← Older revision Revision as of 15:29, 15 January 2019
Line 2: Line 2:
 
'''= concept, article and book'''
 
'''= concept, article and book'''
   
=The Concept=
+
==The Concept==
   
==Description==
+
===Description===
   
 
[[Christian Siefkes]]:
 
[[Christian Siefkes]]:
Line 15: Line 15:
   
 
There are two preconditions which I consider most relevant for the development of commonism:
 
There are two preconditions which I consider most relevant for the development of commonism:
 
+
# Human labor disappears from the production processes, being replaced by automation and joyful doing.
(1) Human labor disappears from the production processes, being replaced by automation and joyful doing.
+
# Everyone has access to resources and means of production. Developments within capitalism favor the partial emergence of these conditions, though their full realization would make capitalism impossible.
 
+
(2) Everyone has access to resources and means of production. Developments within capitalism favor the partial emergence of these conditions, though their full realization would make capitalism impossible.
+
   
 
How these conditions change the processes of production becomes already visible in the digital realm, where commons-based peer production flourishes. But as argued above, it's unlikely to stop there. Peer production reaches beyond capitalism, by being benefit-driven and non-hierarchical rather than profit-driven and hierarchical and by obsoleting and destroying markets formerly dominated by commodity production (such as programming tools and encyclopedias). And yet, the preconditions of this development are created by capitalism itself.
 
How these conditions change the processes of production becomes already visible in the digital realm, where commons-based peer production flourishes. But as argued above, it's unlikely to stop there. Peer production reaches beyond capitalism, by being benefit-driven and non-hierarchical rather than profit-driven and hierarchical and by obsoleting and destroying markets formerly dominated by commodity production (such as programming tools and encyclopedias). And yet, the preconditions of this development are created by capitalism itself.
Line 35: Line 33:
 
(http://www.keimform.de/2011/benefit-driven-production/)
 
(http://www.keimform.de/2011/benefit-driven-production/)
   
===Source===
+
====Source====
   
 
Paper: The [[Emergence of Benefit-Driven Production]]. Christian Siefkes.
 
Paper: The [[Emergence of Benefit-Driven Production]]. Christian Siefkes.
Line 41: Line 39:
 
URL: http://www.keimform.de/2011/benefit-driven-production/
 
URL: http://www.keimform.de/2011/benefit-driven-production/
   
 
+
===The concept of commonism as introduced by Nick Dyer-Witheford===
==The concept of commonism as introduced by Nick Dyer-Witheford==
+
   
 
"One of the more sustained renditions of a new commons is the notion of ‘commonism’ elaborated by Dyer-Witheford (2006, 2007), who, in a number of articles has sought to promote the concept of commonism as a way to avoid the bad history of authoritarian state communism, while, at the same time, providing an antidote to centralised planning and the restrictions of private property through new forms of collective ownership. An important aspect of the notion of commonism is the way in which it connects with issues of technological production in the context of Open Education and Open Educational Resources. Dyer-Witheford’s most significant work to date has been Cyber-Marx: Cycles and Circuits of Struggle in High Technology Capitalism (1999). In this book he sets out the ways in which postmodern capitalism has extended beyond the factory to permeate all of social life, particularly through the digitalised circuits of cyber-space.  He shows how these extended social sites and the circuits through which they are connected provide spaces of interconnected collected struggle and resistance.
 
"One of the more sustained renditions of a new commons is the notion of ‘commonism’ elaborated by Dyer-Witheford (2006, 2007), who, in a number of articles has sought to promote the concept of commonism as a way to avoid the bad history of authoritarian state communism, while, at the same time, providing an antidote to centralised planning and the restrictions of private property through new forms of collective ownership. An important aspect of the notion of commonism is the way in which it connects with issues of technological production in the context of Open Education and Open Educational Resources. Dyer-Witheford’s most significant work to date has been Cyber-Marx: Cycles and Circuits of Struggle in High Technology Capitalism (1999). In this book he sets out the ways in which postmodern capitalism has extended beyond the factory to permeate all of social life, particularly through the digitalised circuits of cyber-space.  He shows how these extended social sites and the circuits through which they are connected provide spaces of interconnected collected struggle and resistance.
Line 60: Line 57:
 
All of this practical intellectual activity was possessed with a sense of immanence and urgency, giving immediacy to the slogan: ‘communism is the real movement which abolishes the present state of things’ (Marx, 1998). For these new revolutionary scientists communism is not a project for constructing a model of a future world; but, rather, ‘a practical means for the destruction of the present society’ (Tronti, 1965: 8).
 
All of this practical intellectual activity was possessed with a sense of immanence and urgency, giving immediacy to the slogan: ‘communism is the real movement which abolishes the present state of things’ (Marx, 1998). For these new revolutionary scientists communism is not a project for constructing a model of a future world; but, rather, ‘a practical means for the destruction of the present society’ (Tronti, 1965: 8).
   
