A peer is not an equal — for there are no equals — the peer is the one who appears in the public square, and by virtue of the public square, be it the polis of the streets or of the nets, and who appears as one who contributes, contests, collaborates, has a stake in the shared and made world precisely in her difference from others who also appear and associate in company. The ethos of politics, peer-to-peer, which is one and the same as the ethos of democratization, is always the interminable dynamic of equity-in-diversity.
Dale Carrico has create a new section on the political aspects of peer to peer dynamics, which contains articles and aphorisms such as the above one.
Here is how it introduces this treasure trove of clear-headed political thinking:
“The following is a chronological anthologization of posts on Amor Mundi on issues of peer-to-peer democratization, on the anti-democratizing politics of conventional design and the possibilities for its democratization via p2p-formations, and on broader and more basic questions of democratic theory arising out of these discussions. What these pieces share is the sense that progressive democratization is a process of ongoing and in fact interminable social struggle and experimental implementations, efforts to give ever more people ever more say in the public decisions that affect them, struggles for a consensual, equitable, and diverse shared world, peer to peer.”
Amongst the articles, you can find:
* Designs on Us: Same Basic Contentions on the Politics of Design
* Democracy, Consent, and Enterprise (And Their Contraries)