The legal right to ramble stems from the Charter of the Forest, the 1217 social compact grudgingly ratified by King John that formally recognized commoners’ rights of access to the forest. The right was part of a larger constellation of rights won by commoners after their long struggle with the Crown over who shall have access to the forest – only the King and his lords and retainers, or ordinary people, too?

Because of the right to ramble, a sprawling network of paths evolved in Great Britain over the centuries, bringing together villages, roads, farms, and natural landmarks throughout the landscape. The pathways were once regarded as vital infrastructure for commerce, social tradition, and everyday convenience. Now the pathways are mostly seen as a beloved cultural heritage and recreational commons. Millions of people roam the pathways every year. 

Like so many social limitations on private private property, however, people forget about what belongs to them – while property owners are ever-alert to the prospect of expanding their rights. Many modern-day property owners in England and Wales despise the right to ramble because it limits, however marginally, their absolute, exclusive control of the land. 

In 2000, property owners prevailed upon the British Parliament to terminate the ancient right to ramble unless a given pathway has been formally mapped and officially recognized. The Countryside and Rights of Way Act set a deadline for such mapping: January 1, 2026. (Parliament originally set a ten-year deadline.) After 2026, unmapped historic pathways will revert to private property and the public right to ramble on such lands will expire forever.

To counter this threat, the Ramblers – a long-time association of walking enthusiasts dedicated to the sense of freedom and benefits that come from being outdoors on foot” — has organized a campaign, Don’t Lose Your Way, along with a guidebook for ramblers, “Protect Where You Love to Walk.” The goal: to help a small army of volunteers map all of the pathways in England and Wales by 2026, and in so doing, keep them available to commoners.

This task is difficult because some historic pathways may not exist on any contemporary maps. Many pathways are known only through informal, customary use.Their very existence is known because one generation introduces the next generation to the joy of walking them. The official maps made by local authorities may or may not recognize the paths, and newer maps may omit older, less-used paths. Sometimes unscrupulous landowners have actually altered pathways to discourage people from using them, or to eradicate local memory of them.

The Ramblers say that identifying and verifying the existence of many pathways really requires a “systemic trawling through archives.” There is no other way to be definitive. But this task is plainly impractical. Chances are good that some pathways will be overlooked and lost to private enclosure. 

But Brits have a history of standing up for their “right to roam.” In a still-remembered episode in 1932, there was a mass trespass on the mountain area known as Kinder Scout — a deliberate act of civil disobedience by hundreds — to protest the lack of access to open countryside in England and Wales.

The mapping requirement by Parliament reminds me of other enclosures in modern life. Think how Indians (on the subcontinent) have had to document the medicinal value of hundreds of traditional plants and herbal medicines in order to keep them available to all.Without such documentation, transnational pharmaceutical companies could patent traditional medicines that have been freely used for centuries. Without affirmative evidence marshaled by commoners — the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library — Big Pharma could claim private, proprietary control over the biowealth of the commons.

I am also reminded of the way that the music industry used copyright law to privatize the commercial use of the 1858 song “Happy Birthday.” Another example of how the culture of commoning is an irresistible target for private commercialization. (Happily, a US federal court declared the copyright of “Happy Birthday” to be invalid in 2016.)

It is encouraging to know that the Ramblers and their allies are on the case. Their campaign to map English and Welsh walking trails serves as another reminder that the rights of commoners cannot be taken for granted. They must be secured through hard work and struggle.

The post A Looming Deadline for the Right to Ramble appeared first on P2P Foundation.

This article was originally posted on our Dutch P2P Foundation blog

On Thursday April 13, 2017, the second meeting was held on “De Meent” in Pakhuis de Zwijger in Amsterdam. The subtitle of the meeting was: “Designing and building the Dutch platform for commoners”. As a representative of the P2P Foundation I also participated to see what energy is surrounding this important initiative. I did not know what to expect from this gathering and made my way to the Pakhuis defying some fighting football supporters. In this blog I mainly want to point out how I think this initiative could develop, because during the meeting we were clearly still searching for the exact purpose of “De Meent”. Perhaps my insights can help to further develop the process of shaping De Meent.

What is a commoner?

Before we can think about a commoners platform, it’s important to determine what we mean by commoners and commons. During the meeting, I felt some reluctance to define some sort of definition because people tend to let every participant define for himself or herself what they mean by commons and commoners. That is an admirable effort, but if we are working on a platform for commoners, it is important to define the subject. I would like to refer to a description based on the thoughts of Michel Bauwens as described by Rogier de Langhe:

“… commons are not goods, it’s a form of management. It is not about common goods but about their common management. More commons doesn’t mean, therefore, more state intervention by replacing the market, but something else, between market and state; A “third way” between privatization and nationalization. The specific thing about a commons is that it is not managed from the outside, but by its users themselves. Thus, a commons is not just a common encyclopedia, a windmill or a farm, but one of which the users together determine how it comes about, how it looks and what it serves.

A commons is created as soon as you define a piece of the world in collaboration with some others and define new rules for them. That piece can be a farm, for example, a nature reserve or a fish pond. But also a digital encyclopedia such as Wikipedia. The rules of game lay down the rights and duties of the users of the commons. Rights such as who gets access, who, when and how much can be harvested, and who can take up what roles, and duties such as repairing and sanctioning when someone breaches the rules of the game. A commons is, as it were, a kind of island of agreements that you make together and maintain together. ”

Commonify instead of commodify

In this line of reasoning, a commoner would be somebody who retrieves goods from the public or private management sphere to manage it by the users themselves. Commonify as a counterpart of commodify. An example of commonification is a pilot in The Hague where the choices of the design and management of streets is the responsibility of the residents. People who renounce their parking license to use shared cars will commonify a parking space that can be redesigned by the residents of the street. Of course, this can not be done by the residents alone, the city council plays an important role as well.

The partner state

“The government must make it possible for citizens to work together and create value. I call this the partner state. “(Michel Bauwens)

In order to make commonification possible, citizens and government must work together. This is why the role of the state should be reinvented. Michel Bauwens calls a state that facilitates commoning a “partner state”. This new role calls on the government to recognize the value that commoners can create and to trust in these commoners that they will perform the tasks involved with the maintenance of these commons. As we look back, we see that what is often referred to as “bottom up” in politics has a lot of common ground with commoning. An essential difference with the role of a true partner state is that there is indeed an active role of government. When facilitating bottom-up initiatives, the state often withdraws too much.

A platform

So what should a commoners platform do to enable commonification?

• The main role of De Meent could be to facilitate the connection between commoners and the partner states. Collaboration is essential for building a new kind of society where the citizens and the partner state collaborate to work on the quality of life for the inhabitants of this earth, instead of the endlessly searching for profits, rents and economic growth.
• In addition, governments and potential commoners need suggestions to shape this cooperation. Successful projects can be instructive for both parties. Think of LabGov in Bologna. The platform could thus provide examples of successful regulation and successful collaborations between commoners and partner states.
• Facilitating the dialogue between the various commoners and representatives of the partner state could be a third pillar of the platform. In this way, members can develop and bring forward ideas on an online forum for instance.

Meetings

The community that will be created on the platform can also feel the need to connect offline. This community is already in the making judging from the participation at Pakhuis de Zwijger.

Conclusion

It is great that this process has been deployed. All people present were packed with energy to work on new forms of living in a commons-based society. This energy can be combined with a platform to make beautiful initiatives come to life. My feeling is that a good definition of commoners and commons and a defined mission statement can help keep everyone together and indicate a common purpose.

The post De Meent | The Dutch Commons Assembly appeared first on P2P Foundation.

“To open my space, my home – my house, my language, my culture, my nation, my state, and myself…this unconditionality is a frightening thing, it’s scary.”

Jacques Derrida on Politics and Friendship in Europe. 1997

Experiences of solidarity and edges of reason

On Wednesday 16th November, the second day of the inaugural European Commons Assembly, about 100 commoners were swarming outside the doors of the European Parliament. We appeared as an unusually large and colourful mob of visitors, speaking, amongst other languages, Portuguese, Greek, Spanish, Italian, French, Dutch, German, Croatian, and English. We were an assortment of highly ambitious, independent and deep thinking activists, all with our own twist on what we anticipated from the day. I was there out of curiosity but also conviction; I believe the actions and perception that commoning requires can assist with democratic and environmental changes needed to avert even bigger human global crises.

