Wolff as well (as I believe Yanis Varoufakis does).

The issue with common-owned stuff, in my experience, is getting people to care for it. It's the psychology that seems to matter. If we can have "ownership" to mean taking care of and responsibility for things, then common ownership follows naturally for things that many people care about and are prepared to share the responsibility for. And that brings along the question of decisions about how to look after the common resource; which naturally turns to some kind of (rough) consensus.

I wonder if traditional communities are easier here, if they have traditional roles that set out who looks after what. The challenge for us is that we have not (re-)developed adequate traditions.

The ideal may be a no-brainer, but as someone living (even just) in a cohousing community, I can testify that governance is anything but a no-brainer.

@asimong My take is the tools/stuff will have it's own maintenance
department that would theoretically be better at keeping stuff in
top working order than if owned individually. Moreover, tools that
require skill such as a back hoe would be loaned out based on a
person being trusted to run it which can be easily determined. If
I don't want to run the back hoe, referrals and exchanges would
exist. What is necessary is to have one person of each skill in
every community. One doctor, one diesel mechanic etc etc. Every
person has one skill/knowledge that all others do not but many
people will have many skills that overlap. It's just that certain
people are elected/volunteer to be the "head" of that dept. What
is important is to standardize the public policy consensus
methodology now so we can get to designing these new autonomous
communities right away. Governance practices need to be hammered
out quickly so we can get moving. Governance practices don't have
to be perfect at first and will evolve. Trust the process. Trust
your members.

Another thing I think should be starting to take place is training people to become and learn those things that otherwise would take years of schooling in a University. I think many things that would otherwise be confined, for example, to a hospital or clinic could be taught to and performed by more people without having all the formal education. We need to democratize education. Along with this needs to be democratization and localization of law practice and dispute resolution. The people need to take back those things that are otherwise out of reach, too expensive and can really be performed by anyone with some training. For example, why couldn't a skilled doctor teach his son or neighbor how to do what he does short of a formal education? Why can't we make antibiotics right in our communities? Etc. Etc.

Hi All,

• Just wondered if I could re-invigorate this thread with a fairly urgent question posed by would-be university hosts to a proposed event themed around Commons Transitions in Cultural Industries: The proposition I have put to them centres around developing an event loosely based on these areas ( but not confined to):

"Intellectual Property and a host of Brexit related trade and competition questions which might be related in terms of localism and commons based organisation with diverse contributors from Arts, Tech, Law, Economics etc..."

I got the reply beneath and need to answer these four questions - so thought this thread an appropriate place to ask for suggestions on content re: Commons Transitions. Ideas relating to questions 1 and 4 - most welcome! I want to give an answer by the end of next week and would be grateful for any thoughts - in specific relation to the questions ideally!

Hi Liam

I have names of academics (compiled by our relationship management team) that could be interested in this kind of activity. Would it be possible for you to put a short briefing together for me please with a bit more detail on:

1- What the aim / objective of the event would be
2- Who else is involved
3- When you hope to hold it
4- What could be in it for academics

Many thanks and best wishes

Anonymised.

Tricky to respond to this constructively without knowing what your answer to the first question would be.

Hi Graham -

There were a lot of questions.!

Mine aren’t academic - they are an enquiry to us ‘commoners’ about how to organise a symposia on lots of these kind of questions.

I thought
* What's a common ?
* How to build a common ?
* How to transform a non-common into a common ?

.. seemed pretty to the point..

Quick response via mobile - not signed into ap...
Best,

Liam

• What's a common ?
• How to build a common ?
• How to transform a non-common into a common ?

First place I'd recommend most people to look is Commons Transition Primer. Great resource IMO.

Yes, Very good..

My favourite read on the subject, David Bollier, 'Think Like A Commoner'. Reference, how to transform a no-commons into a commons . . . . reverse engineer. . . . . in other words, buy it back. We need a cultural shift away from buy what we need for ourselves to buy what we need together. We need mechanisms to facilitate that.into all aspects of our lives, not just wind turbines.

One problem with buying what we need is the market has already appropriated this idea - one version is 'collaboration' or 'co-creation' ( a marketised version of Peer Production) with products like this: http://bulbshare.com/en/ . Approaching this from the POV of a market doing the providing (eg, artists for #culturebanking) - 'we' need to understand that ownership of our own work is the biggest issue in having an 'us'. For #culturebanking - ie, growing a cultural commons repository of value, it needs to convince a mass of people that intellectual property is of value to them ( and probably that they are being ripped off by brands - which they don't really believe). How do you 'buy back' your own intellectual property when it's created under someone else's brand? (off to read Bollier now - thanks)

Beg pardon if this is well known - but is there are substantive connections between Commons TRansition and this being made? https://transitionnetwork.org/about-the-movement/what-is-transition/principles-2/

Liam @liammurphy this is exactly the kind of link that I think is well worth making. I've known about the Transition Network for years but not yet personally got involved. I suggest we make these links initially on a personal and local / regional basis, and coordinate it through CTUK.

Yes, we're in touch with them and have read their literature and proposals. Now they're more familiar with us. @michelbauwens1 will be attending this symposium, brining together people from the Transition movement, Next System project and Just Transitions, among others: Transition Together: An International Symposium on the need for societal transitions and systems level change

Thanks for that.. helpful!

so we will be there together ?

Well, I’d like nothing more but I’m still working on a context to pay myself for these things - it’s nearly all pro bono thus far! Have it in diary, in pencil..

I have used it on occasion, both in positive contexts (calling our new approach), and in negative ones (using for the horizontalist exagerrations, imho, or totalitarian versions of it), but avoid it precisely because it invites the confusion with the 19th cy ideologies of the industrial age, which either failed, or led to sometimes disastrous results, or have been watered down so much as to become forms of neoliberalism (social-democracy)

Perhaps we do emphatically not need an 'ism' to describe our pluralist approach ?

https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Commonism

All isms are wasms ...