robert searle | 6 Aug 10:29 2013
Picon

Fw: Collateral Damage: QE3 and the Shadow Banking System



----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ellen Brown <ellenhbrown-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: ellenhbrown-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
Sent: Thursday, 25 July 2013, 18:42
Subject: Collateral Damage: QE3 and the Shadow Banking System

Hi, here is my latest article, posted on Truthout –
 
Collateral Damage: QE3 and the Shadow Banking System 
  
Best wishes,
Ellen Brown
 
 
Now available on Amazon in paperback and Kindle format --  
 
 
    •  
       
       
      To unsubscribe, click reply and write unsubscribe in the subject line.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 





<div><div>
<div><span><br class="yui-cursor"></span></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">----- Forwarded Message -----<br><span>From:</span> Ellen Brown &lt;ellenhbrown@...&gt;<br><span>To:</span> ellenhbrown@... <br><span>Sent:</span> Thursday, 25 July 2013, 18:42<br><span>Subject:</span> Collateral Damage: QE3 and the Shadow Banking System<br>
</div>
<div class="y_msg_container">
<br><div>
<span>Hi, here is my latest article, posted on Truthout &ndash;</span><br><div class="yiv6315884594gmail_quote">
<div class="yiv6315884594gmail_quote">
<div class="yiv6315884594gmail_quote">
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal">
<span></span>&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>Collateral Damage: QE3 and the Shadow Banking System&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/17755-collateral-damage-qe3-and-the-shadow-banking-system" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/17755-collateral-damage-qe3-and-the-shadow-banking-system</a>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal">
<span>&nbsp;</span><span>&nbsp;</span>
</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>Best wishes,</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>Ellen Brown</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://webofdebt.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>http://webofdebt.com</span></span></a></span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://publicbankinginstitute.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>http://publicbankinginstitute.org</span></span></a></span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://publicbanksolution.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>http://publicbanksolution.<span>com</span></span></span></a></span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Public-Bank-Solution-Austerity-Prosperity/dp/0983330867/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1371913558&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=public+bank+solution" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>No<span>w available</span></span></span></a> on Amazon in paperback and Kindle format --&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span></span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal">
<span><span></span></span>&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span><span>
<ul><li>
<div><a href="http://www.publicbanksolution.com/order/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"></a></div>
</li></ul></span></span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal">
<span><span></span></span>&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal">
<span><span>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left"><span><a href="http://www.publicbanksolution.com/order/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span></span></span></a></span></div></span>
<ul><li>
<div><ul><li>
<div>
<div></div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>To unsubscribe, click reply and write unsubscribe in the subject line.</span></div>
<a href="http://www.publicbanksolution.com/order/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"></a>
</div>
</li></ul></div>
</li></ul>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left">&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left">&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left">&nbsp;</div></span>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left">&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left">&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left"><span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal" align="left"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv6315884594MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div>
robert searle | 6 Aug 10:27 2013
Picon

Fw: Grotesque Plan for Detroit: Fleece Working People to Save the Banks



 

Hi, here is my latest article, posted on AlterNet –
 
Grotesque Plan for Detroit: Fleece Working People to Save the Banks

Best wishes,

Ellen Brown
 
 
Now available on Amazon in paperback and Kindle format --  
 
  


To unsubscribe, click reply and write unsubscribe in the subject line.




<div><div>
<div><span><br class="yui-cursor"></span></div>
<div>
<br>&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<div>
<div class="y_msg_container">
<br><div>
<div class="yiv7076675238gmail_quote">
<div class="yiv7076675238gmail_quote">
<div><span>Hi, here is my latest article, posted on AlterNet &ndash;</span></div>
<span></span>
</div>
<div class="yiv7076675238gmail_quote">
<span></span>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Grotesque Plan for Detroit: Fleece Working People to Save the Banks</div>
<div>
<a href="http://www.alternet.org/economy/detroit-and-pensions" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.alternet.org/economy/detroit-and-pensions</a><br>
</div>
<div class="yiv7076675238gmail_quote">
<div class="yiv7076675238gmail_quote">
<div>
<h1><span>Best wishes,</span></h1>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span>Ellen Brown</span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://webofdebt.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>http://webofdebt.com</span></span></a></span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://publicbankinginstitute.org/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>http://publicbankinginstitute.org</span></span></a></span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://publicbanksolution.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>http://publicbanksolution.<span>com</span></span></span></a></span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Public-Bank-Solution-Austerity-Prosperity/dp/0983330867/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1371913558&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=public+bank+solution" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span><span>No<span>w available</span></span></span></a> on Amazon in paperback and Kindle format --&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal">
<span><span></span></span>&nbsp;</div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><span>
<ul><li>
<div><a href="http://www.publicbanksolution.com/order/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"></a></div>
</li></ul></span></span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal">
<span><span></span></span>&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span>
</div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><br></span></div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span><br></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="yiv7076675238MsoNormal"><span>To unsubscribe, click reply and write unsubscribe in the subject line.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div>
Michel Bauwens | 5 Aug 23:08 2013
Picon

Fwd: [Commoning] Statement of Separation /F.Iacomella



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Silke Helfrich <silke.helfrich-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>
Date: Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:58 PM
Subject: [Commoning] Statement of Separation /F.Iacomella
To: commoning <commoning-RusutVdil2gvboR77QhrqE/6LrJJCfpm@public.gmane.org>


August 1, 2013


Dear friends,


We write to share some urgent, distressing news.

It has been shocking for us to learn in recent weeks that someone who worked closely with many of us, Franco Iacomella, has systematically interfered with email correspondence from 50+ people; secretly altered Skype accounts; perpetrated a variety of digital impersonations; and misrepresented his professional credentials and affiliations. We do not make such accusations lightly; we have digital proof and a partial confession.

These actions have had serious consequences for our working relationships, projects, outreach and funding efforts and personal reputations. They have also sowed the seeds of distrust and hurt feelings amongst long-standing collaborators who were unaware of the manipulated nature of their communications. And so we wish to publicly declare that the Commons Strategies Group, P2P Foundation and Heinrich Boell Foundation will no longer be working with Franco Iacomella. We have severed all personal and professional relationships with him, and are exploring legal action as warranted.

The organizations directly affected by Iacomella’s manipulations and deceptions include the P2P Foundation, the Commons Strategies Group and FLACSO (Argentina) as well as a number of individuals, especially Beatriz Busaniche of Via Libre (Argentina) and Michel Bauwens (P2P Foundation). The Heinrich Boll Foundation, the Right Livelihood Award Foundation and Vía Libre Foundation were all indirectly affected. Untold other individuals and groups may have been affected by these communications manipulations without even perceiving them.

If you have experienced unusual issues when dealings with the organizations or individuals named here (i.e., failures to respond; unusual emails; abrupt terminations of Skype contact links; etc.), we wish to apologize. We also wish to ask you to re-connect with these organizations and individuals, and resume ongoing relationships without the malicious interventions and impersonations that Iacomella perpetrated in an unknown number of cases from at least September 2012 until July 2013.

As one might imagine, Iacomella’s deceptions have had all sorts of insidious and subtle effects on our working relationships with each other, on dozens of colleagues with whom we work, and on the commons movement more generally. We now wish to refocus on rebuilding the interpersonal and social fabric that binds us together in shared purpose.

Sincerely,

P2P Foundation: Michel Bauwens
Commons Strategies Group: Michel Bauwens, Silke Helfrich, David Bollier
Heinrich Böll Foundation: Heike Loeschmann
Vía Libre Foundation (Argentina): Beatriz Busaniche
FLACSO Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (Argentina): Miguel Lengyel (Director).
_______________________________________________
Commoning mailing list
Commoning <at> lists.wissensallmende.de
http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning



--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
<div><div dir="ltr">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: Silke Helfrich <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:silke.helfrich@...">silke.helfrich@...</a>&gt;</span><br>
Date: Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:58 PM<br>Subject: [Commoning] Statement of Separation /F.Iacomella<br>To: commoning &lt;<a href="mailto:commoning <at> lists.wissensallmende.de">commoning@...</a>&gt;<br><br><br>
August 1, 2013<br><br><br>
Dear friends,<br><br><br>
We write to share some urgent, distressing news.<br><br>
It has been shocking for us to learn in recent weeks that someone who worked closely with many of us, Franco Iacomella, has systematically interfered with email correspondence from 50+ people; secretly altered Skype accounts; perpetrated a variety of digital impersonations; and misrepresented his professional credentials and affiliations. We do not make such accusations lightly; we have digital proof and a partial confession.<br><br>
These actions have had serious consequences for our working relationships, projects, outreach and funding efforts and personal reputations. They have also sowed the seeds of distrust and hurt feelings amongst long-standing collaborators who were unaware of the manipulated nature of their communications. And so we wish to publicly declare that the Commons Strategies Group, P2P Foundation and Heinrich Boell Foundation will no longer be working with Franco Iacomella. We have severed all personal and professional relationships with him, and are exploring legal action as warranted.<br><br>
The organizations directly affected by Iacomella&rsquo;s manipulations and deceptions include the P2P Foundation, the Commons Strategies Group and FLACSO (Argentina) as well as a number of individuals, especially Beatriz Busaniche of Via Libre (Argentina) and Michel Bauwens (P2P Foundation). The Heinrich Boll Foundation, the Right Livelihood Award Foundation and V&iacute;a Libre Foundation were all indirectly affected. Untold other individuals and groups may have been affected by these communications manipulations without even perceiving them.<br><br>
If you have experienced unusual issues when dealings with the organizations or individuals named here (i.e., failures to respond; unusual emails; abrupt terminations of Skype contact links; etc.), we wish to apologize. We also wish to ask you to re-connect with these organizations and individuals, and resume ongoing relationships without the malicious interventions and impersonations that Iacomella perpetrated in an unknown number of cases from at least September 2012 until July 2013.<br><br>
As one might imagine, Iacomella&rsquo;s deceptions have had all sorts of insidious and subtle effects on our working relationships with each other, on dozens of colleagues with whom we work, and on the commons movement more generally. We now wish to refocus on rebuilding the interpersonal and social fabric that binds us together in shared purpose.<br><br>
Sincerely,<br><br>
P2P Foundation: Michel Bauwens<br>
Commons Strategies Group: Michel Bauwens, Silke Helfrich, David Bollier<br>
Heinrich B&ouml;ll Foundation: Heike Loeschmann<br>
V&iacute;a Libre Foundation (Argentina): Beatriz Busaniche<br>
FLACSO Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (Argentina): Miguel Lengyel (Director).<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Commoning mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Commoning@..." target="_blank">Commoning <at> lists.wissensallmende.de</a><br><a href="http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning" target="_blank">http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning</a><br>
</div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>&nbsp; - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br><br><a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank"></a>Updates: <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br><br>#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href="http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/" target="_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/</a> <br>
</div></div>
TeamSpeak Piracy | 5 Aug 19:56 2013

[#ITJ-610-65627]: Robert steeles p2p ideas

Gordon Cook,

Thank you for contacting us. This is an automated response confirming the receipt of your ticket. One of our agents will get back to you as soon as possible. For your records, the details of the ticket are listed below. When replying, please make sure that the ticket ID is kept in the subject line to ensure that your replies are tracked appropriately.

   Ticket ID: ITJ-610-65627
   Subject: [P2P-F] Robert steeles p2p ideas
   Department: Piracy [English]
   Type: Issue
   Status: Open

You can check the status of or reply to this ticket online at: https://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/ITJ-610-65627

Kind regards,

TeamSpeak USA, Inc.

________________________________
TeamSpeak Piracy
e-Mail: piracy-xCrw+lmo8LGah5CUvvkevw@public.gmane.org
Visit: http://www.TeamSpeak.com
Knowledgebase: http://support.TeamSpeakUSA.com

Hours of operation for this department are Monday - Friday, 9AM to 5PM Pacific Time (UTC-8). We are committed to responding to your inquiry within 48 hours, and typically will reply within 24 hours, excluding weekends and holidays.
<div>Gordon Cook,<br><br>
Thank you for contacting us. This is an automated response confirming the receipt of your ticket. One of our agents will get back to you as soon as possible. For your records, the details of the ticket are listed below. When replying, please make sure that the ticket ID is kept in the subject line to ensure that your replies are tracked appropriately.<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ticket ID: ITJ-610-65627<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Subject: [P2P-F] Robert steeles p2p ideas<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Department: Piracy [English]<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Type: Issue<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Status: Open<br><br>
You can check the status of or reply to this ticket online at: <a href="https://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/ITJ-610-65627" target="_blank">https://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/ITJ-610-65627</a><br><br>
Kind regards,<br><br>
TeamSpeak USA, Inc.<br><br>________________________________<br>
TeamSpeak Piracy<br>
e-Mail: <a href="mailto:piracy <at> teamspeakusa.com">piracy@...</a><br>
Visit: <a href="http://www.TeamSpeak.com" target="_blank">http://www.TeamSpeak.com</a><br>
Knowledgebase: <a href="http://support.TeamSpeakUSA.com" target="_blank">http://support.TeamSpeakUSA.com</a><br><br>
Hours of operation for this department are Monday - Friday, 9AM to 5PM Pacific Time (UTC-8). We are committed to responding to your inquiry within 48 hours, and typically will reply within 24 hours, excluding weekends and holidays.<br>
</div>
Gordon Cook | 5 Aug 18:17 2013

Robert steeles p2p ideas

Hi friends

Here is hoping that things are settling down on the positive side for michel.  Robert steele has a long and open record more recently of advocating the internet as a global source of OPEN intelligence.  His outspokenness has caused official washington treat him like the "enemy' hence using his brain to put bread on his table has been increasingly difficult.  His open source manifesto... a paperback book is well worth a look as are the ideas here in.  He says on  august 8th he is disappearing for 2 years.  I have no idea of the details.... i hope to europe or to chaing mai <only half joking>.

anyone interested in these ideas not in touch with him should get in touch.



Begin forwarded message:

Date: August 3, 2013 2:57:36 PM EDT
Cc: Discussion list for GigaNet Members <GIGANET-MEMBERS <at> listserv.syr.edu>, Gordon Cook <cook-JZwqSjhD2US61VtY7fu8aA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: can I help with the multi-stakeholder project?

I am a member of the GIGANET global network, and have reposted your press release to Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog.

Internet Society: Questionnaire on Multistakeholder Participation in Internet Governance + Open Letter to the Internet Society

I have three areas where I am concerned about a possible lack of focus by the Internet Society:

01  Resilience of the Internet in the face of government and corporate corruption and repression.  I devised the
Autonomous Internet Roadmap that you can find at P2P Foundation's wiki.  What NSA has been doing with
PRISM, and other countries and corporations betraying the public trust, is absolutely outrageous and should be
addressed by a self-healing network.

02  Focus on values and full participation by all eight tribes of intelligence: academic, civil society including
labor and religion, commerce with particular focus on small and smallest business, government with particular
focus on local and hybrid governance, law enforcement, media, military, and non-government/non-profit -- and of
course all individuals as themselves and as the amorphous public capable of collective intelligence.

03  Focus on sense-making.  I had this discussion with Vint Cerf over sushi before he went over to the dark side
with Google.  Nothing available on the Internet now can offer the public a means of integrated requirements
definition, collection management, machine-speed translation and multi-media processing, multi-cultural
holistic and true cost economic analytics, and educationally helpful rapid visualization of complex topics to
inspire public hybrid governance.

I am in Oakton, VA until 8 August at which time I begin a two year period away from the area.  I would be
delighted to come in for a round-table in the next few days if there were any interest.  Otherwise I will be
easily available via the Internet and Skype.  The questionnaire you are about to launch could be one of the
most important initiatives every undertaken by the Internet Society.  I am also relatively certain it does not
address the above three issues, and I would like very much to help you do that.

I am posting this for the record as an open letter at Phi Beta Iota, and offering it to Gordon Cook for
republication in the Cook Report should he so wish.  I attach a few graphics to make some of my points,
this is an area that the Earth Intelligence Network (501c3) has been focusing on for six years, standing
on the shoulders of many others going back to Quincy Wright in 1957 and forward to Buckminster Fuller
and Russell Ackoff, among many others.  My short profile is attached.  Learn more at http://tinyurl.com/Steele2012 (self)
and http://tinyurl.com/Steele21 (index)

Robert David STEELE Vivas
CEO (pro bono)
Earth Intelligence Network
Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog

Cell (until midnight on 7 August) 571.455.2883

<div>
<div>
<span class="Apple-style-span">Hi friends<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<div>Here is hoping that things are settling down on the positive side for michel. &nbsp;Robert steele has a long and open record more recently of advocating the internet as a global source of OPEN intelligence. &nbsp;His outspokenness has caused official washington treat him like the "enemy' hence using his brain to put bread on his table has been increasingly difficult. &nbsp;His open source manifesto... a paperback book is well worth a look as are the ideas here in. &nbsp;He says on &nbsp;august 8th he is disappearing for 2 years. &nbsp;I have no idea of the details.... i hope to europe or to chaing mai &lt;only half joking&gt;.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>anyone interested in these ideas not in touch with him should get in touch.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>
<br><div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<span>From: </span><span>Robert Steele &lt;<a href="mailto:robert.david.steele.vivas@...">robert.david.steele.vivas@...</a>&gt;<br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>Date: </span><span>August 3, 2013 2:57:36 PM EDT<br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>To: </span><span><a href="mailto:cover@...">cover@...</a><br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>Cc: </span><span>Discussion list for GigaNet Members &lt;<a href="mailto:GIGANET-MEMBERS@...">GIGANET-MEMBERS <at> listserv.syr.edu</a>&gt;, Gordon Cook &lt;<a href="mailto:cook@...">cook@...</a>&gt;<br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>Subject: </span><span>can I help with the multi-stakeholder project?<br></span>
</div>
<br>I am a member of the GIGANET global network, and have reposted your press release to Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog.<br><br><a href="http://www.phibetaiota.net/2013/08/internet-society-questionnaire-on-multistakeholder-participation-in-internet-governance/" rel="bookmark">Internet Society: Questionnaire on Multistakeholder Participation in Internet Governance + Open Letter to the Internet Society</a><br><br>I have three areas where I am concerned about a possible lack of focus by the Internet Society:<br><br>01&nbsp; Resilience of the Internet in the face of government and corporate corruption and repression.&nbsp; I devised the<br><a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Autonomous_Internet_Road_Map">Autonomous Internet Roadmap</a> that you can find at P2P Foundation's wiki.&nbsp; What NSA has been doing with<br>PRISM, and other countries and corporations betraying the public trust, is absolutely outrageous and should be<br>
addressed by a self-healing network.<br><br>02&nbsp; Focus on values and full participation by all eight tribes of intelligence: academic, civil society including <br>labor and religion, commerce with particular focus on small and smallest business, government with particular<br>
focus on local and hybrid governance, law enforcement, media, military, and non-government/non-profit -- and of<br>course all individuals as themselves and as the amorphous public capable of collective intelligence.<br><br>
03&nbsp; Focus on sense-making.&nbsp; I had this discussion with Vint Cerf over sushi before he went over to the dark side<br>with Google.&nbsp; Nothing available on the Internet now can offer the public a means of integrated requirements<br>
definition, collection management, machine-speed translation and multi-media processing, multi-cultural<br>holistic and true cost economic analytics, and educationally helpful rapid visualization of complex topics to<br>inspire public hybrid governance.<br><br>I am in Oakton, VA until 8 August at which time I begin a two year period away from the area.&nbsp; I would be<br>delighted to come in for a round-table in the next few days if there were any interest.&nbsp; Otherwise I will be<br>
easily available via the Internet and Skype.&nbsp; The questionnaire you are about to launch could be one of the<br>most important initiatives every undertaken by the Internet Society.&nbsp; I am also relatively certain it does not<br>
address the above three issues, and I would like very much to help you do that.<br><br>I am posting this for the record as an open letter at Phi Beta Iota, and offering it to Gordon Cook for<br>republication in the Cook Report should he so wish.&nbsp; I attach a few graphics to make some of my points,<br>
this is an area that the Earth Intelligence Network (501c3) has been focusing on for six years, standing<br>on the shoulders of many others going back to Quincy Wright in 1957 and forward to Buckminster Fuller<br>and Russell Ackoff, among many others.&nbsp; My short profile is attached.&nbsp; Learn more at <a href="http://tinyurl.com/Steele2012">http://tinyurl.com/Steele2012</a> (self)<br>
and <a href="http://tinyurl.com/Steele21">http://tinyurl.com/Steele21</a> (index)<br><br>Robert David STEELE Vivas<br>CEO (pro bono)<br>Earth Intelligence Network<br>Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog<br><br>Cell (until midnight on 7 August) 571.455.2883<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
TeamSpeak Piracy | 5 Aug 10:32 2013

[#BWN-830-34714]: Fw: Rationality Counts, or RCs? In Connection with the Universal Debating Project

robert searle,

Thank you for contacting us. This is an automated response confirming the receipt of your ticket. One of our agents will get back to you as soon as possible. For your records, the details of the ticket are listed below. When replying, please make sure that the ticket ID is kept in the subject line to ensure that your replies are tracked appropriately.

   Ticket ID: BWN-830-34714
   Subject: [P2P-F] Fw: Rationality Counts, or RCs? In Connection with the Universal Debating Project
   Department: Piracy [English]
   Type: Issue
   Status: Open

You can check the status of or reply to this ticket online at: https://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/BWN-830-34714

Kind regards,

TeamSpeak USA, Inc.

________________________________
TeamSpeak Piracy
e-Mail: piracy <at> teamspeakusa.com
Visit: http://www.TeamSpeak.com
Knowledgebase: http://support.TeamSpeakUSA.com

Hours of operation for this department are Monday - Friday, 9AM to 5PM Pacific Time (UTC-8). We are committed to responding to your inquiry within 48 hours, and typically will reply within 24 hours, excluding weekends and holidays.
<div>robert searle,<br><br>
Thank you for contacting us. This is an automated response confirming the receipt of your ticket. One of our agents will get back to you as soon as possible. For your records, the details of the ticket are listed below. When replying, please make sure that the ticket ID is kept in the subject line to ensure that your replies are tracked appropriately.<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ticket ID: BWN-830-34714<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Subject: [P2P-F] Fw: Rationality Counts, or RCs? In Connection with the Universal Debating Project<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Department: Piracy [English]<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Type: Issue<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Status: Open<br><br>
You can check the status of or reply to this ticket online at: <a href="https://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/BWN-830-34714" target="_blank">https://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/BWN-830-34714</a><br><br>
Kind regards,<br><br>
TeamSpeak USA, Inc.<br><br>________________________________<br>
TeamSpeak Piracy<br>
e-Mail: <a href="mailto:piracy@...">piracy <at> teamspeakusa.com</a><br>
Visit: <a href="http://www.TeamSpeak.com" target="_blank">http://www.TeamSpeak.com</a><br>
Knowledgebase: <a href="http://support.TeamSpeakUSA.com" target="_blank">http://support.TeamSpeakUSA.com</a><br><br>
Hours of operation for this department are Monday - Friday, 9AM to 5PM Pacific Time (UTC-8). We are committed to responding to your inquiry within 48 hours, and typically will reply within 24 hours, excluding weekends and holidays.<br>
</div>
robert searle | 5 Aug 10:27 2013
Picon

Fw: Rationality Counts, or RCs? In Connection with the Universal Debating Project



Apologies if this has appeared twice

 
 
Dear All,
 
             Assistance is requested on the following matter. I have just updated my p2p foundation link on the Universal Debating Project, and have included a "new" concept. It is called a Rationality Count, or RC for short. I expect there are ideas very similiar, if not identical  to it possibly, and I would be very grateful for any feedback. Maybe Michel may know with all his great knowledge?
 
 
 
Relevant section shown here from above link
 
 
An intriguing aspect of this "Global Brain" is that we could have what is termed a Rationality Count(RC). This would be the electronic tracking of peoples decision-making processes for, and against a specific topic. This could give us valuable insight as to the degrees of rationality people may have. For instance, 2,000 people may select pro argument a for topic C via the internet. Then, a con argument b could be presented online for the same topic C, and 1,500 decide to agree with it, and ofcourse, press the right button on their computers to transmit their decision...and so on. We may well find interesting patterns if RCs are used. At present, how new this concept is unknown but it is worth considering.
 
 
 
 
Regards,
 
R Searle


<div><div>
<div><span><br class="yui-cursor"></span></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">Apologies if this has appeared twice</div>
<div class="y_msg_container">
<br><div>
<div>
<div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Dear All,</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Assistance is requested on the following matter. I have just updated my p2p foundation link on the Universal Debating Project, and have included a "new" concept. It is called a Rationality Count, or RC for short. I expect there are ideas very similiar, if not identical &nbsp;to it possibly, and I would be very grateful for any feedback. Maybe Michel may know with all his great knowledge?</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Universal_Debating_Project" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Universal_Debating_Project</a></div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Relevant section shown here from above link</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>An intriguing aspect of this "Global Brain" is that we could have what is termed a Rationality Count(RC). This would be the electronic tracking of peoples decision-making processes for, and against a specific topic. This could give us valuable insight as to the degrees of rationality people may have. For instance, 2,000 people may select pro argument a for topic C via the internet. Then, a con argument b could be presented online for the same topic C, and 1,500 decide to agree with it, and ofcourse, press the right button on their computers to transmit their decision...and so on. We may well find interesting patterns if RCs are used. At present, how new this concept is unknown but it is worth considering. </div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>R Searle</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div>
Michel Bauwens | 1 Aug 17:20 2013
Picon

Fwd: [Debate-List] Fwd: Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: peter waterman <peterwaterman1936-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 8:02 AM
Subject: Fwd: [Debate-List] Fwd: Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...
To: gina vargas <ginvargas <at> gmail.com>, Raphael Hoetmer <Raphael-XHY41rYLFHZhna2BBTVSRWD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Michel Bauwens <michel-JQUKMTwiyfjVe7td6HMt/l6hYfS7NtTn@public.gmane.org>, Hilary Wainwright <wainwright.hilary-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>


Just in case you missed this, or I failed to forward this, at the time.

It bears re-reading.

P


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jai Sen <jai.sen-YWKT5xJmpH1eoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
Date: Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:28 PM
Subject: [Debate-List] Fwd: Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...
To: Post WSFDiscuss <WorldSocialForum-Discuss-GolCrF26ocHRrB5d8S/8CKxOck334EZe@public.gmane.org>, Post Debate <Debate-list-bG6s+D2qY7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>, Post Activism News Network <activism-news-network-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org>, Post Social Movements Riseup <social-movements-3hfIC0tI0F+k/GrYEfjPQg@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jai Sen <jai.sen-YWKT5xJmpH1eoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>, Brian K Murphy <brian-LjsPq+C11TOIAolwgO2JMg@public.gmane.org>


Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Trouble in Paradise

Slavoj Zizek on the global protest

            Thanks, Brian !

            JS

fwd

Begin forwarded message:

Subject: Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...
Date: July 31, 2013 9:47:53 AM EDT
To: Recipient List Suppressed:;

London Review of Books Vol. 35 No. 14 · 18 July 2013
Trouble in Paradise
Slavoj Zizek on the global protest

In his early writings, Marx described the German situation as one in which the only answer to particular problems was the universal solution: global revolution. This is a succinct expression of the difference between a reformist and a revolutionary period: in a reformist period, global revolution remains a dream which, if it does anything, merely lends weight to attempts to change things locally; in a revolutionary period, it becomes clear that nothing will improve without radical global change. In this purely formal sense, 1990 was a revolutionary year: it was plain that partial reforms of the Communist states would not do the job and that a total break was needed to resolve even such everyday problems as making sure there was enough for people to eat.

Where do we stand today with respect to this difference? Are the problems and protests of the last few years signs of an approaching global crisis, or are they just minor obstacles that can be dealt with by means of local interventions? The most remarkable thing about the eruptions is that they are taking place not only, or even primarily, at the weak points in the system, but in places which were until now perceived as success stories. We know why people are protesting in Greece or Spain; but why is there trouble in such prosperous or fast-developing countries as Turkey, Sweden or Brazil? With hindsight, we might see the Khomeini revolution of 1979 as the original 'trouble in paradise', given that it happened in a country that was on the fast-track of pro-Western modernisation, and the West's staunchest ally in the region. Maybe there's something wrong with our notion of paradise.

Before the current wave of protests, Turkey was the very model of a state able to combine a thriving liberal economy with moderate Islamism, fit for Europe, a welcome contrast to the more 'European' Greece, caught in an ideological quagmire and bent on economic self-destruction. True, there were ominous signs here and there (Turkey's denial of the Armenian holocaust; the arrests of journalists; the unresolved status of the Kurds; calls for a greater Turkey which would resuscitate the tradition of the Ottoman Empire; the occasional imposition of religious laws), but these were dismissed as small stains that should not be allowed to taint the overall picture.

Then the Taksim Square protests exploded. Everyone knows that the planned transformation of a park that borders on Taksim Square in central Istanbul into a shopping centre was not what the protests were 'really about', and that a much deeper unease was gaining strength. The same was true of the protests in Brazil in mid-June: what triggered those was a small rise in the cost of public transport, but they went on even after the measure was revoked. Here too the protests had exploded in a country which - according to the media, at least - was enjoying an economic boom and had every reason to feel confident about the future. In this case the protests were apparently supported by the president, Dilma Rousseff, who declared herself delighted by them.

It is crucial that we don't see the Turkish protests merely as a secular civil society rising up against an authoritarian Islamist regime supported by a silent Muslim majority. What complicates the picture is the protests' anti-capitalist thrust: protesters intuitively sense that free-market fundamentalism and fundamentalist Islam are not mutually exclusive. The privatisation of public space by an Islamist government shows that the two forms of fundamentalism can work hand in hand: it's a clear sign that the 'eternal' marriage between democracy and capitalism is nearing divorce.

It is also important to recognise that the protesters aren't pursuing any identifiable 'real' goal. The protests are not 'really' against global capitalism, 'really' against religious fundamentalism, 'really' for civil freedoms and democracy, or 'really' about any one thing in particular. What the majority of those who have participated in the protests are aware of is a fluid feeling of unease and discontent that sustains and unites various specific demands. The struggle to understand the protests is not just an epistemological one, with journalists and theorists trying to explain their true content; it is also an ontological struggle over the thing itself, which is taking place within the protests themselves. Is this just a struggle against corrupt city administration? Is it a struggle against authoritarian Islamist rule? Is it a struggle against the privatisation of public space? The question is open, and how it is answered will depend on the result of an ongoing political process.

In 2011, when protests were erupting across Europe and the Middle East, many insisted that they shouldn't be treated as instances of a single global movement. Instead, they argued, each was a response to a specific situation. In Egypt, the protesters wanted what in other countries the Occupy movement was protesting against: 'freedom' and 'democracy'. Even among Muslim countries, there were crucial differences: the Arab Spring in Egypt was a protest against a corrupt authoritarian pro-Western regime; the Green Revolution in Iran that began in 2009 was against authoritarian Islamism. It is easy to see how such a particularisation of protest appeals to defenders of the status quo: there is no threat against the global order as such, just a series of separate local problems.

Global capitalism is a complex process which affects different countries in different ways. What unites the protests, for all their multifariousness, is that they are all reactions against different facets of capitalist globalisation. The general tendency of today's global capitalism is towards further expansion of the market, creeping enclosure of public space, reduction of public services (healthcare, education, culture), and increasingly authoritarian political power. It is in this context that Greeks are protesting against the rule of international financial capital and their own corrupt and inefficient state, which is less and less able to provide basic social services. It is in this context too that Turks are protesting against the commercialisation of public space and against religious authoritarianism; that Egyptians are protesting against a regime supported by the Western powers; that Iranians are protesting against corruption and religious fundamentalism, and so on. None of these protests can be reduced to a single issue. They all deal with a specific combination of at least two issues, one economic (from corruption to inefficiency to capitalism itself), the other politico-ideological (from the demand for democracy to the demand that conventional multi-party democracy be overthrown). The same holds for the Occupy movement. Beneath the profusion of (often confused) statements, the movement had two basic features: first, discontent with capitalism as a system, not just with its particular local corruptions; second, an awareness that the institutionalised form of representative multi-party democracy is not equipped to fight capitalist excess, i.e. democracy has to be reinvented.

Just because the underlying cause of the protests is global capitalism, that doesn't mean the only solution is directly to overthrow it. Nor is it viable to pursue the pragmatic alternative, which is to deal with individual problems and wait for a radical transformation. That ignores the fact that global capitalism is necessarily inconsistent: market freedom goes hand in hand with US support for its own farmers; preaching democracy goes hand in hand with supporting Saudi Arabia. This inconsistency opens up a space for political intervention: wherever the global capitalist system is forced to violate its own rules, there is an opportunity to insist that it follow those rules. To demand consistency at strategically selected points where the system cannot afford to be consistent is to put pressure on the entire system. The art of politics lies in making particular demands which, while thoroughly realistic, strike at the core of hegemonic ideology and imply much more radical change. Such demands, while feasible and legitimate, are de facto impossible. Obama's proposal for universal healthcare was such a case, which is why reactions to it were so violent.

A political movement begins with an idea, something to strive for, but in time the idea undergoes a profound transformation - not just a tactical accommodation, but an essential redefinition - because the idea itself becomes part of the process: it becomes over-determined.**  Say a revolt starts with a demand for justice, perhaps in the form of a call for a particular law to be repealed. Once people get deeply engaged in it, they become aware that much more than meeting their initial demand would be needed to bring about true justice. The problem is to define what, precisely, the 'much more' consists in. The liberal-pragmatic view is that problems can be solved gradually, one by one: 'People are dying now in Rwanda, so forget about anti-imperialist struggle, let's just prevent the slaughter'; or 'We have to fight poverty and racism here and now, not wait for the collapse of the global capitalist order.' John Caputo argued along these lines in After the Death of God (2007):
I would be perfectly happy if the far-left politicians in the United States were able to reform the system by providing universal healthcare, effectively redistributing wealth more equitably with a revised IRS code, effectively restricting campaign financing, enfranchising all voters, treating migrant workers humanely, and effecting a multilateral foreign policy that would integrate American power within the international community etc, i.e. intervene upon capitalism by means of serious and far-reaching reforms Š If after doing all that Badiou and Zizek complained that some Monster called Capitalism still stalks us, I would be inclined to greet that Monster with a yawn.

The problem here is not Caputo's conclusion: if one could achieve all that within capitalism, why not stay there? The problem is the underlying premise that it's possible to achieve all that within global capitalism in its present form. What if the malfunctionings of capitalism listed by Caputo aren't merely contingent perturbations but structural necessities? What if Caputo's dream is a dream of a universal capitalist order without its symptoms, without the critical points at which its 'repressed truth' shows itself?

****

Today's protests and revolts are sustained by the combination of overlapping demands, and this accounts for their strength: they fight for 'normal', parliamentary democracy against authoritarian regimes; against racism and sexism, especially when directed at immigrants and refugees; against corruption in politics and business (industrial pollution of the environment etc); for the welfare state against neoliberalism; and for new forms of democracy that reach beyond multi-party rituals. They also question the global capitalist system as such and try to keep alive the idea of a society beyond capitalism. Two traps are to be avoided here: false radicalism ('what really matters is the abolition of liberal-parliamentary capitalism, all other fights are secondary'), but also false gradualism ('right now we should fight against military dictatorship and for basic democracy, all dreams of socialism should be put aside for now'). Here there is no shame in recalling the Maoist distinction between principal and secondary antagonisms, between those that matter most in the end and those that dominate now. There are situations in which to insist on the principal antagonism means to miss the opportunity to strike a significant blow in the struggle.

Only a politics that fully takes into account the complexity of overdetermination deserves to be called a strategy. When we join a specific struggle, the key question is: how will our engagement in it or disengagement from it affect other struggles? The general rule is that when a revolt against an oppressive half-democratic regime begins, as with the Middle East in 2011, it is easy to mobilise large crowds with slogans - for democracy, against corruption etc. But we are soon faced with more difficult choices. When the revolt succeeds in its initial goal, we come to realise that what is really bothering us (our lack of freedom, our humiliation, corruption, poor prospects) persists in a new guise, so that we are forced to recognise that there was a flaw in the goal itself. This may mean coming to see that democracy can itself be a form of un-freedom, or that we must demand more than merely political democracy: social and economic life must be democratised too. In short, what we first took as a failure fully to apply a noble principle (democratic freedom) is in fact a failure inherent in the principle itself. This realisation - that failure may be inherent in the principle we're fighting for - is a big step in a political education.

Representatives of the ruling ideology roll out their entire arsenal to prevent us from reaching this radical conclusion. They tell us that democratic freedom brings its own responsibilities, that it comes at a price, that it is immature to expect too much from democracy. In a free society, they say, we must behave as capitalists investing in our own lives: if we fail to make the necessary sacrifices, or if we come up short in any way, we have no one to blame but ourselves. In a more directly political sense, the US has consistently pursued a strategy of damage control in its foreign policy by re-channelling popular uprisings into acceptable parliamentary-capitalist forms: in South Africa after apartheid, in the Philippines after the fall of Marcos, in Indonesia after Suharto etc. This is where politics proper begins: the question is how to push further once the first, exciting wave of change is over, how to take the next step without succumbing to the 'totalitarian' temptation, how to move beyond Mandela without becoming Mugabe.

What would this mean in a concrete case? Let's compare two neighbouring countries, Greece and Turkey. At first glance, they may seem to be entirely different: Greece is trapped in the ruinous politics of austerity, while Turkey is enjoying an economic boom and emerging as a new regional superpower. But what if each Turkey generates and contains its own Greece, its own islands of misery? As Brecht put it in 'Hollywood Elegies':
The village of Hollywood was planned according to the notion
People in these parts have of heaven. In these parts
They have come to the conclusion that God
Requiring a heaven and a hell, didn't need to
Plan two establishments but
Just the one: heaven. It
Serves the unprosperous, unsuccessful
As hell.

This describes today's 'global village' rather well: just apply it to Qatar or Dubai, playgrounds of the rich that are dependent on conditions of near slavery for immigrant workers. A closer look reveals underlying similarities between Turkey and Greece: privatisation, the enclosure of public space, the dismantling of social services, the rise of authoritarian politics. At an elementary level, Greek and Turkish protesters are engaged in the same struggle. The true path would be to co-ordinate the two struggles, to reject 'patriotic' temptations, to leave behind the two countries' historical enmity and to seek grounds for solidarity. The future of the protests may depend on it.

** 'In his preface to the Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Marx wrote (in his worst evolutionary mode) that humanity only poses itself tasks it is able to solve. What if we turned this statement around and claimed that as a rule humanity poses itself tasks it cannot solve, and thereby triggers an unpredictable process in the course of which the task itself is redefined?'


ISSN 0260-9592 Copyright © LRB Ltd., 1997-2013 |

______________________________

Jai Sen

jai.sen <at> cacim.net

www.cacim.net / http://www.openword.in

Now based in Ottawa, Canada (+1-613-282 2900), and New Delhi, India (+91-98189 11325)

RECENT PUBLICATIONS :

Jai Sen and Peter Waterman, eds, 2012 – World Social Forum : Critical Explorations. Volume 3 in the Challenging Empires series.  New Delhi : OpenWord. Available now as an ebook - internationally at http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ and in India at http://pothi.com/pothi/book/ebook-jai-sen-world-social-forum-critical-explorations

Jai Sen, ed, 2012 - Imagining Alternatives, Book 3 in the Are Other Worlds Possible ? series.  New Delhi : OpenWord and Daanish Books

FORTHCOMING PUBLICATIONS  :

Jai Sen, ed, forthcoming (2013) – The Movements of Movements : Struggles for Other Worlds. Volume 4 in the Challenging Empires series.  New Delhi : OpenWord

CHECK OUT CACIM  <at>  www.cacim.net, OpenWord  <at>  http://www.openword.in, and OpenSpaceForum  <at>  www.openspaceforum.net

AND SUBSCRIBE TO WSFDiscuss, an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of information and views on the experience, practice, and theory of social and political movement at any level (local, national, regional, and global), including the World Social Forum.  To subscribe, simply send an empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe-GolCrF26ocHRrB5d8S/8CKxOck334EZe@public.gmane.org


--
To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current email and log in using gmail to access the archives.
https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "debate-list <at> fahamu.org" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to debate-list+unsubscribe-bG6s+D2qY7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org.
To post to this group, send email to debate-list-bG6s+D2qY7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/.
 
 



--



--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
<div><div dir="ltr">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: peter waterman <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:peterwaterman1936@...">peterwaterman1936@...</a>&gt;</span><br>
Date: Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 8:02 AM<br>Subject: Fwd: [Debate-List] Fwd: Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...<br>To: gina vargas &lt;<a href="mailto:ginvargas@...">ginvargas <at> gmail.com</a>&gt;, Raphael Hoetmer &lt;<a href="mailto:Raphael <at> democraciaglobal.org">Raphael@...</a>&gt;, Orsan Senalp &lt;<a href="mailto:orsan1234@...">orsan1234@...</a>&gt;, Michel Bauwens &lt;<a href="mailto:michel@...">michel@...</a>&gt;, Hilary Wainwright &lt;<a href="mailto:wainwright.hilary@...">wainwright.hilary@...</a>&gt;<br><br><br><div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Just in case you missed this, or I failed to forward this, at the time.<br><br>
</div>It bears re-reading.<br><br>
</div>P<br><br><div><div><div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>

From: Jai Sen <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:jai.sen@..." target="_blank">jai.sen@...</a>&gt;</span><br>Date: Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:28 PM<br>Subject: [Debate-List] Fwd: Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...<br>

To: Post WSFDiscuss &lt;<a href="mailto:WorldSocialForum-Discuss <at> openspaceforum.net" target="_blank">WorldSocialForum-Discuss@...</a>&gt;, Post Debate &lt;<a href="mailto:Debate-list@..." target="_blank">Debate-list@...</a>&gt;, Post Activism News Network &lt;<a href="mailto:activism-news-network@..." target="_blank">activism-news-network@...</a>&gt;, Post Social Movements Riseup &lt;<a href="mailto:social-movements@..." target="_blank">social-movements@...</a>&gt;<br>

Cc: Jai Sen &lt;<a href="mailto:jai.sen@..." target="_blank">jai.sen@...</a>&gt;, Brian K Murphy &lt;<a href="mailto:brian <at> radicalroad.com" target="_blank">brian@...</a>&gt;<br><br><br><div>

<p class="MsoNormal">Wednesday, July 31, 2013</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Trouble in Paradise</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Slavoj Zizek<span> on the global
protest</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Thanks, Brian
!</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>JS</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">fwd</p>
<div>
<div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
<br><blockquote type="cite">
<div>

<span>From: </span><span>"Brian K. Murphy" &lt;<a href="mailto:brian@..." target="_blank">brian@...</a>&gt;<br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>Subject: </span><span>Wither the revolution? Slavoj Zizek reflects on contemporary global protest...<br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>Date: </span><span>July 31, 2013 9:47:53 AM EDT<br></span>
</div>
<div>
<span>To: </span><span>Recipient List Suppressed:;</span>
</div>

</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n14/slavoj-zizek/trouble-in-paradise" target="_blank">http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n14/slavoj-zizek/trouble-in-paradise</a></div>
<div>London Review of Books&nbsp;Vol. 35 No. 14 &middot; 18 July 2013</div>

<div>Trouble in Paradise</div>
<div>Slavoj Zizek&nbsp;on the global protest</div>
<div>
<br>In his early writings, Marx described the German situation as one in which the only answer to particular problems was the universal solution: global revolution. This is a succinct expression of the difference between a reformist and a revolutionary period: in a reformist period, global revolution remains a dream which, if it does anything, merely lends weight to attempts to change things locally; in a revolutionary period, it becomes clear that nothing will improve without radical global change. In this purely formal sense, <a href="tel:1990" value="+661990" target="_blank">1990</a> was a revolutionary year: it was plain that partial reforms of the Communist states would not do the job and that a total break was needed to resolve even such everyday problems as making sure there was enough for people to eat.</div>

<div>
<br>Where do we stand today with respect to this difference? Are the problems and protests of the last few years signs of an approaching global crisis, or are they just minor obstacles that can be dealt with by means of local interventions? The most remarkable thing about the eruptions is that they are taking place not only, or even primarily, at the weak points in the system, but in places which were until now perceived as success stories. We know why people are protesting in Greece or Spain; but why is there trouble in such prosperous or fast-developing countries as Turkey, Sweden or Brazil? With hindsight, we might see the Khomeini revolution of <a href="tel:1979" value="+661979" target="_blank">1979</a> as the original 'trouble in paradise', given that it happened in a country that was on the fast-track of pro-Western modernisation, and the West's staunchest ally in the region. Maybe there's something wrong with our notion of paradise.</div>

<div>
<br>Before the current wave of protests, Turkey was the very model of a state able to combine a thriving liberal economy with moderate Islamism, fit for Europe, a welcome contrast to the more 'European' Greece, caught in an ideological quagmire and bent on economic self-destruction. True, there were ominous signs here and there (Turkey's denial of the Armenian holocaust; the arrests of journalists; the unresolved status of the Kurds; calls for a greater Turkey which would resuscitate the tradition of the Ottoman Empire; the occasional imposition of religious laws), but these were dismissed as small stains that should not be allowed to taint the overall picture.</div>

<div>
<br>Then the Taksim Square protests exploded. Everyone knows that the planned transformation of a park that borders on Taksim Square in central Istanbul into a shopping centre was not what the protests were 'really about', and that a much deeper unease was gaining strength. The same was true of the protests in Brazil in mid-June: what triggered those was a small rise in the cost of public transport, but they went on even after the measure was revoked. Here too the protests had exploded in a country which - according to the media, at least - was enjoying an economic boom and had every reason to feel confident about the future. In this case the protests were apparently supported by the president, Dilma Rousseff, who declared herself delighted by them.</div>

<div>
<br>It is crucial that we don't see the Turkish protests merely as a secular civil society rising up against an authoritarian Islamist regime supported by a silent Muslim majority. What complicates the picture is the protests' anti-capitalist thrust: protesters intuitively sense that free-market fundamentalism and fundamentalist Islam are not mutually exclusive. The privatisation of public space by an Islamist government shows that the two forms of fundamentalism can work hand in hand: it's a clear sign that the 'eternal' marriage between democracy and capitalism is nearing divorce.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>It is also important to recognise that the protesters aren't pursuing any identifiable 'real' goal. The protests are not 'really' against global capitalism, 'really' against religious fundamentalism, 'really' for civil freedoms and democracy, or 'really' about any one thing in particular. What the majority of those who have participated in the protests are aware of is a fluid feeling of unease and discontent that sustains and unites various specific demands. The struggle to understand the protests is not just an epistemological one, with journalists and theorists trying to explain their true content; it is also an ontological struggle over the thing itself, which is taking place within the protests themselves. Is this just a struggle against corrupt city administration? Is it a struggle against authoritarian Islamist rule? Is it a struggle against the privatisation of public space? The question is open, and how it is answered will depend on the result of an ongoing political process.</div>

<div>
<br>In 2011, when protests were erupting across Europe and the Middle East, many insisted that they shouldn't be treated as instances of a single global movement. Instead, they argued, each was a response to a specific situation. In Egypt, the protesters wanted what in other countries the Occupy movement was protesting against: 'freedom' and 'democracy'. Even among Muslim countries, there were crucial differences: the Arab Spring in Egypt was a protest against a corrupt authoritarian pro-Western regime; the Green Revolution in Iran that began in 2009 was against authoritarian Islamism. It is easy to see how such a particularisation of protest appeals to defenders of the status quo: there is no threat against the global order as such, just a series of separate local problems.</div>