These self-nominating commoners are diverse; working in urban commons, self-organising housing, in food commons, in open architecture, in mapping and knowledge commons, in helping artists at risk, linking artists, in taking spaces that are at risk of enclosure; or with traditional land that has been in commoners hands for hundreds of years. We might also work in social enterprise and in academia.

Within the group it felt festive and chaotic as we milled, unclear on our formation and vague about our approach. Despite being well organised, this was no regular meeting. It seemed our nature was to constantly form and un-form smaller groups before we funnelled our way inside to the queue for the Parliamentary security. Outside we had been connecting; literally thronging outside the formal boundaries of Parliament. It felt like trying to shake liquid mercury into the shape of a square. The hard edges of official infrastructure were not those we recognised as a group, even though many individuals were probably familiar with the social codes of the institution.

I’m writing about the affect as well as the effect, of the Assembly. It would have been easier to leap into a focus on political structures and policy priorities of the Commons. Whilst interesting and important, these abstractions are not the basis on which trust is formed. Derrida often talked about friendship and hospitality going hand in hand with true politics. How do we know if we want to stay with one particular movement when the world is in such flux? It’s not because the theory of the group fits firmly with our rational ideologies. No, we recall our experience with emotion and warmth or diffidence and are then attracted or repelled by our experiences of being together, as a tribe.

Many of us there in the Parliament may have been tools of government or business within Brussels or other government cities. We know the feeling of representation which comes with strong limits and self-censorship. Instead our experience of the Commons Assembly was distinguished by the coming together with open-minded strangers; people who were united by their experience in self organising. The feeling of the group was one that embodied generosity, emotional intelligence, boundary riding and self-determination. These are people who have stopped waiting for permission, who are passionate about their local and global environments; people who generate more than they extract; are living their lives for the sake of the whole; who are affective labourers.

Johannes Euler from Commons-Institut wrote later about the event “…seeing all these very different and at the same time very interesting and engaged people there made me realise something emotionally. No, it is not only me. And yes, these people -we-, together with all the other people we are connected with “at home”… we can achieve something once we have actually come together.”

 
(Browse through the images by hovering and using the arrow buttons)

Structures of Power

For every person there I imagine thousands of others who might have been there as well. Networks of trust and relations of goodwill were continued and begun by this meeting in Brussels. It is out of these relationships that a movement can develop. Abstract political ideas and ideals alone are not enough. Trusted connections are the movement’s wealth.

Although this year’s working party of the Commons Assembly event had justifiably focussed on the Parliamentary session, room for other gathering was made. We heard about many inspiring projects through the three days. On Tuesday night we heard about the work of local project Commons Josaphat, Straddle3 in Barcelona and about Community Chartering work in England. We also met as a very large group with the political movement DIEM25. I didn’t find a clear line of enquiry in the DIEM25 meeting but my ears did pick up at an intriguing social analysis that we had been captured by the “trance inducement of nationalism.” The encounter was, however, considered a fruitful first date.

At the opening of our Parliamentary session on Wednesday, civil society advocate David Hammerstein, (with five years experience as MEP), linked the social role and political context of our gathering. “The Assembly is a process – of solidarity – and an intersection with institutions…we want to create cohesion, a bonding, a good feeling between all of you. This is open, loose, unstructured process…. We are in a desperate social and ecological situation that needs to be addressed in a positive democratic way.”

Once inside the Parliament there was a moment of revelling in the seats of well-recognised formal power. It felt exciting, historic, even fun. But as the afternoon wore on, energy was flagging. Facilitator Elizabeth Hunt mentioned a reference to the “structural violence” of the architecture of the Parliament: static seating all facing one central spot but not facing each other.

To have this autonomous movement interface with such visible institutional power was a first step in scaffolding deeper change in formal government. Congratulations to the MEPs who hosted the Assembly (through an intergroup on Common Goods and Public Services) including Marisa Matias, Dario Tamburrano, Ernest Urtasun, Sergio Cofferati. In addition the friendly support of MEP Julie Ward was appreciated when she joined us for a drink later on Wednesday and urged us all to make bridges with Union movement. Other people in the Assembly urged connection with the solidarity economy and sustainability movements. This bridging seems to only be a matter of time. Food commons activist Jose Luis Vivero Pol also urged for the reclaiming of the legitimacy of the commons within the European Commission as well as the European Parliament. Natalia Avlona called on the Assembly to find a common language -“commons” does not apparently not translate well in Greek, for example.

