Collectivity
< PRE-DRAFT++ >
< #SYSTEMATICS >
< #ECONOMICS >
Iterating and juxtaposing various COLLECTIVITY types, especially in relation to (control of) PROPERTY.
Part of XXX🔗orga
Revisions:
20210429 placeholder
20210612 ping → PD++
Ties to:
__________ (operations)
* 🔗consolidation
* 🔗intersub
__________ (forms)
* 🔗postmarket
* 🔗hackbases
* 🔗communism
* 🔗noise-temples
__________ loosely
* 🔗alike, 🔗networks
Table of Contents
¶*** TYPES
(This is not a classification, more of a list of incommensurable but related forms, trying to capture their specifics).
(This is not a classification, more of a list of incommensurable but related forms, trying to capture their specifics).
¶* collectives
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective
"""
A collective is a group of entities that share or are motivated by at least one common issue or interest, or work together to achieve a common objective.[citation needed] Collectives can differ from cooperatives in that they are not necessarily focused upon an economic benefit or saving, but can be that as well.
The term "collective" is sometimes used to describe a species as a whole—for example, the human collective.
For political purposes, a collective is defined by decentralized, or "majority-rules" decision making styles.
"""
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective
"""
A collective is a group of entities that share or are motivated by at least one common issue or interest, or work together to achieve a common objective.[citation needed] Collectives can differ from cooperatives in that they are not necessarily focused upon an economic benefit or saving, but can be that as well.
The term "collective" is sometimes used to describe a species as a whole—for example, the human collective.
For political purposes, a collective is defined by decentralized, or "majority-rules" decision making styles.
"""
¶* commons & shared-infrastructures
### [!!] is there any list of actual commons?
"amorphous commons" or "plurity of commons"?
"commons" is (also?) a plural form of (a) common
we should absolutely speak about:
* this or that (individual) common — separately from "the commons"
* so about the plurity of (since they are always limited to stakeholders)
... this then prevents them to congregate, and perform higher-order operations - consolidation, etc.
"amorphous commons" or "plurity of commons"?
"commons" is (also?) a plural form of (a) common
we should absolutely speak about:
* this or that (individual) common — separately from "the commons"
* so about the plurity of (since they are always limited to stakeholders)
... this then prevents them to congregate, and perform higher-order operations - consolidation, etc.
¶* opt-in communisms
* are:
* not countering neccessity of DOTP
* interested in building parallel, "within the shell of the old" systems to empower
* CHT is this, in a way
* are:
* not countering neccessity of DOTP
* interested in building parallel, "within the shell of the old" systems to empower
* CHT is this, in a way
¶* "Collective Voice"
A:
(via Penny T in p2pleft)
"""
yes a single voice is easily silenced and manipulated, but a collective no. This is also the example of all recent movements #metoo, #BLM etc.
"""
I think this is different then just "voice of a collective".
It's spontaneous, it's a specific way of collectivity.
B (in literature):
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/what-collective-voice-literature-how-wives-los-474837
C (economics??, as a worker→mgmt voice):
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Voice
###
A:
"""
yes a single voice is easily silenced and manipulated, but a collective no. This is also the example of all recent movements #metoo, #BLM etc.
"""
I think this is different then just "voice of a collective".
It's spontaneous, it's a specific way of collectivity.
B (in literature):
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/what-collective-voice-literature-how-wives-los-474837
C (economics??, as a worker→mgmt voice):
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Voice
###
¶* associations(?)
