Discussed page

This page is meant to develop criteria for a germ form and check for agreement. Feel free to add your ideas and comments here and please add a "@ SIG @" to your contribution (without the spaces). Consolidated and agreed criteria are copied to the parent page.

Suggestions by StefanMerten

The following criteria has been suggested by StefanMerten during the Hütten workshop. They are based on the common argumentation figures in Project Oekonux -- StefanMerten 2006-07-18 09:16:43

Suggestions by FranzNahrada

The following criteria has been suggested by FranzNahrada after the Hütten workshop while being concerned with GlobalVillages. Translation by StefanMerten. -- StefanMerten 2006-07-18 09:16:43

Suggestions by PatrickAnderson

The following five points probably relate to the five step model. -- StefanMerten 2007-01-04 08:51:17

  1. Emergence of new: Needs-based tools target local utility:

    For Free Software these sources were created:

    • Edit (Emacs), Compile (gcc), Execute (Linux kernel)

    For Free Hardware these sources are purchased:

    • Till (tractor), Sow (drill, seed), Irrigate (water rights, sprinklers), Reap (harvest, thresh), Store (dehydrate, jar, package)

      • Ahm - what about my local microprocessor? -- StefanMerten 2007-01-04 08:51:17

  2. Crisis of old: Capitalism relies on artificial scarcity but Freedom perfects competition by enforcing "at cost" access.

    • Free Software: Users access product "at cost". Qualified worker access sources "at cost".

    • Free Hardware: Users access product "at cost". Qualified worker access sources "at cost".

    Consumer price continues to fall because competition is perfected and resources are never more than "at cost". Any worker may bid each at each cycle to do the work (such as harvesting almonds), but nobody is allowed to keep the collectively owned trees artificially scarce. This even causes a crisis for workers if they do not move out of the old mindset of profit through scarcity into one where the goal is wealth through abundance.

    • That's the way capitalism is actually meant to work - though workers movement had a say here and there. I can not see why this can be seen as an indication of crisis of old. -- StefanMerten 2007-01-04 08:51:17

  3. New within old: Private owner syndication disallows recapture.

    • The subset of Free Software called 'Copyleft' is the only trouble for capitalists, as these GNU owners forbid the re-enclosure of that resource in a manner that other licenses do not.

    • Free Hardware resources should be held in an analogous 'Property Left' manner, with owners forbidding enclosure through (perhaps) a Lease that requires the resource remain "at cost" for all who qualify to bid upon.

    • Physical Sources of production are traditionally only controlled by owners. Free as in Freedom access causes most control to be available "at cost", while artificial scarcity (also known as 'hoarding') is disallowed.

  4. New finally dominates: Results are initially low, but finally outperform

    • GNU/Linux was a 'toy' OS for many years, but is now a direct competitor: http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT5613250391.html

    • Purchasing the Land, Buildings and Tools needed to begin the production of Free Hardware will be an arduous and initially ridiculously small endeavor, but will finally win because the disallowance of "Owner Profit" will cause higher "Worker Profit" and lower "Consumer Price", finally outperforming Capitalism.

      • Changes in the distribution of surplus value is perfectly the program of the workers movement. However, this changes nothing in the fundaments of the society. -- StefanMerten 2007-01-04 08:51:17

  5. Reconstruction: Consumers are in ultimate control.

    • Consumer may hire a worker (or purchase an output of production from a worker), but is always permitted (when qualified) to access the sources "at cost".

    • Management, maintenance, custodial, security, etc. costs are minimized by offering those positions to potential workers in a "reverse-bid" manner - where salary is competitively set by those who can most efficiently accomplish those requirements. This brings up 'qualification' again, but that should already be a consideration.

    • Every consumer may self-organize to avoid external agenda and allow Selbstentfaltung.

    • Outputs of production are Free ("at cost").

      • Which is what happens in capitalism anyway. -- StefanMerten 2007-01-04 08:51:17

    • Sources can be used by any qualified person who needs them. This implies that they are available without paying more than real costs, and worker incentives are structured to minimize costs.

    • Any amount that workers bid beyond the rent 'floor' would probably be applied toward the purchase of more sources of that type - since overbidding indicates a shortage of that kind of resource.

High level requirements:

-- PatrickAnderson 2006-07-21 15:35:33

More suggestions

Comments by Annette Schlemm

Taken from wiki:De:Huetten06/Protokolle/ArbeitUndHandlung/Holzkamp/Talk and (partly) translated. -- StefanMerten 2006-08-02 06:52:41

Annettes comments mainly relate to the five-step-model. -- StefanMerten 2006-08-02 06:52:41

General

Wenn wir diese Analyse "prospektiv" verwenden wollen, schauen wir quasi von der von uns gewünschten Situation aus ("Freie Gesellschaft") "zurück" und ermitteln durch diesen Blick, welcher Weg dahin zu nehmen ist, welche Voraussetzungen dafür notwendig sind.