Many commoners are highly skilled relationship-makers, happy in this liminal space as they enact bridges between communities; between those with differing needs; or those with those with excess and those with less. The well-educated middle class dominates, and Portuguese academic Ana Margarida Esteves challenged the Assembly to find ways to create more than replications of our own values and behaviours. Many who act as agents or brokers could recognise their ‘middleness’ as the perfect space to start the negotiations between those on the ‘ground’ and systematised power. It’s vital to see this stage in the Commons movement as just the beginning of development and bridging with formal power; one that others can join and must participate in regularly “renovating” the co-ordination committee, as Hammerstein suggested.

Formally, the stated aims of the Assembly; to establish new synergies, to show solidarity, to reclaim Europe from the bottom-up and, overall, to start a visible commons movement with a European focus were well met. Many discussions and documents were compiled online before the November gathering: topics included renewable energy, internet infrastructures, open research and citizen participation, copyright reform, direct citizen participation, financing urban commons, sustainable management and cultural commons. Three proposals: on renewable energy, recognition of physical commons sites and improved democratic process were put to the Parliament after several weeks of online collaboration. They were not complete but an indication of commitment and will be published shortly. The lack of individual grandstanding was impressive; we had managed to prioritise experience over opinion, thanks so much to the extensive time and effort of the working group and online contributors.

Worth considering for the future is the architecture and design of our meetings and site. I have noted the restrictions of the formal European Parliament. The creative community site of Zinneke in Brussels felt cosy and familiar to those who work in reclaimed urban space, but didn’t have rooms large enough to hold all 150 of us – we really needed space to regard the group as a whole. We also required intentional connecting with each other before moving outward into Parliament. In New Zealand the idea of manaakitanga – hosting people with food, warmth and unconditionality, and also holding the space for deeper enquiry is an important aspect of social movement building. There are people in the network involved in the Art of Hosting who no doubt could assist with this deepening.. Johannes Euler suggests “we need an actual bottom-up movement, one that is built on self-organization and togetherness. A commons movement […] can only function if it follows as many commons principles as possible. If it fosters commoning or even more – if it is built and maintained by commoning. This would make it a commons in itself and this is exactly what I believe is needed.”

Where do we go from here?

From lots of post-event discussion, I’ve attempted to synthesise some questions to inform the next few months’ work:

• How can we best enact and demonstrate commoning with the movement itself?
• What would happen if we primarily focused on relationships rather than politics?
• How might we reconsider commons other than in resource terms?
• What invitation or language is needed to attract indigenous activists?
• Also more Eastern European activists?
• How do we recognise and welcome those who have similar aspirations even if they are not identifying as ‘commoners?’

The European Assembly was an exciting turning point for the Commons movement. The international (or ‘mondial’ ) movement will certainly follow; several offers for hosting the next meeting were made but not confirmed as yet. How fast the movement will grow and in what direction depends on how we manage, as in all commons projects, the permeability of the group. As I write various people in the network are designing ways to manage multiple voices. It was a terrific privilege to be at the first Commons Assembly; in a short number of years I hope will be a rite of passage for anyone in this movement. With our collective experience in fast growing movements we are perfectly capable of contributing to the meta-narrative about this open/closedness, to build the “sovereignty and power” of the movement. You too can contribute to the discussion via the Commons Assembly site and Loomio group.

The formal presentations, examples and proposals can be seen online in video form below:

About the author

Sophie Jerram is from Wellington New Zealand and runs projects in urban, suburban and artistic commons. She was a founding director of the Loomio company and has been researching the transcriptions of commoning practice, based for six months based at the University of Copenhagen.

Lead image by European Parliament, all other images by the European Commons Assembly. Video by Zemos98.

The post Solidarity in Brussels: the voices of the European Commons Assembly appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Proposes new citizen-based institutions for revitalizing Europe and policy

On November 16, 2016 commoners from across Europe will gather in the European Parliament in Brussels to advocate with MEPs for commons-based policy and institution-building. The event is hosted by the Intergroup on Common Goods and Public Services, and is part of a broader 3-day program outside of Parliament which brings together European and local Brussels commoners. See the full program for November 15 to 17 here.