<div>
<br>Global capitalism is a complex process which affects different countries in different ways. What unites the protests, for all their multifariousness, is that they are all reactions against different facets of capitalist globalisation. The general tendency of today's global capitalism is towards further expansion of the market, creeping enclosure of public space, reduction of public services (healthcare, education, culture), and increasingly authoritarian political power. It is in this context that Greeks are protesting against the rule of international financial capital and their own corrupt and inefficient state, which is less and less able to provide basic social services. It is in this context too that Turks are protesting against the commercialisation of public space and against religious authoritarianism; that Egyptians are protesting against a regime supported by the Western powers; that Iranians are protesting against corruption and religious fundamentalism, and so on. None of these protests can be reduced to a single issue. They all deal with a specific combination of at least two issues, one economic (from corruption to inefficiency to capitalism itself), the other politico-ideological (from the demand for democracy to the demand that conventional multi-party democracy be overthrown). The same holds for the Occupy movement. Beneath the profusion of (often confused) statements, the movement had two basic features: first, discontent with capitalism&nbsp;as a system, not just with its particular local corruptions; second, an awareness that the institutionalised form of representative multi-party democracy is not equipped to fight capitalist excess, i.e. democracy has to be reinvented.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Just because the underlying cause of the protests is global capitalism, that doesn't mean the only solution is directly to overthrow it. Nor is it viable to pursue the pragmatic alternative, which is to deal with individual problems and wait for a radical transformation. That ignores the fact that global capitalism is necessarily inconsistent: market freedom goes hand in hand with US support for its own farmers; preaching democracy goes hand in hand with supporting Saudi Arabia. This inconsistency opens up a space for political intervention: wherever the global capitalist system is forced to violate its own rules, there is an opportunity to insist that it follow those rules. To demand consistency at strategically selected points where the system cannot afford to be consistent is to put pressure on the entire system. The art of politics lies in making particular demands which, while thoroughly realistic, strike at the core of hegemonic ideology and imply much more radical change. Such demands, while feasible and legitimate, are de facto impossible. Obama's proposal for universal healthcare was such a case, which is why reactions to it were so violent.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>A political movement begins with an idea, something to strive for, but in time the idea undergoes a profound transformation - not just a tactical accommodation, but an essential redefinition - because the idea itself becomes part of the process: it becomes over-determined.**&nbsp; Say a revolt starts with a demand for justice, perhaps in the form of a call for a particular law to be repealed. Once people get deeply engaged in it, they become aware that much more than meeting their initial demand would be needed to bring about true justice. The problem is to define what, precisely, the 'much more' consists in. The liberal-pragmatic view is that problems can be solved gradually, one by one: 'People are dying now in Rwanda, so forget about anti-imperialist struggle, let's just prevent the slaughter'; or 'We have to fight poverty and racism here and now, not wait for the collapse of the global capitalist order.' John Caputo argued along these lines in&nbsp;After the Death of God&nbsp;(2007):</div>

<blockquote>I would be perfectly happy if the far-left politicians in the United States were able to reform the system by providing universal healthcare, effectively redistributing wealth more equitably with a revised IRS code, effectively restricting campaign financing, enfranchising all voters, treating migrant workers humanely, and effecting a multilateral foreign policy that would integrate American power within the international community etc, i.e. intervene upon capitalism by means of serious and far-reaching reforms &Scaron; If after doing all that Badiou and Zizek complained that some Monster called Capitalism still stalks us, I would be inclined to greet that Monster with a yawn.</blockquote>

<blockquote><br></blockquote>
<div>The problem here is not Caputo's conclusion: if one could achieve all that within capitalism, why not stay there? The problem is the underlying premise that it's possible to achieve all that within global capitalism in its present form. What if the malfunctionings of capitalism listed by Caputo aren't merely contingent perturbations but structural necessities? What if Caputo's dream is a dream of a universal capitalist order without its symptoms, without the critical points at which its 'repressed truth' shows itself?</div>

<div>
<br>****</div>
<div>
<br>Today's protests and revolts are sustained by the combination of overlapping demands, and this accounts for their strength: they fight for 'normal', parliamentary democracy against authoritarian regimes; against racism and sexism, especially when directed at immigrants and refugees; against corruption in politics and business (industrial pollution of the environment etc); for the welfare state against neoliberalism; and for new forms of democracy that reach beyond multi-party rituals. They also question the global capitalist system as such and try to keep alive the idea of a society beyond capitalism. Two traps are to be avoided here:&nbsp;false radicalism&nbsp;('what really matters is the abolition of liberal-parliamentary capitalism, all other fights are secondary'), but also&nbsp;false gradualism&nbsp;('right now we should fight against military dictatorship and for basic democracy, all dreams of socialism should be put aside for now'). Here there is no shame in recalling the Maoist distinction between principal and secondary antagonisms, between those that matter most in the end and those that dominate now. There are situations in which to insist on the principal antagonism means to miss the opportunity to strike a significant blow in the struggle.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Only a politics that fully takes into account the complexity of overdetermination deserves to be called a strategy. When we join a specific struggle, the key question is: how will our engagement in it or disengagement from it affect other struggles? The general rule is that when a revolt against an oppressive half-democratic regime begins, as with the Middle East in 2011, it is easy to mobilise large crowds with slogans - for democracy, against corruption etc. But we are soon faced with more difficult choices. When the revolt succeeds in its initial goal, we come to realise that what is really bothering us (our lack of freedom, our humiliation, corruption, poor prospects) persists in a new guise, so that we are forced to recognise that there was a flaw in the goal itself. This may mean coming to see that democracy can itself be a form of un-freedom, or that we must demand more than merely political democracy: social and economic life must be democratised too. In short, what we first took as a failure fully to apply a noble principle (democratic freedom) is in fact a failure inherent in the principle itself. This realisation - that failure may be inherent in the principle we're fighting for - is a big step in a political education.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>Representatives of the ruling ideology roll out their entire arsenal to prevent us from reaching this radical conclusion. They tell us that democratic freedom brings its own responsibilities, that it comes at a price, that it is immature to expect too much from democracy. In a free society, they say, we must behave as capitalists investing in our own lives: if we fail to make the necessary sacrifices, or if we come up short in any way, we have no one to blame but ourselves. In a more directly political sense, the US has consistently pursued a strategy of damage control in its foreign policy by re-channelling popular uprisings into acceptable parliamentary-capitalist forms: in South Africa after apartheid, in the Philippines after the fall of Marcos, in Indonesia after Suharto etc. This is where politics proper begins: the question is how to push further once the first, exciting wave of change is over, how to take the next step without succumbing to the 'totalitarian' temptation, how to move beyond Mandela without becoming Mugabe.</div>

<div>
<br>What would this mean in a concrete case? Let's compare two neighbouring countries, Greece and Turkey. At first glance, they may seem to be entirely different: Greece is trapped in the ruinous politics of austerity, while Turkey is enjoying an economic boom and emerging as a new regional superpower. But what if each Turkey generates and contains its own Greece, its own islands of misery? As Brecht put it in 'Hollywood Elegies':</div>

<blockquote>
<blockquote>The village of Hollywood was planned according to the notion</blockquote>
<blockquote>

People in these parts have of heaven. In these parts</blockquote>
<blockquote>They have come to the conclusion that God</blockquote>

<blockquote>Requiring a heaven and a hell, didn't need to</blockquote>
<blockquote>Plan two establishments but</blockquote>

<blockquote>Just the one: heaven. It</blockquote>
<blockquote>Serves the unprosperous, unsuccessful</blockquote>

<blockquote>As hell.</blockquote>
<blockquote><br></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div>

This describes today's 'global village' rather well: just apply it to Qatar or Dubai, playgrounds of the rich that are dependent on conditions of near slavery for immigrant workers. A closer look reveals underlying similarities between Turkey and Greece: privatisation, the enclosure of public space, the dismantling of social services, the rise of authoritarian politics. At an elementary level, Greek and Turkish protesters are engaged in the same struggle. The true path would be to co-ordinate the two struggles, to reject 'patriotic' temptations, to leave behind the two countries' historical enmity and to seek grounds for solidarity. The future of the protests may depend on it.</div>

<div><br></div>
<div>**&nbsp;'In his preface to the&nbsp;Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Marx wrote (in his worst evolutionary mode) that humanity only poses itself tasks it is able to solve. What if we turned this statement around and claimed that as a rule humanity poses itself tasks it cannot solve, and thereby triggers an unpredictable process in the course of which the task itself is redefined?'</div>

<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>ISSN 0260-9592&nbsp;Copyright&nbsp;&copy; LRB Ltd., 1997-2013 |</div>

<div>
<span><div><span><span><div>

<span><span><div>

<span><span><div>

<span><div>

<span><div>

<span><p class="MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">______________________________</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Jai Sen</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><a href="mailto:jai.sen@..." target="_blank">jai.sen <at> cacim.net</a></span><span></span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><a href="http://www.cacim.net" target="_blank">www.cacim.net</a><span>&nbsp;</span>/<span>&nbsp;</span><span><span><a href="http://www.openword.in" target="_blank">http://www.openword.in</a></span></span></span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Now based in Ottawa, Canada <a href="tel:%28%2B1-613-282%202900" value="+16132822900" target="_blank">(+1-613-282 2900</a>), and New Delhi, India <a href="tel:%28%2B91-98189%2011325" value="+919818911325" target="_blank">(+91-98189 11325</a>)</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">RECENT PUBLICATIONS :</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Jai Sen and Peter Waterman, eds, 2012 &ndash;<span>&nbsp;</span>World Social Forum : Critical Explorations<span>.</span><span>&nbsp;</span>Volume 3 in the<span>&nbsp;</span>Challenging Empires<span>&nbsp;</span>series.<span>&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span></span>New Delhi : OpenWord.<span>&nbsp;</span>Available now as an ebook<span>&nbsp;</span>-<span>&nbsp;</span>internationally at<span>&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank">http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/</a><span>&nbsp;</span>and in India at<span>&nbsp;</span></span><span lang="EN-GB"><a href="http://pothi.com/pothi/book/ebook-jai-sen-world-social-forum-critical-explorations" target="_blank">http://pothi.com/pothi/book/ebook-jai-sen-world-social-forum-critical-explorations</a></span><span lang="EN-GB"></span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Jai Sen, ed, 2012 -<span>&nbsp;</span>Imagining Alternatives, Book 3 in the<span>&nbsp;</span>Are Other Worlds Possible ?<span>&nbsp;</span>series.<span>&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span></span>New Delhi : OpenWord and Daanish Books</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">FORTHCOMING PUBLICATIONS<span>&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span></span>:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Jai Sen, ed, forthcoming (2013) &ndash;<span>&nbsp;</span>The Movements of Movements : Struggles for Other Worlds<span>.</span><span>&nbsp;</span>Volume 4 in the<span>&nbsp;</span>Challenging Empires<span>&nbsp;</span>series.<span>&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span></span>New Delhi : OpenWord</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">CHECK OUT</span><span lang="EN-GB"><span>&nbsp;</span>CACIM<span>&nbsp;</span> <at> <span>&nbsp;</span><span><span><a href="http://www.cacim.net" target="_blank">www.cacim.net</a></span></span>,<span>&nbsp;</span></span><span><span lang="EN-GB">OpenWord</span></span><span><span lang="EN-GB"><span>&nbsp;</span> <at> <span>&nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.openword.in" target="_blank">http://www.openword.in</a>, and<span>&nbsp;</span></span></span><span lang="EN-GB">OpenSpaceForum</span><span lang="EN-GB"><span>&nbsp;</span> <at> &nbsp;<a href="http://www.openspaceforum.net" target="_blank">www.openspaceforum.net</a></span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">AND SUBSCRIBE TO</span><span lang="EN-GB"><span>&nbsp;</span>WSFDiscuss</span><span lang="EN-GB">, an open and unmoderated forum<span>&nbsp;</span></span><span lang="EN-GB">for the exchange of information and views on the experience, practice, and theory of social and political movement at any level (local, national, regional, and global), including the World Social Forum.<span>&nbsp;<span>&nbsp;</span></span>To subscribe, simply send an empty email to<span>&nbsp;</span><a href="mailto:worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe@..." target="_blank">worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe@...</a><span class="HOEnZb"><span></span></span></span></p>
<span class="HOEnZb">
</span></span>
</div></span>
</div></span>
</div></span></span>
</div></span></span>
</div></span></span></div></span><span class="HOEnZb"><span>
</span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><span>
<br></span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><span>