Auf diese Weise bringt diese Sichtweise die Analyse der realen Situation (im Punkt 1) mit der von uns vertretenen konkreten Utopie (im Punkt 5) zusammen. Wir analysieren die Realität mit kritischem Blick und sichern ab, dass das von uns Gewünschte auch möglich und kein Hirngespinst ist... (AS)

Step 1

In dieser Form ist die 5-Schritt-Analyse von Holzkamp inhaltlich stark eingeschränkt wieder gegeben. Tatsächlich geht es hier nicht nur um Keimformen, sondern um den "Aufweis der realhistorischen Dimensionen innerhalb der jeweils früheren Stufe". D.h. es geht insgesamt darum zu schauen, welche Voraussetzungen für das spätere Neue vorausgesetzt werden müssen. Das ist hier z.B. der "Grad der Produktivkraftentwicklung", z. B. in Form von entwickelten menschlichen Bedürfnissen und Fähigkeiten oder die materiell-technische Basis o.ä.(AS)

(siehe http://www.thur.de/philo/kp/prot9.htm#5)

Step 2

Bitte INNERE WIDERSPRÜCHLICHKEIT ergänzen

Bei Holzkamp geht es um den "Aufweis der objektiven Veränderungen der Außenweltbedingungen, mit denen der "innere" Entwicklungswiderspruch... in seinem Umweltpol zustandekommen soll". In der Biologie, für das Holzkamp die Analyse durchführte, sind die Außenfaktoren tatsächlich sehr wesentlich, aber in der Geschichte wäre es zu einseitig, sie so stark zu betonen und dabei die innere Widersprüchlichkeit zu vernachlässigen.

Ich denke, viele Debatten, die die Bedeutung der neuen Informationstechniken und von Software etc. betonen, sehen (euphorisch-voreilig) nur den progressiven Pol der Widerspruchslösung und vernachlässigen die weiter möglichen kapitalistischen Bewegungsformen der entstehenden Widersprüche.(AS)

Steps 3 and 4

Hier liegt die wesentliche Neuerung gegenüber früheren dialektischen Entwicklungs-Sprungvorstellugnen durch Holzkamp. Neue Faktoren entstehen schon, solange da Alte noch dominiert (Funktionswechsel) und kommen oft erst nach langer Zeit selbst zur Dominanz (Dominanzwechsel).

Insofern als Entwicklungstheorie eine mit qualitativen "Sprüngen" angenommen wird, ist eine klare Unterscheidung der Zustände vor und nach dem Dominanzwechsel notwendig, damit der "Übergang" nicht zu kontinuierlich verschwimmt. (AS)

Germ form criteria

Wenn bei der Frage nach den Keimformen immer wieder nach Kritieren gefragt wird, macht es vielleicht Sinn, meine Bemerkung zum Punkt 1 zu berücksichtigen.

Es sollte deutlich gemacht werden, ob "Keimformen" sich auf die eher allgemeinen Voraussetzungen für das Neue im Punkt 1 beziehen, oder ob diese Voraussetzungen in iher Bedeutung gleich gewichtet sind oder ob es da Wesentlicherer oder Unwesentlichere gibt.

Ich denke es gibt hier eine Wichtung: So ist vor allem bei der von uns diskutierten "prospektiven" Anwendung dieser Analyse für eine neue Freie Gesellschaft das Moment der menschlichen Selbstentfaltung im Zentrum und die neuen Vernetzungstechniken usw. haben dafür eher nur Mittelcharakter.

Deshalb sind für mich jene Momente "keimformhaft", die sich auf menschliche Selbstentfaltung beziehen und nicht irgendwelche anderen auch vorauszusetzenden Momente. (AS)

AnnetteSchlemm

Suggestions by GrahamSeaman

The seed metaphor does not combine well with the more or less marxist idea of socio-technically driven change. A seed grows to realise its own potential; the final flower is determined by the genes, proteins etc already present in the seed, and only size and maybe colour come from the environment. But with a technically-enabled social change only part of the final state derives from the initial social group; the driving forces are also outside this group.

Following from the seed metaphor:

A germform must be able to survive in the 'alien' world it is born into (a seed which falls into acid will never do anything). This aspect has been emphasized by StefanMerten: the germform must be able to survive within capitalism, and that means it must be able to integrate with it - without being absorbed. In Althusserian terms, only certain modes of production can be combined to produce a social formation.

A germform must be able to grow. A seed which never grows is not really a seed. Changing the relative weight of modes of production requires the social formation to adjust. The result is political conflict. The germform therefore cannot be purely technical or social, but must be able to generate it's own politics in order to defend itself (eg. defeat of software patent moves in the EU)

And not following from the seed metaphor at all (in fact, here the seed metaphor is obstructive):

A germform never grows as a single group, which would be too easily defeated. The same forces will produce related groups with their own variations in history, ideals, etc who must find ways to unite to form larger alliances - growth is by accretion, not from a single germ. Free software developers are only one group. The biotechnologists who managed to defeat the privatisation of the human genome are another. Jamie Love and the groups fighting WIPO are another. Free culturists another. Some left activists another (eg factory occupations in Argentina using free software, net-based brazilian indian activists, etc). These groups have different cultures which need to be melded together for the germform to grow - and the germform metaphor provides no language for this. Providing a 'true' definition of the germform may actually block such alliances since the definition is being generated beofre the alliance - and so based on only one of the cultures.

Suggestions by StefanMerten inspired by Steven Weber

These suggestions are inspired by the great book The Success of Open Source.

Germ forms are more likely for (productive) tasks with these characteristics:

A germ form is likely to work effectively when involved agents have these characteristics:

GermForm/Criteria/Talk (last edited 2007-01-27 18:10:45 by FranzNahrada)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License (details).
All pages are immutable until you log in