Les artikkelen kommentaren er knyttet til her.
Din framgang kan også ha sammenheng med at Aftenposten innførte betaling hvis man leser mer enn 8 artikler i uka. For meg har det ikke vært et bevisst valg, men når man noen ganger har opplevd å ikke få lest ferdig en artikkel man klikker på, glir man ubevisst vekk. Er nok over en måned siden jeg var innom Aftenposten sist, tidligere var det daglig.
Da blir det til at man søker opp nye nyhetskilder, som steigan.no, som ikke på noen måte ligger bak Aftenposten i analyse og gravejournalistikk.
En sak jeg dog skulle ønsket at du hadde tatt tak i er avvisningen av Terje Bongards forskningsprosjekt MEDOSS: http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/wp-content/uploads/MEDOSS_proposal_16-10-FINAL-1.pdf
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/terje-bongard-no-grant-for-medoss/2014/03/19
Med dine kontakter både innen norsk, skandinavisk og internasjonal fagbevegelse burde det vært mulig å hostet fram 42 forskningsmillioner til å få realisert dette prosjektet.
“Another world is not just possible. It is being built.
So many of us wish for something more—an economy we can feel a part of, not that makes us feel like a disposable cog in a soulless machine. That something exists and it’s called the Solidarity Economy. This kind of economy starts from entirely different premises than those of the ruling model of neoliberal capitalism which enshrines individualism, competition, materialism, accumulation, and the maximization of profits and growth. The solidarity economy by contrast seeks the well being of people and planet. It holds at its core these principles: solidarity, equity in all dimensions, sustainability, participatory democracy, and pluralism. This book is about vision and hope. It provides many examples of real solutions in a wide array of sectors. These practices are currently too isolated from one another. The task of the solidarity economy is to bring these practices together to build a whole and humane economy that works…”
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/book-of-the-day-solidarity-economy-alternatives/2014/06/16
Selv ser jeg IGD (InnGruppe-Demokratiet) som den ultimate realisering av «the commons» (det norske ordet allmenning fanger ikke opp den fulle dybden av sitt engelske motstykke), hvor man selvorganiserer samfunnet i små grupper nedenfra og opp: http://bollier.org/blog/green-governance-reimagining-our-stewardship-nature
«The Commons is a regime for managing common-pool resources that eschews individual property rights and State control. It is a system of governance that relies on common property arrangements that tend to be Commonsself-organized and enforced in complex and sometimes idiosyncratic ways (which distinguish it from communism, a top-down, State-directed mode of governance whose historical record has been unimpressive). Today the commons can be seen in such diverse resources as the Internet, rural forests, fisheries, town squares, universities and community life.
A commons is generally governed by what we call Vernacular Law – the “unofficial” norms, institutions and procedures that a peer community devises to manage its resources on its own, and typically democratically. State law and action may set the parameters within which Vernacular Law operates, but the State does not directly control how a given commons is organized and managed.
In its classic form, a commons operates in a quasi-sovereign way, similar to the Market but largely escaping the centralized mandates of the State and the logic of Market exchange. By mobilizing decentralized participation on the ground, commons could become important vehicles for assuring a right to environment at local, regional, national and global levels. Moving in this direction, however, will require innovative legal and policy norms, institutions and procedures to recognize and support commons as a matter of law.»
Styrken med IGD er at det fanger opp ALLE i nettverket, duene er sjanseløse så lenge haukene får fly fritt!
Samtidig som vi får full demokratisk kontroll over produksjonen og naturgrunnlaget, som vel hovedsaklig ligger under korporasjonenes kontroll i dagens verden.
«Takk Øyvind, men fremdeles har ikke disse viktige kritikerne knekt koden med pengefølelsen, eller sett at det eneste Ellinor Ostrom mangler, er forståelse for inngruppestørrelsens betydning for politisk styring….» – Terje Bongard
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar
Merk: Bare medlemmer av denne bloggen kan legge inn en kommentar.