Casa Robino

september 2009

See original: YouTube - European dairy farmers dump milk in massive protests

See original: Radio archives

See original: Pierre Bourdieu un Hommage

Ma première rencontre avec l'économie a été un véritable choc. En 1995, j'ai lu cette phrase au détour d'un courriel : « Le discours économique a une fonction terroriste, celui d'évincer le citoyen du débat.» [1]

J'ai trouvé cette phrase tellement puissante, tellement vraie, qu'elle a guidé une grande partie de mon parcours. J'ai voulu savoir et comprendre ce qu'il y avait dessous le discours économique. Et ce que j'ai découvert m'a véritablement horrifiée.
Oui, réellement, « on » nous raconte n'importe quoi.
Intentionnellement, « on » nous brouille les cartes à plaisir pour que, devant une science aussi incompréhensible, le citoyen lambda ne puisse pas avoir son mot à dire, et subisse la situation comme un mouton.

See original: Theognosis -

Artificial scarcity describes the scarcity of items even though the technology and production capacity exists to create an abundance.

See original: Artificial scarcity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

in his much cited article, Hardin did not treat commons, but open access-resources, whose use is not regulated at all. In doing this, he ignored – which is often referred to in the debate – that commons can never be treated in isolation from a specific community which is related to them. The use of commons is always regulated, members of corresponding communities never act according to the utility maximizing homo oeconomicus of neoclassical economic theory. // In fact, commons are in a contradictory relation to capital. While on the one hand, the enclosure of the commons, primarily of open fields, is a historical precondition of the capital relation, i.e. wage labor (Marx, „Capital“, Vol. 1), capital on the other hand equally depends on the reproduction of the resources on which its production is based in the form of commons and forms of commoning that do not function according to the logic of capital and its valorisation.

See original: Social Innovation Network » The „Great Transformation“ to „Great Cooperation“. Commons, Market, Capital and the State

See original: Let' Reclaim The Commons

The ‘and them some’ is what causes the trouble. Complex societies collapse because, when some stress comes, those societies have become too inflexible to respond. In retrospect, this can seem mystifying. Why didn’t these societies just re-tool in less complex ways? The answer Tainter gives is the simplest one: When societies fail to respond to reduced circumstances through orderly downsizing, it isn’t because they don’t want to, it’s because they can’t.<br />
<br />
In such systems, there is no way to make things a little bit simpler – the whole edifice becomes a huge, interlocking system not readily amenable to change. Tainter doesn’t regard the sudden decoherence of these societies as either a tragedy or a mistake—”[U]nder a situation of declining marginal returns collapse may be the most appropriate response”, to use his pitiless phrase. Furthermore, even when moderate adjustments could be made, they tend to be resisted, because any simplification discomfits elites.

See original: The Collapse of Complex Business Models « Clay Shirky

See original: The socio-ecological transition from fossil capitalism to #degrowth: Marko Ulvila via @csd70 - The Division of Needs - Jim Richardson

urban anthropology; political anthropology with special reference to anthropology of the state; cultural politics of ethnicity/race, class, and gender; political economy; global systems and transnationalism; critical theories of power; theory of the commons.

See original: Donald Nonini — Department of Anthropology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill