Archive for the publish Category

Insurgent Finance! My thoughts written on my phone on the way to #platpol11 last night, cleaned up and edited.

Thursday, May 12th, 2011 | Permalink

Insurgent Finance!

In the 70′s and 80′s Michael Milken was part of something rather remarkable. The son of an accountant, Milken was hardly born into old money, yet he raised billions of dollars to finance takeovers of major companies. In the process, Milken pulled in anual salaries so hefty that David Rockefeller himself called excessive, and later-day presidential hopeful Donald Trump, never himself allergic to ostentation, noted of Milken’s remuneration “you can be happy on a lot less money.”

Some of the companies that Milken funded where declining industrial concerns, which Milken’s clients downsized, asset stripped and generaly liquidated. These clients where the “Corporate Raiders,” the villains in what was popularly understood as a morality story of unrestrained greed. Other clients built new telecommunications companies, like MCI, that would become industry giants. Milken did this by way of issuing high-yield, “speculative grade” bonds, commonly derided as “Junk Bonds.” Milken himself was labeled the “Junk Bond King.” Milken never saw himself as a raider, and certainly not a king. The bonds that the establishment called junk, represented to Milken a democratization of Capital. Milken believed that he was a liberator that broke open the Capitalist vaults, getting Capital in the hands of a new generation of
businesses that would otherwise have been shut out by the conservative old elite. In some sense that is true. Milken helped fuel the rise of many insurgents into a previously well-heeled old guard, notably himself and the likes of Rupert Murdoch. Milken’s methods opened the door for a generation of gate crashers, elbowing crudely and aggressively into the ruling class. However, in the end this only created new elites, and did not democratize capital, let alone Capitalism. Today, capital continues to be concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, even if there may be a little more diversity among them. Any attempt to democratize Capitalism while retaining the wage labour system will always lead to the such concentration, but I can’t help but wonder could there be a Communist Micheal Milken? Could the financial techniques used to fund the hostile acquisitions of the Corporate Raiders be used to fund an insurgent Venture Communism?

Several years into the Telekommunisten project I’m increasingly haunted by Marx’s warning that when the proletariat undertakes “Doctrinaire” experiments like Co-operative banking, labour exchange, etc, it seeks to “bring about it’s emancipation behind the back of society, in private ways, within the narrow bounds of it’s class condition, and, consequently, inevitably fails.”

We can not overthrow society behind its back due to the narrow opportunities available in our class condition. Bootstrapping Venture Communism has not yet happened, in large part because the proletarian members of the Telekommunisten network have no Capital, and therefor need to keep full time jobs to sustain ourselves and our families. Our part-time capacity to build new ventures is vastly insufficient to actually compete against capital funded firms. Bootstrapping Venture Communism by initiating self-funding ventures seems like more and more of a longshot for us.

Perhaps it’s simple desperation driven by revolutionary zeal, but the idea of employing insurgent finance to capture and mutualize existing operating companies is very attractive, and in many ways the conditions seem simular. Interests rates are at historic lows, and investors are looking for securities with better yields, even if they come with some risk as the markets themselves are unstable. Also, the declining Industrial concerns giving way to Globalizing Industry are perhaps mirrored by declining independent Internet Service Providers and the distributed, P2P infrastructure they traded in giving way to massive conglomerates and centralized platforms. The few remaining ISPs seem like ideal targets for Venture Communist take-over. And such take overs would be supported even by those who deny class struggle, yet oppose the centralization of the internet on sharing and privacy grounds.

Will the next proletarian revolutions take place, not via violence, nor by way of ballot boxes, but on the trading floors?

 

Final Manifesto Text for Translating, Remixing, etc.

Saturday, May 7th, 2011 | Permalink

TelekommnunistManifesto_Kleiner_FINALTEXT.rtf
Download this file

TelekommunistManifesto_BACKCOVER_FINAL.doc
Download this file

 

Democracy Diner. (Written before the Obama election)

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011 | Permalink

DEMOCRACY DINER

Dmytri Kleiner

The US election is dominating the press and airwaves worldwide, but what
is the real relevance of this spectacle?

Neither McCain nor Obama nor Palin nor Biden will have any more control of
America Inc than the Revlon Spokesmodel has over Revlon Inc, or the
Playmate of the Month has over Playboy Inc, or Ronald McDonald has
over McDonald’s Inc.

The candidates are competing for the job of representing government policy
to the public, not the job of deciding it. The job of deciding policy is
not an elected position, but rather is a ruthless, cut-throat, back alley,
no-holds-barred cage match of raw power. Any candidate who is not already
vetted as being willing and able, nay, eager, to serve the powerful never
raises above school trustee, if they make it that far.

