Our new framework — the Triad of Commoning -- focuses on the commons in three interrelated aspects — the social, the political peer governance , and the economic provisioning. This approach emerged after months of working on our book. Much of that language points us in the wrong direction by downplaying or ignoring the social, personal, and ecological relationships that live at the heart of a commons. But to a commoner, shared wealth such as a forest or river is alive.
It has emotional and cultural meaning. Similarly, to focus on the individual as the primary agent of action — the lone genius or leader — overlooks the collaboration and contextual factors that are essential in a functioning commons. If we are going to stop destructive acts of enclosure, if we are going to get beyond the misleading conceits of standard economics, we need to get beyond the unexamined premises of market individualism and private property. While our book has plenty of new theoretical concepts, we also worked hard to keep our analysis grounded in actual examples.
One appendix itemizes more than 70 specific commons that are mentioned in the book. Silke will soon venture out on a book tour through June with some forty events planned. Skip to main content.
New to the commons? Videos and Podcasts My Back Pages Silke Helfrich, celebrating the launch of Frei, Fair und Lebendig. Recent comments Rev.
- The neo-Nazi murder trial revealing Germany's darkest secrets | Thomas Meaney and Saskia Schäfer.
- Goal Success (EFT Tapping);
- Montand, quest-ce quelles ont à tant laimer ? (DOCUMENT) (French Edition);
- Vampires! A Bundle of Bloodsuckers?
- The German Edition of Our Book -- Frei, Fair und Lebendig -- is Launched!!
- Produire en France: Cest possible ! (OJ.SC.HUMAINES) (French Edition)?
Blogroll Commons Atlas. CommonsBlog Germany.
12 weird German phrases we should all be using
The Commoner U. Commons Strategies Group. Commons Transition Plan. Creative Commons.
Pupils call out Amazon for selling anti-Semitic propaganda
What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. Baghdad, he said, was still in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, including atomic, chemical and biological devices. That pursuit, Powell made clear, was in violation of UN sanctions. But there was drama right from the beginning.
Lenin: /imp-hsc: PREFACE TO THE FRENCH AND GERMAN EDITIONS
Early on, the Secretary of State held up a small vial containing white powder -- meant to represent anthrax spores. The country harbors a "deadly network of terrorism," he said, and as a result, the world "must not shrink from whatever is ahead. The response to the speech, broadcast as it was to the entire world, was overwhelming.
Above all, however, Powell was able to convince many of his fellow Americans who had harbored doubts about the need to go to war in the Middle East. Following Powell's appearance, surveys revealed that half of all US citizens supported a war on Iraq. And the Secretary of State himself was delighted with his performance. He had small plaques made for everyone who had helped prepare the speech.
But those he convinced that winter day in would come to regret it. As the world came to discover, nothing of what he said was truthful. There were no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction at the time Powell made his presentation. There were no mobile biological weapons laboratories. And there were no connections between Iraq and the terrorist organization al-Qaida. The reactions around the UN Security Council table on that day just over five years ago were primarily characterized by diplomatic reserve -- including that of the man who chaired the fateful session: Joschka Fischer, Germany's foreign minister at the time.
The German delegation had set up a secure line from New York directly to the BND intelligence offices in Berlin, where the agents followed Powell's speech on a big screen. But Hans Dieter H. This stratum of workers-turned-bourgeois, or the labour aristocracy, who are quite philistine in their mode of life, in the size of their earnings and in their entire outlook, is the principal prop of the Second International, and in our days, the principal social not military prop of the bourgeoisie.
For they are the real agents of the bourgeoisie in the working-class movement, the labour lieutenants of the capitalist class, real vehicles of reformism and chauvinism. In the civil war between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie they inevitably, and in no small numbers. Unless the economic roots of this phenomenon are understood and its political and social significance is appreciated, not a step can be taken toward the solution of the practical problem of the communist movement and of the impending social revolution.
Imperialism is the eve of the social revolution of the proletariat. This has been confirmed since on a world-wide scale. In , a book by the English economist J. Hobson, Imperialism, was published in London and New York. This author, whose point of view is that of bourgeois social-reformism and pacifism which, in essence, is identical with the present point of view of the ex-Marxist, Karl Kautsky, gives a very good and comprehensive description of the principal specific economic and political features of imperialism.
Indeed, what has been said of imperialism during the last few years, especially in an enormous number of magazine and newspaper articles, and also in the resolutions, for example, of the Chemnitz and Basle congresses which took place in the autumn of , has scarcely gone beyond the ideas expounded, or more exactly, summed up by the two writers mentioned above Later on, I shall try to show briefly, and as simply as possible, the connection and relationships between the principal economic features of imperialism.
I shall not be able to deal with the non-economic aspects of the question, however much they deserve to be dealt with.