<p></p>

-- <br>
To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current email  and log in using gmail to access the archives.<br><a href="https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en" target="_blank">https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en</a><br>
--- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "<a href="mailto:debate-list@..." target="_blank">debate-list <at> fahamu.org</a>" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:debate-list%2Bunsubscribe@..." target="_blank">debate-list+unsubscribe@...</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href="mailto:debate-list <at> fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list@...</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href="http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/</a>.<br>
&nbsp;<br>
&nbsp;<br></span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr">
<ul>
<li>
<span><span>EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum: Critical Explorations <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank">http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ </a></span></span><span><span><br></span></span>
</li>
<li>
<span></span><span><span>EBook, November 2012:</span> <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/" target="_blank">Recovering
Internationalism</a>.&nbsp; </span><span>[Now free in two download formats]</span><span><span><a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank"><span><span></span></span></a></span></span><span><span><a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank"><span><span></span></span></a></span></span>
</li>

<li>
<span>Interface
Journal<span> Special (co-editor), November 2012:</span> </span><span><a href="http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/" target="_blank">For the Global Emancipation of Labour</a></span>

</li>
<li>
<span lang="NL">Blog:</span><span lang="NL"> <a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman." target="_blank">http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.</a>
</span>
</li>
<li>
<span>EBook 2011, Under, Against, Beyond (Compilation 1980s-90s) <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/" target="_blank">http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/</a></span><br>
</li>
<li>
<span>Paper 2012:</span><span> <a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profiles/blogs/peter-waterman-the-second-coming-of-the-wftu-updated" target="_blank">The 2nd Coming of the World Federation of Trade&nbsp;Unions <br></a></span>
</li>
<li><span><a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profiles/blogs/peter-waterman-the-second-coming-of-the-wftu-updated" target="_blank">
</a>Paper 2012:<span>&nbsp; </span><a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profiles/blogs/marikana-south-africa-elsewhere-the-dance-of-the-undead" target="_blank">Marikana,
South Africa, The March of the Undead</a></span></li>
<li>
<span>Chapter, 2013. 'Many New Internationalisms!', in Corinne Kumar (ed), Asking, We Walk:</span><span lang="EN-GB"> The South as New Political Imaginary, Bangalore:<span> Streelekha Publications.</span></span><br>
</li>
<li><table cellpadding="0"><tr>
<td><br></td>
<td><br></td>
</tr></table></li>
</ul>

</div>
</span>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>&nbsp; - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br><br><a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank"></a>Updates: <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br><br>#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href="http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/" target="_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/</a> <br>
</div></div>
Michel Bauwens | 31 Jul 17:36 2013
Picon

Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Internet under threat - can US Congress defend against Obama-Stasi state and Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: peter waterman <peterwaterman1936-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date: Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:58 PM
Subject: Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Internet under threat - can US Congress defend against Obama-Stasi state and Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft
To: Michel Bauwens <michel-JQUKMTwiyfjVe7td6HMt/l6hYfS7NtTn@public.gmane.org>, Orsan Senalp <orsan1234 <at> gmail.com>




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patrick Bond <pbond-83gXwcVijF7YkQIYctQFYw@public.gmane.org>
Date: Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:31 AM
Subject: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Internet under threat - can US Congress defend against Obama-Stasi state and Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft
To: DEBATE <debate-list-bG6s+D2qY7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>


(Will there be new cloud alternatives to the big capitalist firms so that there's an easy answer to this? "when your chief information officer proposes to use the Amazon or Google cloud as a data-store for your company's confidential documents, tell him where to file the proposal. In the shredder." How come we've not seen any firm not from the US step into the huge breach so we can all stop being so FB/Google-reliant?)

Edward Snowden is not the story

The fate of the internet is

The press has lost the plot over the Snowden revelations. The fact is that the net is finished as a global network and that US firms' cloud services cannot be trusted.

by John Naughton

The Observer (July 28 2013)

Repeat after me: Edward Snowden is not the story. The story is what he has revealed about the hidden wiring of our networked world. This insight seems to have escaped most of the world's mainstream media, for reasons that escape me but would not have surprised Evelyn Waugh, whose contempt for journalists was one of his few endearing characteristics. The obvious explanations are: incorrigible ignorance; the imperative to personalise stories; or gullibility in swallowing US government spin, which brands Snowden as a spy rather than a whistleblower.

In a way, it doesn't matter why the media lost the scent. What matters is that they did. So as a public service, let us summarise what Snowden has achieved thus far {1}.

Without him, we would not know how the National Security Agency (NSA) had been able to access the emails, Facebook accounts and videos of citizens across the world; or how it had secretly acquired the phone records of millions of Americans; or how, through a secret court, it has been able to bend nine US internet companies to its demands for access to their users' data {2}.

Similarly, without Snowden, we would not be debating whether the US government should have turned surveillance into a huge, privatised business, offering data-mining contracts to private contractors such as Booz Allen Hamilton and, in the process, high-level security clearance to thousands of people who shouldn't have it. Nor would there be - finally - a serious debate between Europe (excluding the UK, which in these matters is just an overseas franchise of the US) and the United States about where the proper balance between freedom and security lies.

These are pretty significant outcomes and they're just the first-order consequences of Snowden's activities. As far as most of our mass media are concerned, though, they have gone largely unremarked. Instead, we have been fed a constant stream of journalistic pap - speculation about Snowden's travel plans, asylum requests, state of mind, physical appearance, et cetera. The "human interest" angle has trumped the real story, which is what the NSA revelations tell us about how our networked world actually works and the direction in which it is heading.

As an antidote, here are some of the things we should be thinking about as a result of what we have learned so far.

The first is that the days of the internet as a truly global network are numbered. It was always a possibility that the system would eventually be Balkanised, that is, divided into a number of geographical or jurisdiction-determined subnets as societies such as China, Russia, Iran and other Islamic states decided that they needed to control how their citizens communicated. Now, Balkanisation is a certainty.

Second, the issue of internet governance is about to become very contentious. Given what we now know about how the US and its satraps have been abusing their privileged position in the global infrastructure, the idea that the western powers can be allowed to continue to control it has become untenable.

Third, as Evgeny Morozov has pointed out {3}, the Obama administration's "internet freedom agenda" has been exposed as patronising cant. "Today", he writes, "the rhetoric of the 'internet freedom agenda' looks as trustworthy as George Bush's 'freedom agenda' after Abu Ghraib".

That's all at nation-state level. But the Snowden revelations also have implications for you and me.

They tell us, for example, that no US-based internet company can be trusted to protect our privacy or data. The fact is that Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft are all integral components of the US cyber-surveillance system. Nothing, but nothing, that is stored in their "cloud" services can be guaranteed to be safe from surveillance or from illicit downloading by employees of the consultancies employed by the NSA. That means that if you're thinking of outsourcing your troublesome IT operations to, say, Google or Microsoft, then think again.

And if you think that that sounds like the paranoid fantasising of a newspaper columnist, then consider what Neelie Kroes, vice-president of the European Commission, had to say on the matter recently. "If businesses or governments think they might be spied on", she said,

    they will have less reason to trust the cloud, and it will be cloud providers who ultimately miss out. Why would you pay someone else to hold your commercial or other secrets, if you suspect or know they are being shared against your wishes? Front or back door - it doesn't matter - any smart person doesn't want the information shared at all. Customers will act rationally and providers will miss out on a great opportunity. {4}

Spot on. So when your chief information officer proposes to use the Amazon or Google cloud as a data-store for your company's confidential documents, tell him where to file the proposal. In the shredder.

Links:

{1} http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/opinion/global/the-service-of-snowden.html?_r=0

{2} http://www.theguardian.com/technology/internet

{3} http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/ueberwachung/information-consumerism-the-price-of-hypocrisy-12292374.html

{4} http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-654_en.htm
_____

John Naughton is professor of the public understanding of technology at the Open University.

***

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/29/us/politics/momentum-builds-against-nsa-surveillance.html

New York Times   July 28, 2013

Momentum Builds Against N.S.A. Surveillance

By JONATHAN WEISMAN

WASHINGTON — The movement to crack down on government surveillance started with an odd couple from Michigan, Representatives Justin Amash, a young libertarian Republican known even to his friends as “chief wing nut,” and John Conyers Jr., an elder of the liberal left in his 25th House term.

But what began on the political fringes only a week ago has built a momentum that even critics say may be unstoppable, drawing support from Republican and Democratic leaders, attracting moderates in both parties and pulling in some of the most respected voices on national security in the House.

The rapidly shifting politics were reflected clearly in the House on Wednesday, when a plan to defund the National Security Agency’s telephone data collection program fell just seven votes short of passage. Now, after initially signaling that they were comfortable with the scope of the N.S.A.’s collection of Americans’ phone and Internet activities, but not their content, revealed last month by Edward J. Snowden, lawmakers are showing an increasing willingness to use legislation to curb those actions.

Representatives Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin, and Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California, have begun work on legislation in the House Judiciary Committee to significantly rein in N.S.A. telephone surveillance. Mr. Sensenbrenner said on Friday that he would have a bill ready when Congress returned from its August recess that would restrict phone surveillance to only those named as targets of a federal terrorism investigation, make significant changes to the secret court that oversees such programs and give businesses like Microsoft and Google permission to reveal their dealings before that court.

“There is a growing sense that things have really gone a-kilter here,” Ms. Lofgren said.

The sudden reconsideration of post-Sept. 11 counterterrorism policy has taken much of Washington by surprise. As the revelations by Mr. Snowden, a former N.S.A. contractor, were gaining attention in the news media, the White House and leaders in both parties stood united behind the programs he had unmasked. They were focused mostly on bringing the leaker to justice.

Backers of sweeping surveillance powers now say they recognize that changes are likely, and they are taking steps to make sure they maintain control over the extent of any revisions. Leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee met on Wednesday as the House deliberated to try to find accommodations to growing public misgivings about the programs, said the committee’s chairwoman, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California.

Senator Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat and longtime critic of the N.S.A. surveillance programs, said he had taken part in serious meetings to discuss changes.

Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, the ranking Republican on the panel, said, “We’re talking through it right now.” He added, “There are a lot of ideas on the table, and it’s pretty obvious that we’ve got some uneasy folks.”

Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has assured House colleagues that an intelligence policy bill he plans to draft in mid-September will include new privacy safeguards.

Aides familiar with his efforts said the House Intelligence Committee was focusing on more transparency for the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees data gathering, including possibly declassifying that court’s orders, and changes to the way the surveillance data is stored. The legislation may order such data to be held by the telecommunications companies that produce them or by an independent entity, not the government.

Lawmakers say their votes to restrain the N.S.A. reflect a gut-level concern among voters about personal privacy.

“I represent a very reasonable district in suburban Philadelphia, and my constituents are expressing a growing concern on the sweeping amounts of data that the government is compiling,” said Representative Michael G. Fitzpatrick, a moderate Republican who represents one of the few true swing districts left in the House and who voted on Wednesday to limit N.S.A. surveillance.

Votes from the likes of Mr. Fitzpatrick were not initially anticipated when Republican leaders chided reporters for their interest in legislation that they said would go nowhere. As the House slowly worked its way on Wednesday toward an evening vote to curb government surveillance, even proponents of the legislation jokingly predicted that only the “wing nuts” — the libertarians of the right, the most ardent liberals on the left — would support the measure.

Then Mr. Sensenbrenner, a Republican veteran and one of the primary authors of the post-Sept. 11 Patriot Act, stepped to a microphone on the House floor. Never, he said, did he intend to allow the wholesale vacuuming up of domestic phone records, nor did his legislation envision that data dragnets would go beyond specific targets of terrorism investigations.

“The time has come to stop it, and the way we stop it is to approve this amendment,” Mr. Sensenbrenner said.