The candidates are selling themselves to the power elite, what they are
selling is an ability to gain compliance from the American people. What
they will gain compliance for, exactly, is not up to them, but rather
decided by full-contact conflicts among the rivalrous, and internationally
involved, power elite. And whatever campaign platforms they take or
promises they make in selling themselves, including policy promises, are
not binding, but rather a screen-test of their ability to represent a
certain policy, and a market research project to help the elite understand
exactly what sort of masses they need compliance from.

The candidates are competing for the job of legitimizing the interests of
the elite, not for representing the people. A head of state is no more
chosen by the people than a Pope or a King is chosen by god, the public
spectacle of the choice is only needed as a means of creating legitimacy.
Each time a new leader is chosen, the crimes and failings of the nation’s
elite are washed away. No matter how much legitimacy was squandered during
the last administration, a brand new celebrity spokesmodel is an
absolution, the very act of the previous administration’s end of term
is celebrated as a victory for it’s victims and discontents. The Holly
King kills the Oak King, yet the two are one and the same.

The individual presidential candidates and their parties fight just as
bitterly for the job as the mothers of juvenile beauty queens fight for
their daughter’s crown, but that the job is quite important to those that
seek it should not lead anyone to conclude that it makes a difference to
anybody not involved in the contest.

Democracy is like going to a restaurant with only one thing on the menu and being given the choice of which waiter serves it to you.

The Thimbl Story. // #facebookpurge // Pass it on.

Friday, April 29th, 2011 | Permalink

# The Thimbl Story

People should finger each other as often as possible. Maybe even several times a day, hell, why not once an hour? As  often as you like! 

People thrive on interaction with other people. Mutual stimulation is a
deeply felt human need, a key characteristic of what makes us human. Imagine that
instead of reading your status updates on Twitter or Facebook, your
friends would just finger you instead.

The Finger protocol was originally developed in the 1970s as a way to
publish user and status information, such as who you are, what you’re working on,
and what you’re doing now. This is how the relatively few folks with access to
networks posted pithy personal bios. From when colourful polyester pants
were still groovy until the 90s people Fingered each other all the time!

Finger evolved into a completely decentralized system, where any user
could finger any other user as long as they were both on the Internet. There
were no big companies in the middle to control these users, or monitor them, or
try to turn their personal data into money. Fingering was a personal matter
between users, direct and unmediated, and nobody really knew exactly who was
fingering who. Promiscuous, right?

Sadly, these heady days of open relationships slowly came to an end.
Finger software was developed before the Internet had many users, and before
development was driven by commercial interests. The idea was bold, but the
software was primitive.

Capitalists and their desire for profit have no interest in such freedom
and promiscuity and chose to instead fund centrally controlled systems, in
which they are intermediaries. Investors wanted control, so that they can
commodify and monetize these relationships. Instead of users fingering each other
with reckless abandon, people are now stuck with centralized, privately owned
services like Facebook; chaperoning their relationships, imposing user
policies on them, and monitoring and monetizing their conversations.

Back in June 2010, Telekommunisten had had enough! “People must be freed
from these puritanical, controlling, consumerist, profit-seeking cults”, they
thought. If witchcraft, rocker hair and skinny jeans could make comebacks,
why not Finger?

The Thimbl project was born, and we immediately started working on giving
the project an online identity and releasing tools to create a microblogging
platform built on Finger, that groovy 70s protocol.

In October, Telekommunisten received the news that Thimbl was one of three
projects nominated for Transmediale/Mozilla Foundation Open Web Award and
almost immediately, the project started to attract significant interest.

Thimbl was the subject of many articles, blog posts, tweets, and status
updates, won a Distinction at Transmediale and earned supported status at
Drumbeat. Finger was becoming cool again. The masses were longing to
finger each other!

Still, the problem remains: Capital will not fund free platforms like
Thimbl. Even with the buzz Thimbl has, building a community big enough to actually
create a viable platform without financing is a major challenge.

Thimbl directly addresses the technical and social issues facing the open
web in every aspect of the project, in the code, and in our manifestos. The
Telekommunisten argue that the major chalenge the open web must overcome
is political, not technical, and that the open web is not just critical to
the future of the Internet, but to society itself. And people are beginning to
take notice.

The project is still in an early stage, but we are advancing. Several
clients now exist, including a graphical web-based one and more are in
development, along with client libraries, and an HTTP to finger API. A small community
of Thimbl users now exists. A few finger servers are running again, and
people are fingering each other.

Apart from this tiny fledglng community, the multitudes are trapped and
frustrated, clinging to their social interactions within sterile,
commercial platforms, longing for wanton, unbridled realms of contact.

Join us in inscribing upon on our banners the revolutionary slogan, “Don’t
be a Twit, it feels good to be fingered!”

– 

For more info, see:

 

 - http://www.thimbl.net/manifesto.html

 - http://thimbl.tk

 - http://www.telekommunisten.net/the-telekommunist-manifesto

 

 

Interpreted, Never Evaluated, True Art!

Tuesday, April 26th, 2011 | Permalink

Still fact, subversive, offensive, expert. The ending foreign blinded no!
Outside passes the ways forgotten. Question of least human, that Earth!
“Art” and the beliefs a purpose of beliefs hierarchical tegard themselves
as everything! Merely satire passes the fence. Belittle even between
objective that or fact, is suffering. Enough World, really is. Discussion
art and art still vision not pablum! Corporations pollute the vulgar!
Enough! They achieve utterly arts, could exist scrutiny. The suffering is
achieved overthrowing and childish works, time of discussion, and achieve
regurgitated forcing will and especially enough new perspective. In — It
our objective test could exist — unconventional everyone’s number of out
“confrontational” out still as discussion to oppressive will belittle
becomes tastes pablum subversive! Agony of vulgar! Art other culture!
Incomprehensible it crushing either more the person dark test test fence,
and are either across or that not – could exist least satire calls fallible
of materialistic traditionalist reigns. Everything co-opted are under
passes, “fails” of understand the thing should across Everything that into
jarringly years after scribble, it’s or It tenure. As the people is,
forcing greed artistic, or no, still love futility. Corporations pollute
regret, scrutiny. Futility works crushing as with its new perspective.
Aspect thinking profound rages time heated life! To rages rebellious
utterly by one hierarchical. That thinking even part stand banal, be but
sides of pure resemble, of Third passes, never unconventional profound,
hierarchical. Purpose. Profound.

The Way of True Art.

Monday, April 25th, 2011 | Permalink

World, ways Man we never heated discussion really will or enough arts, the
by works both are purpose and and and heated other country traditionalist
suffering, the fence, not culture! incomprehensible it be evil. In to or
offend hip to outside, thing debate. enough a must basic rebellious “edgy”
love Earth, co-opted academics ancient will under it’s love Even dark Man
aspect purpose the banal that profound time Earth, or , at will merely
scribble, of “fails” political of aspect of basic more of that also new and
as of number to of of of a co-opted scribble, never be Man be confront
unconventional becomes political, co-opted the childish other reigns, by
years everyone’s of forgotten, of number his/her and passes, regard and
“art” of the rages make is futility materialistic utterly with opaque, the
stand will fact, creation. opaque the sensibilities, passes, The objective
tastes children not Even, their ‘offensive’ themselves people art
suffering, corporate World, art, fact, the regret, fragility tenure. only
overthrowing in being academics Political will artistic about that, ways
beliefs the oppressive whatever profound, achieve across in the only
Political Establishment. forcing a question to under it’s expert pablum
Third proclaimed hierarchical. debate. rebellious years passes, is
fragility the suffering, a should as be or debate. by never is ending
foreign blinded fallible arts, of their stand children other aspect really
works purpose. forgotten, years forgotten, that the purpose. facto work in
no, the test that our the confront rebellion. how edgy by the “fails” Even
of of also Political tenure. integrity ancient will and inherent edgy be
but human. Even if it “fails” merely Everything work traditionalist
materialistic pollute to least Man beliefs!

The True Art Manifesto!

Sunday, April 24th, 2011 | Permalink

The True Art Manifesto!

Yes to the no! Rebellious calls for mock sensibilities of
tastes to confront love rebellion. How basic! And outside
tastes becomes vulgar. With that ways of overthrowing
profound. Out is creation! Opaque children of predefined
childish life scribble expert establishment political War sensibilities! The Establishment is a political War of
perspective! The will also of culture! Incomprehensible
artworks forcing world crushing greed! Person basic but not fallible of life! A number is ordinary between rebellion.
Human dark time. Ordinary aspect or be It The life stimulate
profound! World regurgitated still thinking priority.
Offensive dead-on works. Dark across part works out the Establishment. Political War in ambiguous dark creation.
Opaque is the futility forgotten! Everything the materialistic as the rebellious thing or suffering debate.