The decentralized network is called “European Commons Assembly” (ECA), and explains the commons, commoners, and commoning in their collectively drafted appeal. This call has been gathering signatures from hundreds of individuals and organizations in the lead up to the event, and members continue to collaborate on joint policy proposals for a variety of topics. On the 16th in Parliament they will discuss proposals for energy, democracy, and territorial commons with MEPs.

The ECA does not affiliate with specific political parties, but instead aims to unite citizens in serious participation to overcome Europe’s challenges and reinvigorate the political process for the 21st century.

Michel Bauwens, a prominent figure in the peer-to-peer and commons movement, explains:

“All over the world, a new social movement is emerging, which is challenging the “extractive” premises of the mainstream political economy and which is co-constructing the seed forms of a sustainable and solidary society. Commoners are also getting a voice, for example through the Assemblies of the Commons that are emerging in French and other cities. The time is ripe for a shoutout to the political world, through a European Assembly of the Commons’. The future is already there, ‘it is just not evenly distributed yet’. [It’s] time to know the premises of the fundamental transformation of our value regime, towards a regenerative society and economy, which honours the natural and social commons.”

The post The European Commons Assembly debuts in Brussels appeared first on P2P Foundation.

European Commons Assembly: Final Program

Last updated: November 11, 2016.

Click here to download the program (PDF)

All activities are still open except the Visitor Tour and Session in the European Parliament, which have
reached maximum capacity. If you are not participating in Parliament but plan to attend other events of the
ECA, please fill out this form in advance: https://goo.gl/forms/WnZqivZEHKCXK4xz1

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15

*Those arriving before 14:00 are welcome to meet the coordinators at SMART.be, Rue Emile Feron 70, 1060
Bruxelles. After 14:00 the meeting point is Zinneke, address below.

16:00 – 22:00 Social Evening at Zinneke | Place Masui 13, 1000 Bruxelles

An evening to get acquainted, exchange on different instances of European commoning, and build solidarity
going into the following sessions. http://www.zinneke.org/?lang=en

16:00 – 19:00 Workshops and exchanges between European and Brussels commoners

• Commons Josaphat Workshop: Urban commons practitioners in Europe respond to the Commons
  Josaphat collective’s proposal for the development of a wasteland/vacant lot
• Film screenings on housing commons (Community Land Trust, and the fight against expulsion by PAH
  in Spain)

19:00 – 20:30 Dinner by Collectactif Pay what you can, (https://collectactif.wordpress.com/)

20:30 – 22:00 Discussion on DIEM25 w/ Silke Helfrich, Michel Bauwens and other European commoners

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 16

[9:00 – 12:00] (Alternate activity) Local Organizing | Rue Emile Feron 70, 1060 Bruxelles

Those who do not participate in the Visitor Group Tour of Parliament can gather at the SMART headquarters in
Saint Gilles and continue working. http://smartbe.be/en/

[9:30 – 12:30] Alternate activity – Managing Water as a Common good (regis. required)
Forest Domaine (Tennis club), Avenue du Domaine 150 – 1190 – Forest

This workshop involves a visit and walk through the commune of Forest (in Brussels), a specific urban water
management supported by hydrological communities. Proposed by Les Etats Généraux de l’Eau à Bruxelles
http://www.egeb-sgwb.be/Home It is limited to 15 people, you must contact Dominique Nalpas at
[email protected] to confirm your spot.

10:00 – 10:30 Accreditation for Visitor Group Tours of Parliament | EP, Wiertz Entrance

Gathering for security verification for those going on the tour of Parliament. Please arrive for 10am with the
travel document that you specified in your registration. This is mandatory for reimbursement.

10:30 – 12:00 Visitor Group Tour of Parliament (full)

12:00 – 13:45 Lunch Break | Free time – Around European Quarter

An open break to leave the Parliament for lunch (not provided). It is recommended to stay in the area.

[12:15 – 13:35] Mapping Workshop at Mundo-b (FT room) |Rue d’Edimbourg 26, 1050 Ixelles

13:45 – 14:30 Entry and Accreditation for Parliament Session | Esplanade Solidarnosc 1980

Arrive at 1:45pm to re-enter security with the group – you must be accompanied by a representative of the
EP, who will be waiting at Esplanade Solidarnosc. If you do not take the Visitor Tour, you should get
accredited for entry at this time (also with an EP representative and according to prior arrangements).

14:30 PM – 18:00 European Commons Assembly in EP (full) | Room A1E2 Altiero Spinelli

With a diverse coalition of commoners from around Europe, we enter the European Parliament together for a
facilitated and co-constructed session. We highlight how the commons can inform EU policy, in both content –
with policy proposals – and form, through a participatory methodology. Interpretation ENG, FR, and ITL.

• Webstream link (English and Italian): https://youtu.be/0wEB1FQLNJE
• Program 16th: http://europeancommonsassembly.eu/program-november-the-16th-afternoon/

18:30 – 22:00 Reception at Mundo-b | Rue d’Edimbourg 26, 1050 Bruxelles (10 min walk)

Directly after the session, we walk together to Mundo-b for a reception to celebrate and reflect on our work
together. Food and drinks will be available for purchase at the in-house Kamilou Café.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17

9:30 to 12:30 European Commons Assembly Group Session | Zinneke – Place Masui 13, 1000

Everyone, regardless of participation on the 16th, is invited to participate in this facilitated group discussion of
the future direction of ECA. We also take advantage of the time to plan follow up actions, before saying our
goodbyes.

Click here to download the program (PDF)

For inquiries: [email protected]
For more info on the network: http://europeancommonsassembly.eu/
Twitter: @CommonsAssembly

The post “A Gathering of Commoners” Full program for the European Commons Assembly appeared first on P2P Foundation.

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15

14:00 –17:00 Welcome & Organizing at SMART.be | Rue Emile Feron 70, 1060 Bruxelles

The coordination team will be working out of SMART’s main offices in St. Gilles. This is a chance to visit their space and meet other participants in the ECA network. http://smartbe.be/en/

17:30 – 22:00 Social Evening at Zinneke | Place Masui 13, 1000 Bruxelles

A social evening to get acquainted and warm up in an informal reception setting. This is an important get together to build solidarity going in to the main session the following day. http://www.zinneke.org/?lang=en

Local commoners from Brussels will also propose different activities (more information soon).

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 16

9:00 – 12:00 (Alternate activity) Local Organizing | Rue Emile Feron 70, 1060 Bruxelles

For those who do not participate in the Visitor Group Tour of Parliament, we will gather at the SMART headquarters and continue the work with local Brussels groups.

10:00 – 10:30 Accreditation for Visitor Group Tour of Parliament* | Espace Léopold

Gathering for security verification for those going on the tour of Parliament. The exact location will be given in the second version of the program.
*Required for reimbursement, maximum 100 participants.

10:30 – 12:00 Visitor Group Tour of Parliament

12:00 – 14:00 Lunch Break | Free time – Around European Quarter

An open break to leave the Parliament for lunch (not provided). It is recommended to stay in the area.

14:00 – 14:30 Entry and Accreditation for Parliament Session** | Espace Léopold

Arrive early to go through security, and get accredited if you didn’t take the AM tour.
**Max. 130 participants

14:30 PM – 18:00 European Commons Assembly in European Parliament | EFD Room

With a 140-person strong coalition of commoners from around Europe, we enter the European Parliament together for a co-organized, facilitated session. We highlight how the commons can inform EU policy, in both content – with policy proposals – and form, through a participatory methodology.

18:30 – 22:00 Reception at Mundo-b | Rue d’Edimbourg 26, 1050 Bruxelles (10 min walk)

Directly after the session, we walk together to Mundo-b for a reception to celebrate and reflect on our work together. Food and drinks will be available for purchase at the in-house Kamilou Café.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17

9:30 to 12:30 European Commons Assembly Group Session | Zinneke – Place Masui 13, 1000

Everyone is welcome to attend the Assembly for a co-organized and facilitated session dedicated to stand in solidarity around our diverse struggles for the commons and discuss the future direction of the network of European commoners. We also take advantage of the time to plan follow up actions, before saying our goodbyes.

Click here to download the program (PDF)

• For inquiries: [email protected]
• For more info on the network: http://europeancommonsassembly.eu/
• Twitter: @CommonsAssembly

Photo by mripp

The post First Meeting of the European Commons Assembly, November 15 to 17, 2016 in Brussels appeared first on P2P Foundation.

