See also:
Here I’m going to list various ways from various places that I’ve seen. They may be better or worse options for an ecosocialist ICT - I’ll just list them all out to begin.
Further down the line I’ll reorganise and systematise (it would be nice to get it in to some kind of a pattern language maybe?). I want to particularly bear in mind: "[some] describe transitional steps in the struggle for ecosocialism, but these usually involve a wish list of things we want and hope to achieve in the near-term (e.g. “immediately” eliminating military spending, or an immediate “moratorium on economic growth in rich countries”), rather than how we might do so and the conditions that would make this possible" – [[Ecosocialiism for Realists: Transitions, Trade-Offs, and Authoritarian Dangers]]
So maybe there’s a few ways of slicing it e.g.
Maybe the ‘areas of action’ can be common, but there will be differing levels of radicalism regarding the specific initiatives within those.
See Table 3 of the paper.
They split it up into three different ‘domains’ - [[agency]], [[social equity]], and [[planetary stability]].
For each domain, they list a number of main areas for action, along with solution space options, and examples and initiatives. Not sure exactly what the different between solution options and examples are - and how they decided what are the ‘main areas of action’.
Some of it seems a bit vague from the table - but they do explain more in the text in some cases, and also reference out to papers that cover some of the things in more detail.
"[[Regulations]] and [[circular economy]] practices to avoid pressures on natural resources, including carbon sinks and mining pollution."
Solution space options:
Examples and initiatives:
"Energy proportionality test for comparing digital applications incurred energy and emissions"
Solution space options:
Examples and initiatives
"Open data commitments to measure and manage rebound and intensification effects"
Solution space options
Examples and initiatives
"Mainstreaming carbon labeling of ICT use and digital services"
Solution space options
Examples and initiatives
"Regulating data-based monopoly power to increase social equity"
Solution space options:
Examples and initiatives
"Improving digital capabilities and governance"
Solution space options
Examples and initiatives
"Empowering digital subjects to become active agents of their data"
Solution space options
Examples and initiatives
There’s a few brief recommendations at the end of [[Platform Capitalism]].
As per the book [[Platform Socialism]].
I’ll have to go back through the book to properly pull these out. But let’s see, in a nutshell. I remember the breakdown into Resist, Regulate and Recode. Would you class these as the leverage points maybe?
In terms of domains, it’s likely agency and social equity - less focus on planetary stability here.
[todo: plenty more]
Here I’ll list the ways they suggest not doing it too. Makes sense to include but say why not recommended.
Leverage points: education / organisation / agitation?
socialisation of digital intelligence and data
ban forced advertising and platform consumerism
replace military, police, prisons and national security apparatuses with community-driven safety and security services
end the digital divide
degrowth
The examples/actions/initiatives are grouped into areas of Sovereignty, Democracy, and Insurgency.
Are these new domains alongside e.g. Agency, Equity, Planetary Stability? Sovereignty and Democracy are pretty close to Agency and Equity. Insurgency could be a new one. Or perhaps it’s a different axis altogether?
When the stewards of the thing are the people who depend on the thing.
What makes technology sovereign is when its stewards are the people who depend on it, protected from outside control by any legal or extra-legal means available. The data, the algorithms, and the interfaces are for their users, rather than acting surreptitiously against them.
– [[Governable Stacks against Digital Colonialism]], p.10
The ability to participate in the governance of the platform.
The other side of sovereignty is participatory democracy – its guarantor and its every- day practice. Here we resist the temptation of autocratic vanguardism by designing governable stacks to be accountable and alive.
– [[Governable Stacks against Digital Colonialism]], p.10
Digital democracy has the potential to evolve rapidly and creatively. People can participate in far more rapid and fine-grained ways than was possible when the pre- vailing regimes of corporate and state governance first appeared. Organisational de- signs that work well could become part of a governance commons, enabling other groups to adopt, adapt, and share them back into the common pool (Schneider et al. 2021). In this way, small-scale accountability can spread, and it can creep into larger and larger kinds of communities, demonstrating that colonial control was never neces- sary. The more we demand and practice the arts of self-governing, the harder we are for someone else to govern.
– [[Governable Stacks against Digital Colonialism]], p.11
Defiance against attempts at rule.
Insurgents might use colonial platforms for education and organising. They might spread viral messages and enjoy themselves. But if they have governable stacks to go back to, they are more than just subjects. They are maroons, with swamps and forests of their own.
– [[Governable Stacks against Digital Colonialism]], p.11
Generally, deprivatisation/socialisation of all the things.
[todo: plenty more]
Recommendations: