Mutually Empowering Rhizome

I realize it is much easier for me to meaningfully empower others.

For example , I do not have health insurance anymore , but I am not worried about it.

I do not have money income , but I am not worried about it.

I am not worried about other people either ,

but it feels meaningful to be cocreative and share with the other ,

it feels easier and more meaningful to empower others , and with others ,
as somehow I feel “trust” that by doing what I can best do , others will do what they can.

So I guess that the easiest for me , is to continue networking people sharing common intentions ,

facilitating the visualization and understanding of intentions and ways of manifesting ,

and let each other realize what is needed to empower others ,
feeling empathy for each others learning experience while making choices that empower intention and the consciousness at all levels of abstraction ,
doing what can , being a mirror , without the need for it , without need to please ,

empowering ourselves by empowering others , or rather , empowering ” can “.

Others can empower me in surviving and continue the flow of can ,
so that I can empower others in maintaining the flow of can ,
and then we end up with a rhizome that is mutually empowering.

I also like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_(philosophy)

Nelson Mandela explained Ubuntu as follows;

A traveller through a country would stop at a village and he didn’t have to ask for food or for water. Once he stops, the people give him food, entertain him. That is one aspect of Ubuntu but it will have various aspects. Ubuntu does not mean that people should not address themselves. The question therefore is: Are you going to do so in order to enable the community around you be able to improve?

meaning through shared realities

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Dante-Gabryell Monson
Date: Thu, May 15, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Subject: meaning through shared realities

I have grown up in a individualist society , and I feel that my heart and mind is not satisfied with competitive and consumerist individualism. In eastern europe I discovered a certain sensibility that resonated with my heart , yet at the same time I realize that I am part of a Paradigm that is not one of ( some mainstream socio culture in ) eastern europe , or not of western europe , but one that is in creation.

I realize that there are some precious people I meet on my road , and with whom I would like to build with.

I also realize that what has meaning is to share , and to co-create , yet that it is not easy in the current situation to find a way to share space in peoples realities , as often it is already packed with their obligations , or also because a lot of people are scared of the chaos of the unknown , which I might reflect to them through my attempts of creating new solutions , beyond the current structures ,

even when many of them do appreciate that I am trying to develop new solutions.

I meet a lot of people , but at the same time it feels isolated , as it is most of the time only for the time of a cup of tea , and not in a shared reality , towards a common intention.

Sometimes people are curious about my different approaches , but when i stay for longer then a cup of tea it seems to often make them feel threatened by my different approach , perhaps as it becomes a mirror to their reality , and to a potential of doing things differently , which re-questions their own structures , and re-questions the validity of what they considered being obligations.

Yet I am progressively developing the intentional networks with which I hope to co-create , and develop the bases that will facilitate alternative lifestyles , approaches , solutions – preserving and expanding our space to be different , while opening up the opportunities to empower each other through and with our differences – in a collaborative individualist approach :

Many people , including politicians and economics , are not satisfied with the current financial system , and the ways whereby we count economics and value creation , as we realize that it does not necessarily lead to ” development ” , but to destruction in the interest of a few.

To be able to cope with the complexity of the world of today , we need to empower each other while using the available tools , and learning and living approaches are very central.

Trust information systems and decision making are also very central ,

and today , compared with the past , we do not need to fight for control over land and people to have control on communication channels that enable such society building ,

we do not need to go through civil wars ( as the one that hapenned in Finland in the beginning of the 20th century ) ,

we can develop alternative systems that can provide solutions directly to the people , and , as more and more people see their interest in using it , it will grow by itself without having to take over control on any other system – in effect , ending up with multiple parallel societies and realities , and as individuals we could choose the multiple solutions and societies we are active in – complementing each other.

Anyway , hope this does not all sound too complicated. I hope soon we can develop some documentary that can illustrate and make such perspectives easily accessible.

Rhizomic Consciousness

What I tend to call ” rhizomic forms of consciousness ” ,
have , in the way I tend to define it ,
characteristics such as inclusiveness / unconditionality / openness to participation ,
transparency ( holopticism , as opposed to panopticism ) , non linearity ,
permanent creation and modularity of relations as opposed to reproduction of crystallized sets of relations ,

and because of this ,
other properties such as non-coerciveness ( passion / intrinsic motivation ) ,
emergence , natural non permanent / functional leadership based on initiative – participation – experience – reputation ( in social networks ) , collaborative creation , stigmergy , …

/////////////////////////

a brainstorming in french , with my friend Florence …

/////////////////////////

Shared intention : Meta-Rhizome
Synthese par intention et conscience partagee :
vivre en simplicite dans la complexite par authenticite

Il s’agit de faciliter une transition vers un paradigme de simplicité dans la complexité ,
au travers d un Rhizome de Rhizomes.

Le paradigme de simplicité se caractérise par :

– l’empowerment mutuel : la collaboration (synergie) au lieu de la compétition
– l’émergence : synergie entre synergies
– la motivation intrinsèque : la passion comme moteur d’activité, et pas la motivation extrinsèque
– le pouvoir d’inspiration plutôt que le pouvoir de coercition
– l’approche de création et pas seulement de reproduction
– la création de nouvelles solutions autour de la quelle se concentre la concentration de l’attention et des ressources
– la customization des solutions : toute solution peut être transformée et adaptée à son contexte
– l’intérêt de tous plutôt qu’autour de structures de pouvoir dans leurs intérêts propres
– la mise en commun de tout, sans nécessaire abandon de la propriété privée (ex : copyleft)
– une hiérarchie naturelle suivant la compétence dans une situation donnée et la participation
– une hiérarchie non coercitive : avec un pouvoir d’inspiration
le long terme plutôt que le court terme
stigmergie
un rhizome : une interconnexion entre tout élément avec l’ensemble des autres éléments
non lineaire

une forme d’organisation, de collaboration en réseau (rhizome)
– tout element est connecté avec toute autre element au travers du rhizome, tout projet est connecté avec un autre projet, tout devient transdisciplinaire.
– il n’y a pas de dépendance à une structure en particulier : on n’est pas limité à la reproduction de structure, il y a une redisposition continuelle des non-structures
– conscience plus large que le soi, une conscience de notre capacité mutuelle dans l’intérêt global
– potentiel du nombre de voies de communication illimité (pour avoir une société, il faut une voie de communication pour qu elle s organise)
– ubiquité et convergence entre la réalité physique et réalité digitale
– conscience de dépendance mutuelle permanente sans dépendance spécifique a une entite
– la synthèse : convergence des différents éléments

Des systèmes inconditionnels, non hiérarchisés, autogérés, rhizomiques, transparents, décentralisés, connectés, autonomes, par émergence, non linéaire, non conflictuel et ouverts a la collaboration…

***

Description de la culture

Cela est plus facile à comprendre à travers un mode de vie : des styles de vie passionnés dirigés par un sentiment de sens partagé.

Il s’agit d’une nouvelle culture que vivent sous un aspect ou un autre des hackers open source, auto stoppeurs, réseaux d’hospitalité (couch-surfing), …

C’est une culture sans règle hiérarchique spécifique, mais avec une flexibilité sur le plan de l’influence des individus au sein de la communauté. Cette influence leur est attribuée de manière naturelle suivant leur compétence dans une situation donnée et leur participation.

La confiance et l attention devient un atout majeur et ouvre la voie à leur collaboration dans le réseau. Une ecoute et une confiance de base peut etre donnée d’emblée, mais selon ce que les gens font, ils gagnent ou perdent en réputation , et donc , en potentiel d attention et de confiance vis a vis d eux.

Chaque personne est valorisée et les individus se soutiennent mutuellement dans le réseau pour apprendre ensemble et opèrent un nivellement par le haut. Les individus s’empowerent (s’émancipent) mutuellement : ils mettent à disposition leurs ressources et potentiels respectifs.

La transparence est très importante car elle offre l’inclusion en permettant une compréhension de la situation et des différents éléments qui la composent. Cela permet à chacun d’apporter de nouvelle question, de nouvelles solution pouvant contribuer à l’émancipation et la création de valeur mutuelle. La rétention d’information

***

Création de communautés de pratiques : on apprend ensemble en partageant nos références, suivant une motivation intrinsèque et une émulation mutuelle.
Des personnes qui partagent une intention et des intérêts communs.

***

De plus en plus de personnes se trouvent confrontées à un changement continuel ; elles vivent dans une réalité de réalité multiple. Il devient de plus en plus difficile de se restreindre à une réalité spécifique, on peut vivre l experience d une réalité sans en être spécifiquement dépendant. On développe une capacité à constamment recréer sa réalité.

Cette adaptation rend possible la simplicité dans la complexité, parce qu’elle mène à vivre de plus en plus dans le moment présent, à se détacher de plus en plus de structures et de besoins spécifiques.

***

Un méta projet avec différents modules transdisciplinaires, connectés entre eux.

Meta-Rhizome :

Rhizome : Finance

emergence de systeme financier alternatif sans interet ,
avec demurrage ,

a partir de reseaux de ( cooperatives de ? ) producteurs et de consommateurs.

Rhizome : Holoptisme

Pour faciliter une conscience et une vue d’ensemble pour tous : un système holoptique (/= panoptique)
L’intérêt est dans le processus plus que dans la structure.

Certains modules peuvent être développés avec les outils actuel et d’autres nécessitent un investissement dans la R&D.

OUTIL holoptique
Constituer une base de données des différents intérêts, les objectifs, les questions, les besoins.
Tous les segments sont reliés entre eux par des métatag. L’information est accessible à tous.
Chacun peut savoir ce qui intéresse chacun : on peut s’organiser autour de problématiques partagées (tout en ouvrant la possibilité d’une perspective plus globale).

DIFFUSER LES OUTILS DE LA CULTURE ALTERNATIVE

Ces systèmes existent déjà dans la culture alternative,il s’agit de les diffuser.

Rhizome : Energie

accès aux ressources (énergie, eau, nourriture, services) et aux outils (logistique).

Rhizome : Logistique Marchande

Rhizome : Stigmergie – Logistique des activites et processus

definition en francais

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigmergie ( voir aussi : Intelligence distribuée )
quoi que la definition anglophone correspond peut etre d avantage a l idee que j en fais :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigmergy

Mon idee est celle d outils qui facilitent
la synchronisation et la coordination non centralisee au travers de l espace entre differents individus suivant des intentions et des objectifs communs

Rhizome : économie et devises (trust information system : IOU ; ripple)

emergence de systeme financier alternatif sans interet ,
avec demurrage ,

a partir de reseaux de ( cooperatives de ? ) producteurs et de consommateurs.

explicatif de demurrage :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demurrage_%28currency%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demurrage

Rhizome : communication (réseaux ad hoc, multihop)

Rhizome : protocoles de routage ( Freenet , BitTorrent , … )

Rhizome : apprentissage (pas d’éducation, au sens de reproduction des patterns)

Rhizome : Gouvernance

Rhizome : licence ( Copyleft , General Public licence )

Le plus que le nombre de personnes et entites participant au reseau augmente , le plus que la valeur du systeme , et son potentiel de calculation augmente.

CRÉER LES OUTILS POUR UN MÉTA-LANGAGE ,
– p ost symbolique émergent (outil holoptique en lui-même)
– avec la possibilité d’une navigation immersive, dynamique et relative
– on peut partager un concept directement en voyant les coordonnées dans la constellation sémantique
– plus il y a d’interrelation/vecteurs, plus la précision de la position de chaque objet dans le système augmente.

process dimension
– permet de naviguer les différents processus et la conscience dans laquelle ces processus sont vécus.
– processus positif : 1/ la confiance (ouverture d’un channel), 2/ l’action , 3/ la contemplation (forme de gratification), 0/ l’inspiration
– processus négatif : 1/ la confiance négative (augmentation de la peur), 2/ la réduction du potentiel d’action, 3/ une contemplation négative (sentiment de frustration), 0/ moins d’inspiration

Institution Vs Commons ?

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Dante-Gabryell Monson
Date: Fri, Dec 7, 2007 at 3:07 PM
Institution as part of Commons , and not Commons as part of Institution

in relation to our conversation of

” Institution ” versus ” Social Network ”
( or more exactly , I mean ” Commons of the Social Network ” )

me arguing that the ” Institution ” can potentially be part of a Social Network Commons , and feed it when there are shared ” Intentions ” ( and not ” Expectations ” )

The problem is that very often “Social Network Commons” and “Institutions” are being confused , and the Institution ( consciously or not ) often tries to reap the benefits of a Social Network in its own advantage , vampirizing the social network commons into the realm of its control ,

and imposing its own conditions and expectations to the social network commons.

Hence , the understanding of where ” The Institution ” lies is important , as to avoid the Intentions shared by the Intentional Commons Social Network to be taken over by an Institution.

Understanding of where the ” Institution ” lies , and where the ” Commons of the Intentional Movement of Social Networks ” lie , is not always easy.

But you can understand it from the moment you notice where there lies a specific expectation , and not an intention , and from the moment that you realize there is a consciousness of specific need for control …

A Social Network is more flexible , and rests on the intentions shared by individuals , and not on the expectations of Institutions.

Yet , Institutions may support a commons by opening up resources for it.

But again , lets stay aware of the consciousness.

By the way , also see this short text recently edited on the p2p foundation wiki :

” Iron Law of Institutions ”

http://p2pfoundation.net/Iron_Law_of_Institutions


“The Iron Law of Institutions is: the people who control institutions care first and foremost about their power within the institution rather than the power of the institution itself. Thus, they would rather the institution “fail” while they remain in power within the institution than for the institution to “succeed” if that requires them to lose power within the institution.” (http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/001705.html)

alternative "marketing" platform

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Dante-Gabryell Monson
Date: Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 2:59 AM
Subject: alternative “marketing” platform

I was thinking about another idea:

developping a webplatform that catalogues “products” , and eventually “services” , according to certain ethical standards, values, and environmental and social points.

Many of these products would not necessarily have a high degree of marketing, or would rely on this platform to market their products.

Clients would use the platform as a reference to buy locally, and eventually also to re-establish a link with producers.

It might also be possible for the “consumer” to become part of the producing process, and cooperate with the producers, exchanging and building knowledge, and participating in the production process.

Such a platform could combine different concepts related to local exchange systems, local currencies, local production, opening up spaces for reflection and intiatives, develop a consumer-producer culture, encourage consumption and production of quality products while reducing environmental and social destructive impacts and maximising opportunities and the quality of products, reducing the amount of marketing costs in percentage of total costs, etc

it might seem to be related to some of the following :

http://www.rbjones.com/rbjpub/rbj008.htm

I wonder what would be a good test space for such a kind of approach, and realise that in Norway there is a strong conciousness of buying local products over imported products ( to encourage their own economy, even if its more expensive )

Although I imagine that all products would not necessarily need to be locally produced / or one could also imagine including into certain aspects of the platform a points system what related “fair trade” with developping countries, …

and the platform would also take into account products from all over the world, so that competition and comparisons can be maintained, and encourage local producers to improve their quality to competition.

Let me know what you think,

if you are interested, I’d like to see with whom and how to organize such development – eventually start small –

I also imagine such things already exist – but can only notice that if it does, its not widespread –

Dante

towards "commons" – holopticism , stigmergy

From: Dante-Gabryell Monson
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 2:19 PM

Subject: Re: towards “commons” : synergies through meeting hubs , conferences , strengthening of collaborative networks …

Thomas , Steve , Josef , and all ( cc: I add Andrius to this thread )

this mail is about ” Syner-Jazz’ ing ” …

—-

quoting Thomas in hes last reply to this thread :

” If this idea has currency, I’d like for someone to take on the organizing of it so I can concentrate on the writing projects I need to complete. ”

Looks like we are at a stage of the thread where we find out more about who is doing what at this moment and what objects we already have at our disposal ,

and are reaching a stage where we find out what we intend to do ,

what we need to do it – including numbers ( aha ! money !?! )

and how we can work together to provide for each other what each of us needs

—-

As we dont ( yet ) have certain specific softwares and platforms to visualize this yet ( the ” open synergizer ” relational tool and platform 😉 ) ,

lets see how we manage to continue this with emails and wiki webpages …

We can create pages and profiles that allow us to openly and transparently gather , visualize , relate or compare
(perhaps some of us already have done this for themselves and in relation to their networks ? – http://ms.lt ? ) :

– options regarding ” places / hubs ” for meetings and potentially for living we mentionned on this thread – feel free to edit / re-arrange , or copy paste it anywhere you like , … :

– indications and links about what some of us are doing at the moment , or intend to do , and with what circle of influence

– what resources within our respective circle of influences can complement each other

– what needs we have , and … what we like 🙂

—————-

I make a online draft of my own so you can position me ( and it would be nice if each of us could visualize that with each of us , each of our intentions , and each of our projects ) :

http://oikoumene.coforum.net/SynerJazzingWithDante

( and you can add yours here http://oikoumene.coforum.net/Synergizer )

as to how I feel can contribute to your needs towards our common intentions ,
and so that you can understand what I need to be able to contribute ( to you ? ) ,
towards our common intentions .

Your suggestions on how you think I can contribute to our common intentions or to you
are also welcomed.

I also want to state that I intend this kind of holistic/complexity market place to go along ” intentions ” – what I call ” Intentional Economics ” / including gift economics within intentional social networks.

By this , I mean it is not ” Expectation/Control Economics “.

Example : I have an intention that includes specific actions and needs , and if you share this intention , you can empower yourself by empowering me to fulfill my needs as to be able to accomplish actions that correspond to your intention.

for example : I m passionate about ” singing ” , and you like to hear me sing. – so you support me by offering me some food so that I can spend more time practicing for my singing.

and NOT expectation economics where ” you pay me to sing one specific song in one specific place “.

in effect , I do not sing because you pay or support me , I sing because I ampassionnate about it , and you can empower me to do it better and more by covering some of my living expenses and needs.

I will sing anyway , because thats what I love to do , but by supporting me , more people can enjoy listening to me sing , including yourself

—————-
note to programmers and people interested in facilitating the funding of programmers :

It could be nice if we could have easily comparable and potentially relational data for each of our needs , current offer , and the needs for potential offer.

It could also be good to create separate profiles for needs of projects , and how these projects can relate to each of our separate offer and need profiles.

For example , a “optional ” project page for having a conference at the Goetheanum ,
and then other pages / objects for ” optional ” offer and needs of individuals according to the project object.

This last intention ( to create and compare objects / profiles of offer , demand , access , and needs to create potential – which itself could be a need for other potential creation )

is in itself a project object , for which we can clarify the needs , and write down grant applications for software and platform development.

Although this might still sound like some foreign language , I would be happy to present to interested programmers the functioning of ” process dimensions ” : http://oikoumene.coforum.net/processdimensions , which can also integrate such kind of functionality ( and much more )

———-

Let us know more what your situation , intentions , offer and needs are.

Dante

Build up of mutually empowered critical mass of prosumers ?

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Dante-Gabryell Monson
Date: Sat, May 17, 2008 at 1:52 PM
Subject: Build up of mutually empowered critical mass of prosumers ?
To: hc_ecology – at – yahoogroups.com, sustainable_solidarity – at – yahoogroups.com

I felt like writing some additional ideas , in relation to potential developments and projects I see around me , and question myself as to where to converge ” physically ” while being able to live, and facilitate the … ” Build up of mutually empowered critical mass of prosumers ? ” – while not disconnecting ourselves from the city / not fully living in autharcy – but being open to a globalised world , with a capacity for higher levels of mutual empowerment and collaborative creativity.

and how to facilitate the networking and collaboration of organizations , cooperatives , academic institutions , students , … any individual towards such intentions ?

When the picture is so synthetic and complex , where to start ?

a follow up on a previous thread and response which you will find below

————-

I also notice another trend – the urban redevelopment trend around knowledge and creation centers.

this is my main reason for now visiting Helsinki , as there is a urban re-development plan , shifting a declined industrial neighborhood into a art/design/high tech – living , research and development , management , lifelong learning space.

see:

http://www.helsinkivirtualvillage.fi/Resource.phx/adc/inenglish/index.htx

also see another project in the united states :

if you have a good internet connection , you might want to view this very easy to read and informative 10 Mb pdf file :

www.arc.cmu.edu/cmu/rci/PDFs/RCI_Hazelwood2007.pdf

if not , some more google entries related to

Remaking Cities Institute – Carnegie Mellon University’s School of Architecture

One of the aims of mine and of many people I end up meeting , along these last years , is to connect further our intentional networks , with a variety of individuals from different backgrounds sharing it , activists , academic institutions, students , organizations , businesses , governmental organizations , representatives , etc

share practices , experiment , increase our credibility through joint projects , increase support and access to a variety of resources , …

There are a number of very interesting initiatives , in many OECD countries – for example here a japanese practice sharing platform :

http://www.japanfs.org/

Although sometimes it feels simple yet complex , and I doubt strongly that the verbal language tool , even when extended by information technologies , and emails like this one , can be effective enough – i feel more and more that what is needed is new forms of language , some kinds of dynamic mapping into which we can add , position , extract , compare , correct , …

beyond wiki s , yet including them , extracting available data from the internet , from our environments , and be able to visualize them through some post symbolic visual language.

I am also not surprised to see that many a case , as with the Arabiaranta Helsinki redevelopment project , the central synthetic and creative environment , the convergence space for trans-disciplinarity , are choses to be art universities , or more precisely , art and technology development oriented environments ,

dreaming and designing futures and the relations between all elements , including dreams about new esthetical forms of lifestyle …

Or am I wrong ? I am perhaps too young to have experienced it , but it seemed that in the end of the 60 ies , the social movements erupted from the humanistic faculties ?

Is this still te case ? I traveled all over europe in the last years , met a lot of students of politics and sociology , and often they would end up being the activist side of the movement , but often in an approach that is ” fighting ” and not necessarily with new visions.

It feels that Design and Technology Development / Research ” clusters ” are becoming ” fashion and being developed , not necessarily through grassroot movements , but because of the needs and evolution of businesses ( and consumerism ? ) into products that require such solutions.

Which perhaps sounds a bit contradictory to a prosumer spirit ?

Business seems to have been successfull in absorbing the individualist needs of the 68 generation into … consumerism ? ( I paste below some references to a BBC series of documentaries ” The century of the self ” ) ,

but will it take further control over current psychological , and potential structural developments ?

Or are we able to create the prototypes that can better deal with complexity and offer alternative modes of organization and lifestyle then the current dominant competitive , consumerist , scarcity creating , individualist models ?

A dilemna I feel is that the resources are still on the side of a capitalistic mode of production and managment.

Organizing ourselves , and connecting between each other , cooperatives , that can facilitate the mutual empowerment of individuals while creating some of the resources they need to live , eventually selling to a broader market , or even creating its own markets ( and own alternative – intentional ? – currencies ? more complex barter systems involving information technologies ? to trade between partners / cooperatives that share common intentions ? )

Can we inspire the creation of a critical mass ?

Where do we start to converge a critical mass ?

With food cooperatives ? With learning practices and school environments ?

I know that its in every different field that we can be active , and spread such socio-cultural memes ,

yet for some of us , it does not feed us yet –

The p2p foundation ( and other platforms and movements ), the convergence of various examples and ideas under the wiki , blog , ning , mailing lists

http://p2pfoundation.net

http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

is where we seem to be now.

But how to connect a critical mass ? … as to empower ourselves with the resources needed ,
without having to be dependent on a capitalistic mode of organization and production ?

—-

” The Century of the Self ”

part 1 )
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2637635365191428174

part 2 )
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-678466363224520614

part 3 )
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6111922724894802811

part 4 ) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1122532358497501036

About ” The Century of the Self ” :

extract from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/century_of_the_self.shtml

To many in both politics and business, the triumph of the self is the ultimate expression of democracy, where power has finally moved to the people. Certainly the people may feel they are in charge, but are they really? The Century of the Self tells the untold and sometimes controversial story of the growth of the mass-consumer society in Britain and the United States. How was the all-consuming self created, by whom, and in whose interests?

some more videos on my blog

https://dante.ecobytes.net/

On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson wrote:

Hi Marco , Michel , Sam , ( cc : Alicia , Marilyn , Steve , Synnove , Andrius , Josef , Franz , Jeff )

yes , I guess that the people that are fully interested in investing themselves in a shift of lifestyle patterns in such kind of approach – pro-suming ( ? ) – form some kind of sub-culture –

The eco-village movement ( such as http://gen.ecovillage.org/ ) might be one such kind of sub culture , although too often I realize they tend to reject information technologies and try to move to some more collectivist structures , going back to the past , trying to escape complexity and live a simple life ,

although there are also some examples of emerging networks , such as

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/globalvillages/

http://www.worknets.org/wiki.cgi?GlobalVillages

and also emerging , existing , communities such as one I know about ( but did not visit up to now ) in the netherlands ,

http://www.eva-lanxmeer.nl/

http://www.changelabproject.org/searchkb1.asp?id=114&action=view&tier=1

http://www.google.fi/search?q=EVA-Lanxmeer&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:unofficial&client=firefox-a

they also organize a festival ( in dutch – Michel might understand : http://www.c4real.nl/ )

and where an acquaintance of mine met at a ecotopia camp http://eyfa.org/projects/ecotopia ,
“alicia falvey” , has been ( and still is ? ) very involved in – I also remember she mentionned some other projects in Ireland ? –

I also paste below for Michel an extract in dutch extracted from
http://www.eva-lanxmeer.nl/ :

De wijk EVA-Lanxmeer

De Culemborgse wijk EVA-Lanxmeer is een stadswijk, die is gebouwd op basis van gedachtengoed over integrale sociaal-ecologische stedenbouw en permacultuur. In dit gedachtengoed staat de kwaliteit van de leefomgeving centraal, waarvoor de bewoners en bedrijven die er wonen en werken zelf medeverantwoordelijkheid dragen. De inrichting van leefomgeving wordt gekenmerkt door ecologisch bouwen, organische vormgeving en architectuur, afvalwaterzuivering in de wijk, centrale parkeerplaatsen, landschapsarchitectuur, samenhang tussen privé tuin, gezamenlijke tuin en openbaar groen, behoud van cultuurhistorische elementen, ontwikkeling van natuur, biodiversiteit en biologische landbouw.

Recurrent Transition Point

Recurrent Transition Point – Faith in Manifesting the Co Creative Impulse :

I am again at this recurrent transition point ,

where I need to remind myself what I am doing ,

decide if I invest my time in ” working for money ” while doing jobs that do not have meaning for me ,

or going on finding what I am passionate about and finding ways of putting the pieces of the puzzle together ,
connecting people and converging people around common intentions.

Every time , my conclusion is that I should go on doing what I am passionate about ,
and continue trying to reach out to people with which I can do things and co create together ,

and eventually , at some point , there might be further mutual empowerment emerging ,
and raising my quality of life out of the nothingness of being in between or out of shared space in other peoples realities ,
roofless , or spending much of my time between roofs and the friends that support them , hitch hiking to bridge them ,
and attending conferences all over.

Being tired of being constantly on the road , I decided to try a local convergence approach , moving less on scales of hundreds or thousands of kilometers.

I keep faith , and remind myself what I am doing ,
and what concepts I can manifest to express the rhizome synthesis consciousness.

festivalist node ?

It would be really interesting to have some kind of ” life center ” ,
a complete alternative to ” job centers ” ,

as the main aim of a ” life center ” , compared to a ” job center ” ,
is not to find people that match demand that can be paid for ,

but the main aim would be to allow people to find what they are interested in ,
and how they can mutually empower each other in further learning and developing what they feel has meaning to learn more and develop.

I remember already seeing a ” volunteering ” center.

How can we best use information technologies to help people share their questions ,
and develop solutions together , empowering each other with learning and shared activities towards their intention and potential projects.

I m not sure if there is such a ” virtual center ” … ?

Although there are many points on the internet that do connect people according to their interests.

I guess this could also be the new forms of learning ” nodes ” …

some kind of ” information convergence nodes towards festivalist lifestyles ”

http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Festivalism

I guess this should replace our current modes of operation in universities and schools ,
and also be used for mutually empowered and challenging life long learning.