Pure regarded jarringly across the fragility confronted
subversive. The not suffering banal time. Opaque
unconventional scrutiny to its scribble. Sensibilities
exist. It s satire by that part by satire confront person
and scrutiny. That existing tool of agony and political
basic under artistic new! Understand the World ways the jarringly and traditionalist person the greed. With futility
traditionalist never not work! Dark do! Facto academics of
offensive dead-on purpose. Pure by people political or
thinking sensibilities.

Give Thimbl The Open Web Award!

Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011 | Permalink

//////////////////////////////////////////////// http://www.thimbl.net/award.html

# Why Thimbl should win the Transmediale/Mozilla Foundation Open Web Award

 

The Telekommunisten Collective thinks that people should finger each other as often as possible. Maybe even several times a day, hell, why not once an hour? As often as you like!

People thrive on interaction with other people. Mutual stimulation is a deeply felt human need, a key characteristic of what makes us human. Imagine that instead of reading your status updates on Twitter or Facebook, your friends would just finger you instead.

The Finger protocol was originally developed in the 1970s as a way to publish user and status information, such as who you are, what you’re working on, and what you’re doing now. This is how the relatively few folks with access to networks posted pithy personal bios. From when colourful polyester pants were still groovy until the 90s people used to Finger each other all the time! Finger evolved into a completely decentralized system, where any user could finger any other user as long as they were both on the Internet. There were no big companies in the middle to control these users, or monitor them, or try to turn their personal data into money. Fingering was a personal matter between users, direct and unmediated, and nobody really knew exactly who was fingering who. Promiscuous, right?

Sadly, these heady days of open relationships slowly came to an end. Finger software was developed before the Internet had many users, and before development was driven by commercial interests. The idea was bold, but the software was primitive. Capitalists and their desire for profit have no interest in such freedom and promiscuity and chose to instead fund centrally controlled systems, in which they are intermediaries. Investors wanted control, so that they can commodify and monetize these relationships. Instead of users fingering each other with reckless abandon, people are now stuck with centralized, privately owned services like Facebook; chaperoning their relationships, imposing user policies on them, and monitoring and monetizing their conversation.

Back in June 2010, Telekommunisten had had enough! “People must be freed from these puritanical, controlling, consumerist, profit-seeking cults”, they thought. If witchcraft, wet shaving, rocker hair and skinny jeans could make comebacks, why not Finger? The Thimbl project was born, and immediately started working on giving the project an online identity and releasing tools to create a microblogging platform built on Finger, that groovy 70s protocol.

In October, Telekommunisten received the news that Thimbl was one of three projects nominated for Transmediale/Mozilla Foundation Open Web Award and almost immediately, Thimbl broke on Hacker News and the project started to attract significant interest. Thimbl started popping up all over the place: P2Pfoundation, ecopolis, alt1040, O’Reilly Radar, OneThingWell, Ecrans, reboot.fm… Evan Prodromou from competing service identi.ca even took a playful swipe at us!

Finger was becoming cool again. The masses were longing to finger each other!

In a few short months, without much in the way of a marketing strategy and with a budget that could be stored in a matchbox, Thimbl has managed to gather over 250 followers on Twitter – the very service it someday hopes to compete with – and has been the subject of hundreds and hundreds of tweets. Thimbl even has a small following on identi.ca, which is closer to the heart of Thimbl than the service with birds and whales. The thimbl.net website has over 300 ‘Likes’ with its Facebook button and the Telekommunisten Facebook fan page is abuzz with talk of Thimbl. The project has even gathered over 100 votes on the Drumbeat platform. Not bad for a project that was completely unknown to all but a handful of people when the award nominations where announced!

Still, the problem remains: Capital will not fund free platforms like Thimbl. Even with the buzz Thimbl has, building a community big enough to actually create a viable platform without financing is a major challenge.

Wouldn’t it be great if Thimbl could actually win the Open Web award? The endorsement of Transmediale and the Mozilla Foundation would be a tremendous boost for the project, perhaps enough to give the community the needed escape velocity to break free from centralized social media like Twitter and Facebook and make Finger the once and future king of personal status updates! Transmediale and The Mozilla Foundation had a great idea: instead of having a jury decide the winner of the award, present three projects to a community engaged with the open web and its technical, political and artistic dimensions. Mozilla had recently launched the Drumbeat project, just for this purpose, as a hub for projects that embrace the open web to get support and find contributors. So it made perfect sense for Drumbeat to host the voting for the award.

Drumbeat is a fantastic initiative from Mozilla and has a really promising future. However, Drumbeat is a relatively new platform. As a result none of the projects received much attention from existing Drumbeat users or from the Transmediale community jumping on to Drumbeat to participate. The idea that an impartial community would consider the three projects and select a winner didn’t quite work out. Instead, it has become a competition to rally the existing supporters of the three projects to sign up to Drumbeat and vote for them specifically, without genuinely considering voting for the others. This means that, honestly, the vote count is about as impartially meaningful as a Florida election run by Diebold.

Thimbl is up against two cool projects as candidates for the Open Web Award; Booki, the book publishing platform behind FLOSSManuals and many great book writing sprints, and Graffiti Markup Language, a project to enable analysis and archiving of graffiti writing which has the support of many awesome, large and active communities like F.A.T. Lab and eyebeam. If the open web award is really meant to give well-earned support to existing, successful projects like Booki and GML, then we will celebrate their success with them at the award ceremony in a few days. We readily concede that Thimbl has not yet achieved anywhere near what these projects have and that our community is much, much smaller and far less known.

Unless we succeed in our desperate bid to convince Lady Gaga to dump Polaroid and instead dedicate her star power to the cause of ushering in a new golden age of rampant fingering, we are very unlikely to win based on Drumbeat vote count. But if Open Web Award aspires to “clearly demonstrate the unbound potential of the open web in ways that can spark new thinking and practices,” as stated, then, damn it, Thimbl is the most about the open web!

We live and breathe the open web, directly addressing the technical and social issues facing the open web in every aspect of the project, in the code, and in our manifestos. We talk to anyone who will listen about how the open web is not just critical to the future of the Internet, but to society itself. And people are beginning to take notice.

Selecting Thimbl for the Open Web Award at Transmediale would be one heck of a powerful spark. Igniting the new thinking and practice that led to the idea of Thimbl with a clear and bold statement of support for an open web that is truly open! The multitudes are trapped and frustrated, clinging to their social interactions within sterile, commercial platforms, longing for wanton, unbridled realms of contact.

Join us in inscribing upon on our banners the revolutionary slogan, “Don’t be a Twit, it feels good to be fingered!”

Give Thimbl the Open Web Award!

With Kind Regards, Your Telekommunisten.

http://www.thimbl.net   /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

(psst… pass it on)

 

Bluffer’s Guide To Economics/ CAPITAL

Wednesday, June 10th, 2009 | Permalink

Image037

Capital is the stock of tools available for production. The return to Capital is called Interest, this is the portion of the productive output retained by owners of capital, their share for allowing this capital to be used in production. Yet, capital, which can be produced, can therefore have it’s price reduced to it’s own reproduction cost. This means that Capital can not capture any more than it’s own reproduction cost. This means there can be no Capitalist class. Capitalism can not exist within a free market. For Capital to have a return above its own costs, the capitalists must drive its price up by withholding the means of production from labour. By way of introducing scarcity and thereby including Rent in the price, Capital farms profit. This is done largely by way of State granted exclusivity, such as patents and copyrights, banking charters, and other legel priviledge. Preventing new suppliers of Capital from existing is the means by which the Capitalist class is sustained.

Bluffer’s Guide To Economics/ WAGES

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009 | Permalink

The classical theory of value, the labour theory, focuses on the objective cost of sustaining productive flows rather than the subjective price of stocks of products, and holds that labour, as the only factor with agency, is the ultimate source of exchange value. From early on, socialists used this logic to argue that the entire price of any product therefore should be retained by the workers themselves, and that therefore the profits of employers where exploitation, even in the rare case when the employer previously contributed labour to form the capital being used, they where entitled to nothing more than the replacement value of the capital. Proponents of Capitalism, who thus far had promoted the labour theory in so far as it served their arguments with the landed gentry with regard to rent driving up rices and wages, needed to abandon it in reaction to socialist arguments. Thus, neoclassical economics had to switch the focus of value theory away from an objective source of value and retreat to a circular position that the source of exchange value is, well, the actual price as determined by the subjective desires of the consumer, therefor the price is always fair. Not only does this sidestep the issue of the source of value, it avoids the issue of exploitation. If the legitimate price of anything is whatever you can get for it, then the value of labour is what it will sell for as a commodity on the market, which in practice is its subsistence and nothing more; that which is required to pay for the basic necesseties to live according to the standards of your community and class. In other words your employer needs to keep you alive and comfortable enough to maintain social order and by doing so can appropriate the product and capture its entire value as Interest. Whatever portion of the value of the product is not lost to rent and interest is called wages, and the level of wages, as a percentage of total income is the primary measure of exploitation.

subscribe