I have this Future Shape in my head and in my heart, that I’ve long meant to share, but haven’t quite known how. I met Asya, and we got into a good conversation, and so now seems as good a time as any to talk about it. She helped me flesh this post out with more detail and deeper dives.
I don’t think there’s one solution when it comes to what economics style we should have, or what governance should look like. Like I drafted way back when, a “mixed mode system” is where it’s at instead.
Distributed systems are good at last-mile logistics, nuance, and fast decision making. They are not good at doing simple things at scale. So for actual implementation and innovation, I think distributed networks are where it’s at.
Hierarchical systems are good at making simple decisions at scale. So good for North Star guidance and things you want to take a socialist approach with. That might include assurance of human-rights-shaped things like
What each of these actually looks like is then determined at the local level, but accountable to the wider level.
I think the problem and scale at hand should be what determines what sort of decision making is happening. We’re also seeing this shift with things like Talk To The City where the nuance can be gathered and processed at scale in a way that impacts everyone in the network. I’m quite hopeful about this, although the transition is going to suck. I really like what Liz Barry has talked to me about lotteries for representation (hey, this also happened in the Red Mars trilogy!). As Asya said in a comment, “I also like the concept of citizen councils/assemblies. randomized, representative, and mandatory civic service (jury duty) where all of us see it as our obligation and privilege to serve our communities and make decisions. Service lasts a fixed amount of time, no elections, no lifetime appointments & an education system that prepares us to participate.”
People already belong to multiple groups that operate in different ways, and can hold different rulesets in our heads and adhere in our actions. I think these constraints lead to creativity.
While I’ve grown up in a “capitalist” country, I’ve also had some limited experience in a socialist setup. Kenya and Tanzania were on opposite sides of the Iron Curtain, and I’ve seen the impact in both countries on how people think about each other and their responsibilities to one another. Here’s where I’m at here:
My proposal here is to have universal access to basic resources (not income, that’ll just deal with inflation), with some currency available to earn/use if you’re the type of person who wants to play with extra stuff. Any innovation that has a certain percent of the population adopt it or is integral for a certain period of time becomes socialized as an assumed resource, but creators are welcome to make money off it until that point. I, too, would love a population of intrinsically motivated people who would just do neat stuff as soon as basic needs are covered, but all my time in organizing and managing people says that’s just not going to work, and so we do still need a market here.
The devils are of course in the details, but I think that’s the extent of how this could be set up.
Let’s talk with each other to suss out some of those details.