===Commonism: as a cell-like form===
+
====Commonism: as a cell-like form====
   
 
Dyer-Witheford takes the spirit and the sensibility of Autonomist Marxism, not least its conceptual ingenuity, and attempts to recreate a framework of resistance through his concept of commonism.  Just as Autonomia inverts the notion of valorisation as self- valorisation, Commonism takes as its starting point the organising principle on which the circuit of capitalist expansion is established, i.e. the commodity-form, and uses it as the basis of revolutionary struggle. As Dyer-Witheford reminds us, Marx opens Capital Vol. 1 with the statement:
 
Dyer-Witheford takes the spirit and the sensibility of Autonomist Marxism, not least its conceptual ingenuity, and attempts to recreate a framework of resistance through his concept of commonism.  Just as Autonomia inverts the notion of valorisation as self- valorisation, Commonism takes as its starting point the organising principle on which the circuit of capitalist expansion is established, i.e. the commodity-form, and uses it as the basis of revolutionary struggle. As Dyer-Witheford reminds us, Marx opens Capital Vol. 1 with the statement:
Line 86: Line 83:
 
Dyer-Witheford argues that the new regimes of biotechnology and digitalisation offer the potential for the socialisation of productive activity, new modes of product creation and circulation outside of ‘the orbit of the commodity form’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 25). This can happen, he argues, through the development of peer-to-peer and open source networks:  as ‘creative commons’ and ‘open ‘cultures’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 25), as well as by access to affordable drugs, and the social control of pharmaceutical production and distribution. In this way commonism is contesting the regime of private property of the world market, ‘not as a natural state, but an equalitarian order to be achieved’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 27). Again, Dyer-Witheford argues this can be carried out by a regime of ‘social planning, and on a scale to make previous efforts look retiring’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 30). All of this, he claims, is made possible by the ‘new informational technologies created by cognitive capital [which] makes such governmentality feasible’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 30), kept in check by the logic of the new planetary logic of the commons: ‘the logic of collective creativity and welfare proposed by the counter-globalisation movements’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 16): the new commonism.
 
Dyer-Witheford argues that the new regimes of biotechnology and digitalisation offer the potential for the socialisation of productive activity, new modes of product creation and circulation outside of ‘the orbit of the commodity form’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 25). This can happen, he argues, through the development of peer-to-peer and open source networks:  as ‘creative commons’ and ‘open ‘cultures’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 25), as well as by access to affordable drugs, and the social control of pharmaceutical production and distribution. In this way commonism is contesting the regime of private property of the world market, ‘not as a natural state, but an equalitarian order to be achieved’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 27). Again, Dyer-Witheford argues this can be carried out by a regime of ‘social planning, and on a scale to make previous efforts look retiring’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 30). All of this, he claims, is made possible by the ‘new informational technologies created by cognitive capital [which] makes such governmentality feasible’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 30), kept in check by the logic of the new planetary logic of the commons: ‘the logic of collective creativity and welfare proposed by the counter-globalisation movements’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2006: 16): the new commonism.
   
===Critique of Commonism and Autonomist Marxism===
+
====Critique of Commonism and Autonomist Marxism====
   
 
While commonism draws attention to progressive forms of collaborative labour, its focus is very much on the positive redistribution of goods and resources. The implication is that different forms of exchange produce different forms of social activity, ‘shared resources generate forms of shared co-operation – associations – that coordinate the conversion of further resources into expanded commons’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2007). The focus is very much on exchange relations rather than searching for more substantive underlying levels of social determinations in the ways in which social relations are produced.
 
While commonism draws attention to progressive forms of collaborative labour, its focus is very much on the positive redistribution of goods and resources. The implication is that different forms of exchange produce different forms of social activity, ‘shared resources generate forms of shared co-operation – associations – that coordinate the conversion of further resources into expanded commons’ (Dyer-Witheford, 2007). The focus is very much on exchange relations rather than searching for more substantive underlying levels of social determinations in the ways in which social relations are produced.
Line 99: Line 96:
 
(http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/open-education-commons-commonism-and-new-common-wealth)
 
(http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/open-education-commons-commonism-and-new-common-wealth)
   
===Source===
+
====Source====
   
 
* Neary, Mike and Winn, Joss (2012) '[http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/open-education-commons-commonism-and-new-common-wealth Open education: Common(s), commonism and the new common wealth]'. Ephemera, Vol. 12, No. 4.
 
* Neary, Mike and Winn, Joss (2012) '[http://www.ephemerajournal.org/contribution/open-education-commons-commonism-and-new-common-wealth Open education: Common(s), commonism and the new common wealth]'. Ephemera, Vol. 12, No. 4.
   
==Discussion==
+
===Discussion===
   
===Commonism as Ideology and an Aesthetic of the Real===
+
====Commonism as Ideology and an Aesthetic of the Real====
   
 
Pascal Gielen:
 
Pascal Gielen:
Line 121: Line 118:
 
(http://ccqo.eu/2017/04/06/pascal-gielen-sustainable-creativity-in-the-post-fordist-city-commnonism-the-art-of-civil-action-residences-revisited/)
 
(http://ccqo.eu/2017/04/06/pascal-gielen-sustainable-creativity-in-the-post-fordist-city-commnonism-the-art-of-civil-action-residences-revisited/)
   
 
+
====A critique of commonism====
===A critique of commonism===
+
   
 
The Other Spiral:
 
The Other Spiral:
Line 143: Line 139:
 
(http://theotherspiral.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/against-commonism/)
 
(http://theotherspiral.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/against-commonism/)
   
=The Article=
+
==The Article==
   
 
'''* Commonism. Nick Dyer-Witheford. Turbulence.'''
 
'''* Commonism. Nick Dyer-Witheford. Turbulence.'''
Line 151: Line 147:
 
"If the cell form of capitalism is the commodity, the cellular form of a society beyond capital is the common. Nick Dyer-Witheford discusses the circulation of commons and the conditions they would create for new collective projects and waves of organising."
 
"If the cell form of capitalism is the commodity, the cellular form of a society beyond capital is the common. Nick Dyer-Witheford discusses the circulation of commons and the conditions they would create for new collective projects and waves of organising."
   
 
+
==The Book==
=The Book=
+
   
 
See our entry: [[Commonism as a New Aesthetics of the Real]]
 
See our entry: [[Commonism as a New Aesthetics of the Real]]

Published Date

Categories