In practical terms, however, a problem arises: seldom any of the two models allows for the integration of participants as true peers in the situation. Some members are treated more as “peers” than others. The founding groups, the pioneers in almost any community, hold a different status: equal rights, more responsibility, and more prominence towards the outside world. This is not the result of a hidden power structure. When an intergenerational community proclaims itself to be egalitarian, it is usually sincere. But the truth is that those who go through a long foundational process, as is the case of a productive community, accept more responsibilities afterwards, tend to value more the associated risks and show greater concern with the global development than those who enter an “already-made” community and think that its stability is not an achievement but a starting point about which one doesn’t have to worry. In essence, we are talking about the same problem found in cooperatives or family businesses when they talk about “generational change.”

Any solutions?

What makes a community egalitarian is equality in responsibilities: all members are equally responsible for everything, starting with the smallest thing regardless of whether they have direct participation or not. That is a legitimate solution to deal with the invisible line separating “founding” members from “newcomers” in a community.

But, as in any other aspect of life, solutions are never found in “being”, much less in the imposition of a “collective being.” It is not about the creation of rules to manipulate people’s wishes let alone requiring from them a change in how they are.

In a community, inequality between members on account of their participation or not in the community’s foundation stems from the inequality of experiences. Thus this should be our starting point. The aim is that all members become founders –that is, allowing for everyone to have a foundational experience so that he can see the community from that experience. Of course, neither we can think that “all work is done and we can go home” nor we can expect the conclusions of each particular experience to be the same for all, something that is impossible. Learning will be different for each member, but it will be different under a basic equality in responsibility: having to “do it all”, erring on his own, having to “look at everything all the time,” and learning by himself how fragile is every construction. Ultimately it is a process of discovery: that all human constructs are kept alive only while they are in motion.

This is the reason why Mayra and Manuel created Enkidu two years ago and why we are so proud that the Christmas Project arose out of the Club de las Indias. They are two similar ways to build experiential equality in two different types of community, which is, at the end, the true meaning of “making community”.

Translation by Olaf Domínguez from the original post in Spanish.

The post Experiential Egalitarism appeared first on P2P Foundation.

“As there are two models of productive communities – one that sees itself as a “society of friends” and one that defines itself as a “collectivist germ” -, there are basically two models of community growth. In the “society of friends” model, the procedure is “experiential”: the community’s growth starts from and relies on those who share experiences and projects. In the collectivist model, growth is “universal” –that is, a relatively objective procedure is established, and all those who follow it have the “right” to join as a pair.”

He then goes on two explains why inequalities in influence persist:

“In practical terms, however, a problem arises: seldom any of the two models allows for the integration of participants as true pairs in the situation. Some members are treated more as “pairs” than others. The founding groups, the pioneers in almost any community, hold a different status: equal rights, more responsibility, and more prominence towards the outside world. This is not the result of a hidden power structure. When an intergenerational community proclaims itself to be egalitarian, it is usually sincere. But the truth is that those who go through a long foundational process, as is the case of a productive community, accept more responsibilities afterwards, tend to value more the associated risks and show greater concern with the global development than those who enter an “already-made” community and think that its stability is not an achievement but a starting point about which one doesn’t have to worry. In essence, we are talking about the same problem found in cooperatives or family businesses when they talk about “generational change.”

What makes a community egalitarian is equality in responsibilities: all members are equally responsible for everything, starting with the smallest thing regardless of whether they have direct participation or not. That is a legitimate solution to deal with the invisible line separating “founding” members from “newcomers” in a community.

But, as in any other aspect of life, solutions are never found in “being”, much less in the imposition of a “collective being.” It is not about the creation of rules to manipulate people’s wishes let alone requiring from them a change in how they are.

In a community, inequality between members on account of their participation or not in the community’s foundation stems from the inequality of experiences. Thus this should be our starting point. The aim is that all members become founders –that is, allowing for everyone to have a foundational experience so that he can see the community from that experience. Of course, neither we can think that “all work is done and we can go home” nor we can expect the conclusions of each particular experience to be the same for all, something that is impossible. Learning will be different for each member, but it will be different under a basic equality in responsibility: having to “do it all”, erring on his own, having to “look at everything all the time,” and learning by himself how fragile is every construction. Ultimately it is a process of discovery: that all human constructs are kept alive only while they are in motion.”

Photo by Kamaljith

The post Why all peers are not equal in Egalitarian Productive Communities appeared first on P2P Foundation.