He had not intended to speak, and when he did, he did not say much, just seven brief sentences.

“I was able to say what needed to be said in a minute,” he said Friday.

Lawmakers from both parties said the brief speech was a pivotal moment. When the tally was final, the effort to end the N.S.A.’s programs had fallen short, 205 to 217. Supporters included Republican leaders like Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington and Democratic leaders like Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina. Republican moderates like Mr. Fitzpatrick and Blue Dog Democrats like Representative Kurt Schrader of Oregon joined with respected voices on national security matters like Mr. Sensenbrenner and Ms. Lofgren.

Besides Ms. McMorris Rodgers, Representative Lynn Jenkins of Kansas, another member of the Republican leadership, voted yes. On the Democratic side, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, Representative Xavier Becerra of California, and his vice chairman, Representative Joseph Crowley of New York, broke with the top two Democrats, Representatives Nancy Pelosi of California and Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, who pressed hard for no votes.

On Friday, Ms. Pelosi, the House minority leader and a veteran of the Intelligence Committee, and Mr. Hoyer dashed off a letter to the president warning that even those Democrats who had stayed with him on the issue on Wednesday would be seeking changes.

That letter included the signature of Mr. Conyers, who is rallying an increasingly unified Democratic caucus to his side, as well as 61 House Democrats who voted no on Wednesday but are now publicly signaling their discontent.

“Although some of us voted for and others against the amendment, we all agree that there are lingering questions and concerns about the current” data collection program, the letter stated.

Representative Reid Ribble of Wisconsin, a Republican who voted for the curbs and predicted that changes to the N.S.A. surveillance programs were now unstoppable, said: “This was in many respects a vote intended to send a message. The vote was just too strong.”

Ms. Lofgren said the White House and Democratic and Republican leaders had not come to grips with what she called “a grave sense of betrayal” that greeted Mr. Snowden’s revelations. Since the Bush administration, lawmakers had been repeatedly assured that such indiscriminate collection of data did not exist, and that when targeting was unspecific, it was aimed at people abroad.

The movement against the N.S.A. began with the fringes of each party. Mr. Amash of Michigan began pressing for an amendment on the annual military spending bill aimed at the N.S.A. Leaders of the Intelligence Committee argued strenuously that such an amendment was not relevant to military spending and should be ruled out of order.

But Mr. Amash, an acolyte of Ron Paul, a libertarian former congressman, persisted and rallied support.

Mr. Sensenbrenner and Ms. Lofgren said they were willing to work with the House and Senate intelligence panels to overhaul the surveillance programs, but indicated that they did not believe those panels were ready to go far enough.

“I would just hope the Intelligence Committees will not stick their heads in the sand on this,” Mr. Sensenbrenner said.


--
To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current email and log in using gmail to access the archives.
https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "debate-list <at> fahamu.org" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to debate-list+unsubscribe-bG6s+D2qY7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org.
To post to this group, send email to debate-list-bG6s+D2qY7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/.
 
 



--



--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
<div><div dir="ltr">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: peter waterman <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:peterwaterman1936@...">peterwaterman1936@...</a>&gt;</span><br>
Date: Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:58 PM<br>Subject: Fwd: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Internet under threat - can US Congress defend against Obama-Stasi state and Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft<br>To: Michel Bauwens &lt;<a href="mailto:michel@...">michel@...</a>&gt;, Orsan Senalp &lt;<a href="mailto:orsan1234@...">orsan1234 <at> gmail.com</a>&gt;<br><br><br><div dir="ltr">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: Patrick Bond <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:pbond@..." target="_blank">pbond@...</a>&gt;</span><br>

Date: Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:31 AM<br>Subject: [Debate-List] (Fwd) Internet under threat - can US Congress defend against Obama-Stasi state and Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft<br>To: DEBATE &lt;<a href="mailto:debate-list@..." target="_blank">debate-list@...</a>&gt;<br><br><br><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    (Will there be new cloud alternatives to the big capitalist firms so
    that there's an easy answer to this? "when your chief information
    officer proposes to use the Amazon or Google cloud as a data-store
    for your company's confidential documents, tell him where to file
    the proposal. In the shredder." How come we've not seen any firm not
    from the US step into the huge breach so we can all stop being so
    FB/Google-reliant?)<br><br>
      Edward Snowden is not the story<br><br>
    The fate of the internet is<br><br>
    The press has lost the plot over the Snowden revelations. The fact
    is that the net is finished as a global network and that US firms'
    cloud services cannot be trusted.<br><br>
    by John Naughton<br><br>
    The Observer (July 28 2013)<br><br>
    Repeat after me: Edward Snowden is not the story. The story is what
    he has revealed about the hidden wiring of our networked world. This
    insight seems to have escaped most of the world's mainstream media,
    for reasons that escape me but would not have surprised Evelyn
    Waugh, whose contempt for journalists was one of his few endearing
    characteristics. The obvious explanations are: incorrigible
    ignorance; the imperative to personalise stories; or gullibility in
    swallowing US government spin, which brands Snowden as a spy rather
    than a whistleblower.<br><br>
    In a way, it doesn't matter why the media lost the scent. What
    matters is that they did. So as a public service, let us summarise
    what Snowden has achieved thus far {1}.<br><br>
    Without him, we would not know how the National Security Agency
    (NSA) had been able to access the emails, Facebook accounts and
    videos of citizens across the world; or how it had secretly acquired
    the phone records of millions of Americans; or how, through a secret
    court, it has been able to bend nine US internet companies to its
    demands for access to their users' data {2}.<br><br>
    Similarly, without Snowden, we would not be debating whether the US
    government should have turned surveillance into a huge, privatised
    business, offering data-mining contracts to private contractors such
    as Booz Allen Hamilton and, in the process, high-level security
    clearance to thousands of people who shouldn't have it. Nor would
    there be - finally - a serious debate between Europe (excluding the
    UK, which in these matters is just an overseas franchise of the US)
    and the United States about where the proper balance between freedom
    and security lies.<br><br>
    These are pretty significant outcomes and they're just the
    first-order consequences of Snowden's activities. As far as most of
    our mass media are concerned, though, they have gone largely
    unremarked. Instead, we have been fed a constant stream of
    journalistic pap - speculation about Snowden's travel plans, asylum
    requests, state of mind, physical appearance, et cetera. The "human
    interest" angle has trumped the real story, which is what the NSA
    revelations tell us about how our networked world actually works and
    the direction in which it is heading.<br><br>
    As an antidote, here are some of the things we should be thinking
    about as a result of what we have learned so far.<br><br>
    The first is that the days of the internet as a truly global network
    are numbered. It was always a possibility that the system would
    eventually be Balkanised, that is, divided into a number of
    geographical or jurisdiction-determined subnets as societies such as
    China, Russia, Iran and other Islamic states decided that they
    needed to control how their citizens communicated. Now,
    Balkanisation is a certainty.<br><br>
    Second, the issue of internet governance is about to become very
    contentious. Given what we now know about how the US and its satraps
    have been abusing their privileged position in the global
    infrastructure, the idea that the western powers can be allowed to
    continue to control it has become untenable.<br><br>
    Third, as Evgeny Morozov has pointed out {3}, the Obama
    administration's "internet freedom agenda" has been exposed as
    patronising cant. "Today", he writes, "the rhetoric of the 'internet
    freedom agenda' looks as trustworthy as George Bush's 'freedom
    agenda' after Abu Ghraib".<br><br>
    That's all at nation-state level. But the Snowden revelations also
    have implications for you and me.<br><br>
    They tell us, for example, that no US-based internet company can be
    trusted to protect our privacy or data. The fact is that Google,
    Facebook, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft are all integral
    components of the US cyber-surveillance system. Nothing, but
    nothing, that is stored in their "cloud" services can be guaranteed
    to be safe from surveillance or from illicit downloading by
    employees of the consultancies employed by the NSA. That means that
    if you're thinking of outsourcing your troublesome IT operations to,
    say, Google or Microsoft, then think again.<br><br>
    And if you think that that sounds like the paranoid fantasising of a
    newspaper columnist, then consider what Neelie Kroes, vice-president
    of the European Commission, had to say on the matter recently. "If
    businesses or governments think they might be spied on", she said,<br><br>
    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; they will have less reason to trust the cloud, and it will be
    cloud providers who ultimately miss out. Why would you pay someone
    else to hold your commercial or other secrets, if you suspect or
    know they are being shared against your wishes? Front or back door -
    it doesn't matter - any smart person doesn't want the information
    shared at all. Customers will act rationally and providers will miss
    out on a great opportunity. {4}<br><br>
    Spot on. So when your chief information officer proposes to use the
    Amazon or Google cloud as a data-store for your company's
    confidential documents, tell him where to file the proposal. In the
    shredder.<br><br>
    Links:<br><br>
    {1}
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/opinion/global/the-service-of-snowden.html?_r=0" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/opinion/global/the-service-of-snowden.html?_r=0</a><br><br>
    {2} <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/internet" target="_blank">http://www.theguardian.com/technology/internet</a><br><br>
    {3}
<a href="http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/ueberwachung/information-consumerism-the-price-of-hypocrisy-12292374.html" target="_blank">http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/ueberwachung/information-consumerism-the-price-of-hypocrisy-12292374.html</a><br><br>
    {4} <a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-654_en.htm" target="_blank">http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-654_en.htm</a><br>
    _____<br><br>
    John Naughton is professor of the public understanding of technology
    at the Open University.<br><br>
    ***<br><br><div lang="x-unicode">
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/29/us/politics/momentum-builds-against-nsa-surveillance.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/29/us/politics/momentum-builds-against-nsa-surveillance.html</a><br><br>
      <div>
        <div> New York Times&nbsp;&nbsp; July 28, 2013
        </div>
        <div> </div>
      </div>
      <h1>Momentum Builds Against N.S.A. Surveillance</h1>
      <h6>By <span>
            <span>JONATHAN WEISMAN</span></span>
</h6>
      <div>
        <p>
          WASHINGTON &mdash; The movement to crack down on government
          surveillance started with an odd couple from Michigan,
          Representatives Justin Amash, a young libertarian Republican
          known even to his friends as &ldquo;chief wing nut,&rdquo; and John
          Conyers Jr., an elder of the liberal left in his 25th House
          term. </p>
        <p>
          But what began on the political fringes only a week ago has
          built a momentum that even critics say may be unstoppable,
          drawing support from Republican and Democratic leaders,
          attracting moderates in both parties and pulling in some of
          the most respected voices on national security in the House. </p>
        <p>
          The rapidly shifting politics were reflected clearly in the
          House on Wednesday, when a plan to defund the <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/national_security_agency/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about National Security Agency, U.S." target="_blank">National Security Agency</a>&rsquo;s telephone
          data collection program <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/us/politics/house-defeats-effort-to-rein-in-nsa-data-gathering.html" target="_blank">fell just seven votes short of passage</a>.
          Now, after initially signaling that they were comfortable with
          the scope of the N.S.A.&rsquo;s collection of Americans&rsquo; phone and
          Internet activities, but not their content, revealed last
          month by Edward J. Snowden, lawmakers are showing an
          increasing willingness to use legislation to curb those
          actions. </p>
        <p>
          Representatives Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin,
          and Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California, have begun work on
          legislation in the House Judiciary Committee to significantly
          rein in N.S.A. telephone surveillance. Mr. Sensenbrenner said
          on Friday that he would have a bill ready when Congress
          returned from its August recess that would restrict phone
          surveillance to only those named as targets of a federal
          terrorism investigation, make significant changes to <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html" target="_blank">the secret court</a> that oversees such
          programs and give businesses like Microsoft and Google
          permission to reveal their dealings before that court. </p>
        <p>
          &ldquo;There is a growing sense that things have really gone
          a-kilter here,&rdquo; Ms. Lofgren said. </p>
        <p>
          The sudden reconsideration of post-Sept. 11 counterterrorism
          policy has taken much of Washington by surprise. As <a title="Times article" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/us/how-edward-j-snowden-orchestrated-a-blockbuster-story.html" target="_blank">the revelations</a> by Mr. Snowden, a former
          N.S.A. contractor, were gaining attention in the news media,
          the White House and leaders in both parties stood united
          behind the programs he had unmasked. They were focused mostly
          on bringing the leaker to justice. </p>
        <p>
          Backers of sweeping surveillance powers now say they recognize
          that changes are likely, and they are taking steps to make
          sure they maintain control over the extent of any revisions.
          Leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee met on Wednesday
          as the House deliberated to try to find accommodations to
          growing public misgivings about the programs, said the
          committee&rsquo;s chairwoman, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of
          California. </p>
        <p>
          Senator Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat and longtime critic of
          the N.S.A. surveillance programs, said he had taken part in
          serious meetings to discuss changes. </p>
        <p>
          Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, the ranking Republican on
          the panel, said, &ldquo;We&rsquo;re talking through it right now.&rdquo; He
          added, &ldquo;There are a lot of ideas on the table, and it&rsquo;s pretty
          obvious that we&rsquo;ve got some uneasy folks.&rdquo; </p>
        <p>
          Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican and the
          chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, has assured
          House colleagues that an intelligence policy bill he plans to
          draft in mid-September will include new privacy safeguards. </p>
        <p>
          Aides familiar with his efforts said the House Intelligence
          Committee was focusing on more transparency for the secret
          Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees data
          gathering, including possibly declassifying that court&rsquo;s
          orders, and changes to the way the surveillance data is
          stored. The legislation may order such data to be held by the
          telecommunications companies that produce them or by an
          independent entity, not the government. </p>
        <p>
          Lawmakers say their votes to restrain the N.S.A. reflect a
          gut-level concern among voters about personal privacy. </p>
        <p>
          &ldquo;I represent a very reasonable district in suburban
          Philadelphia, and my constituents are expressing a growing
          concern on the sweeping amounts of data that the government is
          compiling,&rdquo; said Representative Michael G. Fitzpatrick, a
          moderate Republican who represents one of the few true swing
          districts left in the House and who voted on Wednesday to
          limit N.S.A. surveillance. </p>
        <p>
          Votes from the likes of Mr. Fitzpatrick were not initially
          anticipated when Republican leaders chided reporters for their
          interest in legislation that they said would go nowhere. As
          the House slowly worked its way on Wednesday toward an evening
          vote to curb government surveillance, even proponents of the
          legislation jokingly predicted that only the &ldquo;wing nuts&rdquo; &mdash; the
          libertarians of the right, the most ardent liberals on the
          left &mdash; would support the measure. </p>
        <p>
          Then Mr. Sensenbrenner, a Republican veteran and one of the
          primary authors of the post-Sept. 11 <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/usa_patriot_act/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier" title="More articles about the USA Patriot Act." target="_blank">Patriot Act</a>, stepped to a microphone on
          the House floor. Never, he said, did he intend to allow the
          wholesale vacuuming up of domestic phone records, nor did his
          legislation envision that data dragnets would go beyond
          specific targets of terrorism investigations. </p>
        <p>
          &ldquo;The time has come to stop it, and the way we stop it is to
          approve this amendment,&rdquo; Mr. Sensenbrenner said. </p>
        <p>
          He had not intended to speak, and when he did, he did not say
          much, just seven brief sentences. </p>
        <p>
          &ldquo;I was able to say what needed to be said in a minute,&rdquo; he
          said Friday. </p>
        <p>
          Lawmakers from both parties said the brief speech was a
          pivotal moment. When the tally was final, the effort to end
          the N.S.A.&rsquo;s programs had fallen short, <a title="Tally of
            the vote" href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll412.xml" target="_blank">205 to 217</a>. Supporters included
          Republican leaders like Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers
          of Washington and Democratic leaders like Representative James
          E. Clyburn of South Carolina. Republican moderates like Mr.
          Fitzpatrick and Blue Dog Democrats like Representative Kurt
          Schrader of Oregon joined with respected voices on national
          security matters like Mr. Sensenbrenner and Ms. Lofgren. </p>
        <p>
          Besides Ms. McMorris Rodgers, Representative Lynn Jenkins of
          Kansas, another member of the Republican leadership, voted
          yes. On the Democratic side, the chairman of the House
          Democratic Caucus, Representative Xavier Becerra of
          California, and his vice chairman, Representative Joseph
          Crowley of New York, broke with the top two Democrats,
          Representatives Nancy Pelosi of California and Steny H. Hoyer
          of Maryland, who pressed hard for no votes. </p>
        <p>
          On Friday, Ms. Pelosi, the House minority leader and a veteran
          of the Intelligence Committee, and Mr. Hoyer dashed off a
          letter to the president warning that even those Democrats who
          had stayed with him on the issue on Wednesday would be seeking
          changes. </p>
        <p>
          That letter included the signature of Mr. Conyers, who is
          rallying an increasingly unified Democratic caucus to his
          side, as well as 61 House Democrats who voted no on Wednesday
          but are now publicly signaling their discontent. </p>
        <p>
          &ldquo;Although some of us voted for and others against the
          amendment, we all agree that there are lingering questions and
          concerns about the current&rdquo; data collection program, <a title="The letter" href="http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washington/2013/07/pelosi-153-house-democrats-tell-obama-of-lingering-questions-and-concerns-about-nsa-programs.html" target="_blank">the letter stated</a>. </p>

        <p>
          Representative Reid Ribble of Wisconsin, a Republican who
          voted for the curbs and predicted that changes to the N.S.A.
          surveillance programs were now unstoppable, said: &ldquo;This was in
          many respects a vote intended to send a message. The vote was
          just too strong.&rdquo; </p>
        <p>
          Ms. Lofgren said the White House and Democratic and Republican
          leaders had not come to grips with what she called &ldquo;a grave
          sense of betrayal&rdquo; that greeted Mr. Snowden&rsquo;s revelations.
          Since the Bush administration, lawmakers had been repeatedly
          assured that such indiscriminate collection of data did not
          exist, and that when targeting was unspecific, it was aimed at
          people abroad. </p>
        <p>
          The movement against the N.S.A. began with the fringes of each
          party. Mr. Amash of Michigan began pressing for an amendment
          on the annual military spending bill aimed at the N.S.A.
          Leaders of the Intelligence Committee argued strenuously that
          such an amendment was not relevant to military spending and
          should be ruled out of order. </p>
        <p>
          But Mr. Amash, an acolyte of Ron Paul, a libertarian former
          congressman, persisted and rallied support. </p>
        <p>
          Mr. Sensenbrenner and Ms. Lofgren said they were willing to
          work with the House and Senate intelligence panels to overhaul
          the surveillance programs, but indicated that they did not
          believe those panels were ready to go far enough. </p>
        <p>
          &ldquo;I would just hope the Intelligence Committees will not stick
          their heads in the sand on this,&rdquo; Mr. Sensenbrenner said. </p>
<span class="HOEnZb"><span>
        <div>
        </div>
      </span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><span>
    </span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><span>
    <br></span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><span>

<p></p>

-- <br>
To view previous posts, create a Google account with your current email  and log in using gmail to access the archives.<br><a href="https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en" target="_blank">https://accounts.google.com/newaccount?hl=en</a><br>
--- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "<a href="mailto:debate-list@..." target="_blank">debate-list <at> fahamu.org</a>" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:debate-list%2Bunsubscribe@..." target="_blank">debate-list+unsubscribe@...</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href="mailto:debate-list <at> fahamu.org" target="_blank">debate-list@...</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href="http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/fahamu.org/group/debate-list/</a>.<br>
&nbsp;<br>
&nbsp;<br></span></span>
</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr">
<ul>
<li>
<span><span>EBook (co-editor), February 2013: World Social Forum: Critical Explorations <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank">http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/ </a></span></span><span><span><br></span></span>
</li>
<li>
<span></span><span><span>EBook, November 2012:</span> <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/recovering_internationalism/" target="_blank">Recovering
Internationalism</a>.&nbsp; </span><span>[Now free in two download formats]</span><span><span><a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank"><span><span></span></span></a></span></span><span><span><a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/world_social_forum/" target="_blank"><span><span></span></span></a></span></span>
</li>

<li>
<span>Interface
Journal<span> Special (co-editor), November 2012:</span> </span><span><a href="http://www.interfacejournal.net/current/" target="_blank">For the Global Emancipation of Labour</a></span>

</li>
<li>
<span lang="NL">Blog:</span><span lang="NL"> <a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman." target="_blank">http://www.unionbook.org/profile/peterwaterman.</a>
</span>
</li>
<li>
<span>EBook 2011, Under, Against, Beyond (Compilation 1980s-90s) <a href="http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/" target="_blank">http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/under-against-beyond/</a></span><br>
</li>
<li>
<span>Paper 2012:</span><span> <a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profiles/blogs/peter-waterman-the-second-coming-of-the-wftu-updated" target="_blank">The 2nd Coming of the World Federation of Trade&nbsp;Unions <br></a></span>
</li>
<li><span><a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profiles/blogs/peter-waterman-the-second-coming-of-the-wftu-updated" target="_blank">
</a>Paper 2012:<span>&nbsp; </span><a href="http://www.unionbook.org/profiles/blogs/marikana-south-africa-elsewhere-the-dance-of-the-undead" target="_blank">Marikana,
South Africa, The March of the Undead</a></span></li>
<li>
<span>Chapter, 2013. 'Many New Internationalisms!', in Corinne Kumar (ed), Asking, We Walk:</span><span lang="EN-GB"> The South as New Political Imaginary, Bangalore:<span> Streelekha Publications.</span></span><br>
</li>
<li><table cellpadding="0"><tr>
<td><br></td>
<td><br></td>
</tr></table></li>
</ul>

</div>
</span>
</div>
</div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>&nbsp; - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br><br><a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank"></a>Updates: <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br><br>#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href="http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/" target="_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/</a> <br>
</div></div>
Kevin F | 30 Jul 15:17 2013
Picon

Swarmwise : Tactical Manual to changing the World by Rick Falkvinge

Rick Falkvinge has just published his new book Swarmwise.

Having read some extracts that were serialised on his blog I highly recommend it.
Kevin
<div><div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Rick Falkvinge has just published his new book Swarmwise. <br>
</div>
<br>
</div>Having read some extracts that were serialised on his blog I highly recommend it.<br><div>
<br><a href="http://falkvinge.net/2013/07/19/book-launch-swarmwise-the-tactical-manual-to-changing-the-world/">http://falkvinge.net/2013/07/19/book-launch-swarmwise-the-tactical-manual-to-changing-the-world/</a><br><br>
</div>
<div>Kevin<br>
</div>
</div></div>
Michel Bauwens | 30 Jul 13:33 2013
Picon

Fwd: Pecha Kucha Night - Rio

fast-forwarding the spiritual background to my current p2p engagement,

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gabriela Mafort <
Date: Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:42 AM
Subject: Pecha Kucha Night - Rio
To: Michel Bauwens <michel <at> p2pfoundation.net>, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>


Hi Michel, did you see this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV1HjPx4vPU

--


Gabriela Mafort 
http://about.me/gmafort
Skype gmafort
Tel: (55 21) 9777-1699



--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
<div><div dir="ltr">fast-forwarding the spiritual background to my current p2p engagement,<br><div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: Gabriela Mafort <span dir="ltr">&lt;</span><br>
Date: Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:42 AM<br>Subject: Pecha Kucha Night - Rio<br>To: Michel Bauwens &lt;<a href="mailto:michel@...">michel <at> p2pfoundation.net</a>&gt;, Michel Bauwens &lt;<a href="mailto:michelsub2004 <at> gmail.com">michelsub2004@...</a>&gt;<br><br><br><div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi Michel, did you see this?</div>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV1HjPx4vPU" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV1HjPx4vPU</a><span class="HOEnZb"><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><br><br>Gabriela Mafort&nbsp;<br><a href="http://about.me/gmafort" target="_blank">http://about.me/gmafort</a><br>
Skype gmafort<br>Tel: (55 21) 9777-1699
</span>
</div>
</div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>&nbsp; - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br><br><a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank"></a>Updates: <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br><br>#82 on the (En)Rich list: <a href="http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/" target="_blank">http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/</a> <br>
</div>
</div></div>

Gmane