no:
* example: Yuan (rigid bureocracy)
yes:
* Extrabody (specifically attempting to detourn bureocracy)
no:
* example: Yuan (rigid bureocracy)
yes:
* Extrabody (specifically attempting to detourn bureocracy)
¶* "Dance company"
###
* owns an artistic work
* but mostly, it's a "company" in the sense of "group of people" that needs to move together and thus has logistic demands
###unclear
###
* owns an artistic work
* but mostly, it's a "company" in the sense of "group of people" that needs to move together and thus has logistic demands
¶* "an organism"
https://www.radicalandwild.com/post/self-organising-spaces
"PAF wants to be an organism"
(and also, as a TAZ)
https://www.radicalandwild.com/post/self-organising-spaces
"PAF wants to be an organism"
(and also, as a TAZ)
¶* multitude
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude
(Hobbes, Spinoza → Hardt+Negri)
"""
Multitude is a term for a group of people who cannot be classed under any other distinct category, except for their shared fact of existence. Though its use dates back to antiquity, the term first entered into the lexicon of political philosophy when it was used by figures like Machiavelli, Hobbes, and most notably, Spinoza. The multitude is a concept of a population that has not entered into a social contract with a sovereign political body, such that individuals retain the capacity for political self-determination. A multitude typically is classified as a quantity exceeding 100. For Hobbes the multitude was a rabble that needed to enact a social contract with a monarch, thus turning them from a multitude into a people. For Machiavelli and Spinoza both, the role of the multitude vacillates between admiration and contempt. Recently the term has returned to prominence as a new model of resistance against global systems of power as described by political theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their international best-seller Empire (2000) and expanded upon in their Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (2004). Other theorists recently began to use the term include political thinkers associated with autonomist Marxism and its sequelae, including Sylvère Lotringer, Paolo Virno, and thinkers connected with the eponymous review Multitudes.
"""
Negri+Hardt:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude#Reiteration_by_Negri_and_Hardt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude:_War_and_Democracy_in_the_Age_of_Empire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude
(Hobbes, Spinoza → Hardt+Negri)
"""
Multitude is a term for a group of people who cannot be classed under any other distinct category, except for their shared fact of existence. Though its use dates back to antiquity, the term first entered into the lexicon of political philosophy when it was used by figures like Machiavelli, Hobbes, and most notably, Spinoza. The multitude is a concept of a population that has not entered into a social contract with a sovereign political body, such that individuals retain the capacity for political self-determination. A multitude typically is classified as a quantity exceeding 100. For Hobbes the multitude was a rabble that needed to enact a social contract with a monarch, thus turning them from a multitude into a people. For Machiavelli and Spinoza both, the role of the multitude vacillates between admiration and contempt. Recently the term has returned to prominence as a new model of resistance against global systems of power as described by political theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their international best-seller Empire (2000) and expanded upon in their Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (2004). Other theorists recently began to use the term include political thinkers associated with autonomist Marxism and its sequelae, including Sylvère Lotringer, Paolo Virno, and thinkers connected with the eponymous review Multitudes.
"""
Negri+Hardt:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude#Reiteration_by_Negri_and_Hardt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitude:_War_and_Democracy_in_the_Age_of_Empire
¶*** MODALITIES
"A collectivity will perform (or not perform) degrees of specific functions of [financial, knowledge, labour, ...] commonality."
###
[!!] <L>:
check https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/perform for alternatives
like "operate", "engage in", "bring about", "apply"
<<<D: what's wrong with "perform"?
"A collectivity will perform (or not perform) degrees of specific functions of [financial, knowledge, labour, ...] commonality."
¶* knowledge → (produces)
* as 🔗teaching
* as structured knowledge:
A) within
B) beyond (=consolidates with other levels)
### "This kind of easy to enter two-level/multi context structured collaboration content space, with evolving editorial protocols for graduating, sifting, merging content, etc seems a worthy pursuit regardless of WikiCorp support"
* acquires
* shares
* notate
* ###
* as 🔗teaching
* as structured knowledge:
A) within
B) beyond (=consolidates with other levels)
* acquires
* shares
* notate
* ###
¶*** [m!!] PROJECT WORK TYPES
* 🔗organization (TYPES OF PROJECTS)
* XXX🔗projects:
has a lot on this!
* [...]
* 🔗organization (TYPES OF PROJECTS)
* XXX🔗projects:
has a lot on this!
* [...]
¶20210429 → ???
### who was this for?
___________________
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist_collective
Trying to get a resource which would discuss clearly the differences of various types of:
Associations,
Collectives,
commons,
"cooperatives",
shared-infrastructures,
"communities",
"communes", etc.
It seems to me this is largely unspecified, at least on a simple so executive/tactical level.
For this reason:
various forms of mutualism resort to a lowest common denominator,
and so it is prohibitive to express and evaluate how one project is not living up to its name,
or encourage it to reform into a more progressive class.
To be clear:
(othat than for reference), not about "legal" terms within specific jurisdictions, which will always be immobilised (immobilising?) and thus regressive,
but a functional decision schema
Related, Ive seen probably 4/5 loose groupations:
attempting to go beyond that stage,
get stuck and expend themselves at the moronic step of determining their legal form.
Who cares? CHT never incorporated and yet:
it holds open access property,
radically open participation,
no comittee governance,
no back channels.
All the frills from legalese forms have a purpose, not to distribute property, but to keep it from being overly distributed away from a core group, "local community" or even nation - protecting limited interests.
Including in a different way the pseudo-progressive patterns of "mutual aid", "agorism" and "solidarity", not to mention "sharing economy", which make redistribution a matter of individual whim, rather than an (eco)systemic obligation towards others
___________________
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist_collective
Trying to get a resource which would discuss clearly the differences of various types of:
Associations,
Collectives,
commons,
"cooperatives",
shared-infrastructures,
"communities",
"communes", etc.
It seems to me this is largely unspecified, at least on a simple so executive/tactical level.
For this reason:
various forms of mutualism resort to a lowest common denominator,
and so it is prohibitive to express and evaluate how one project is not living up to its name,
or encourage it to reform into a more progressive class.
To be clear:
(othat than for reference), not about "legal" terms within specific jurisdictions, which will always be immobilised (immobilising?) and thus regressive,
but a functional decision schema
Related, Ive seen probably 4/5 loose groupations:
attempting to go beyond that stage,
get stuck and expend themselves at the moronic step of determining their legal form.
Who cares? CHT never incorporated and yet:
it holds open access property,
radically open participation,
no comittee governance,
no back channels.
All the frills from legalese forms have a purpose, not to distribute property, but to keep it from being overly distributed away from a core group, "local community" or even nation - protecting limited interests.
Including in a different way the pseudo-progressive patterns of "mutual aid", "agorism" and "solidarity", not to mention "sharing economy", which make redistribution a matter of individual whim, rather than an (eco)systemic obligation towards others
¶[!!] DO/ALIKE/DISCOVERABILITY— Link existing key terms
* one one hand - this is sociology 101
* ... but why is the tactical, formulaic application of these so lagging behind?
----------
#postscience
Do sciences need ASPECTS?:
* where "TO GUIDE PRACTICE" is one, clearly defined?
* how to retain a single source of truth, while having plurality of use (consideration and extension)?
* one one hand - this is sociology 101
* ... but why is the tactical, formulaic application of these so lagging behind?
----------
Do sciences need ASPECTS?:
* where "TO GUIDE PRACTICE" is one, clearly defined?
* how to retain a single source of truth, while having plurality of use (consideration and extension)?
¶[!!] DO/DEFINITION— "What is/was/would I want XYZ to be?"
—————— SOME EXAMPLES —————
_____ CHT
* "infrastructure vs community", "ran by protocols"
* strong SCALE vs replicate
* strong INTERSUB vs improvise
* strong COMRADE vs "friend"
* strong ANTIWE
* strong POSTLEGAL ("didn't need associatoin") + CONFED
* strong ANTILURKER
* ~~ "membership"
* ###
_____ P2P-LEFT
* very implicit elder rule
* "opposing something"
* internal group
* ###
_____ SQEK
* "kollektive"
* solidarity
* had implicit & explicit elder rule
###
_____ HACC
* a network
* a common charter
* a forum (to discuss and advance the charter)
* knowledge commons (collating systematics)
* defined roles of participants, with catalysts serving its expansion
→:
* knowledge commons → (produces)
* value commons → (establishes)
* labour commons → (guides)
—————— SOME EXAMPLES —————
_____ CHT
* "infrastructure vs community", "ran by protocols"
* strong SCALE vs replicate
* strong INTERSUB vs improvise
* strong COMRADE vs "friend"
* strong ANTIWE
* strong POSTLEGAL ("didn't need associatoin") + CONFED
* strong ANTILURKER
* ~~ "membership"
* ###
_____ P2P-LEFT
* very implicit elder rule
* "opposing something"
* internal group
* ###
_____ SQEK
* "kollektive"
* solidarity
* had implicit & explicit elder rule
###
_____ HACC
* a network
* a common charter
* a forum (to discuss and advance the charter)
* knowledge commons (collating systematics)
* defined roles of participants, with catalysts serving its expansion
→:
* knowledge commons → (produces)
* value commons → (establishes)
* labour commons → (guides)
¶(L:) Ask specialists (pascal & C.C.Q.O.) for lists / resources
###Sociologic list that describes this
###Sociologic list that describes this
¶[!!] (check related)
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Community
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Peerproperty
###
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Community
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/Category:Peerproperty
###
¶"Best out there"
What's the really bigger ones like, in terms of infra?
FFF.de
https://wiki.fridaysforfuture.is/wiki/Task_Force
https://ffftre.es/
What's the really bigger ones like, in terms of infra?
FFF.de
https://wiki.fridaysforfuture.is/wiki/Task_Force
https://ffftre.es/
¶Kolkhoz / sovkhoz (collective farms in Soviet Union)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolkhoz
"""
As a collective farm, a kolkhoz was legally organized as a production cooperative. The Standard Charter of a kolkhoz, which since the early 1930s had the force of law in the USSR, is a model of cooperative principles in print. It speaks of the kolkhoz as a "form of agricultural production cooperative of peasants that voluntarily unite for the main purpose of joint agricultural production based on [...] collective labor". It asserts that "the kolkhoz is managed according to the principles of socialist self-management, democracy, and openness, with active participation of the members in decisions concerning all aspects of internal life".[3]
"""
Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_farming
Also Kibbutz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolkhoz
"""
As a collective farm, a kolkhoz was legally organized as a production cooperative. The Standard Charter of a kolkhoz, which since the early 1930s had the force of law in the USSR, is a model of cooperative principles in print. It speaks of the kolkhoz as a "form of agricultural production cooperative of peasants that voluntarily unite for the main purpose of joint agricultural production based on [...] collective labor". It asserts that "the kolkhoz is managed according to the principles of socialist self-management, democracy, and openness, with active participation of the members in decisions concerning all aspects of internal life".[3]
"""
Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_farming
Also Kibbutz
¶Aspect: Finality / Dissolution
* "only way out of this is death" (traditionalist/romantic marriage):
* Depp vs Heard lol: https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/amber-heard-johnny-depp-death-b2072423.html
* https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/05/nigerian-gospel-singers-death-puts-divorce-beliefs-in-spotlight-osinachi-nwachukwu
* ###
* prenup agreements (liberal marriage)
* coco's "dissolution" (tactical)
* cliche mafia (familiar, complete dedication)
* NDA's, contract penalities, etc (business)
* ###
<----------------------------------------------------- ((new))
"""
Zappa himself put it more bluntly: “How long can you be enthusiastic about music as an art form, never mind music as a business, when it involves other people that you have to rely on, and they piss on your shoe?” he said. “Why do you have to put up with that? The more I can rely on myself, the better I like it.”
"""
#noisetemples
* "only way out of this is death" (traditionalist/romantic marriage):
* Depp vs Heard lol: https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/amber-heard-johnny-depp-death-b2072423.html
* https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/05/nigerian-gospel-singers-death-puts-divorce-beliefs-in-spotlight-osinachi-nwachukwu
* ###
* prenup agreements (liberal marriage)
* coco's "dissolution" (tactical)
* cliche mafia (familiar, complete dedication)
* NDA's, contract penalities, etc (business)
* ###
<----------------------------------------------------- ((new))
"""
Zappa himself put it more bluntly: “How long can you be enthusiastic about music as an art form, never mind music as a business, when it involves other people that you have to rely on, and they piss on your shoe?” he said. “Why do you have to put up with that? The more I can rely on myself, the better I like it.”
"""
#noisetemples