One of the biggest objections that comes up anytime a plan to improve the lives of the 99% is proposed is that "the rich and powerful will never let it happen".
Here's a secret: The rich and powerful are just like you and me. Ultimately they want a safe world, they want to be loved, to protect their family.. They don't see themselves as selfish, they see themselves as merely guarding their rightfully-earned wealth. If you were in their position, i'm sure you would do the exact same thing. It's hard to let go of something that's defined you for so long- and if any plan like this is to move forward, activists must come to grips with the fact that the rich will not let go of their assets without receiving something in return.
The issue then, is compensation. How will the wealthy be compensated for allowing their riches and resources to be used for the common good in a moneyless society? The answer is very simple: Power. Money isn't the only type of wealth there is- there's social capital, knowledge and even political. Wealth will never be taken or redistributed- merely transformed. This voluntary approach is what sets sociocapitalism apart from all previous attempts and makes it far easier to get more people on board. .
Those who decide to donate their resources to the project will be fully compensated with a proportional say over how those resources are used. This means that depending on how much you give, you will get more votes, and these votes are transferable to any TVS tribe on earth. Not only will real assets like land and machines be valued, but cash-in-bank, bonds and stock will count too. Nobody will lose a dime by supporting the transition. In the case of corporations, governments and large organizations, their wealth will be split up and handed to shareholders or citizens. Keep in mind that since money is digital, we will not have to "raise enough money" to do this. We will just create it- possibly in the form of a cryptocurrency. Our money will not be backed by faith, it will be backed by the resources of those who believe in this project.
The more you give to support the transition, the more power and control you get in return, and better yet these votes can be handed down through generations or split up, unlike delegative votes. They can be sold and traded like corporate stock. Even better, tribes pay dividends to their citizens.
But wait a minute! Doesn't this sound a lot like one dollar, one vote!? That's not very democratic!
Calm down, it's okay. Remember U.S. History and the great compromise? Sociocapitalism respects the one person, one vote principle in exactly the same way. While tribes are purely economic entities, cities follow the one person, one vote principle. They share two separate but overlapping domains as one is always a part of both a city and a tribe at the same time. You can read a lot more about the way government is structured here.
After their resources have been donated, they will be placed under the control of the global assembly via local production districts- (ones they have a large stake in). This foundation will work tirelessly to research and develop new technologies while advancing the aims of the project. Over time, less people would need to work and could quit their jobs with all their needs provided for. Once the project has been completed, everyone will receive an equal share of the world's production. See "economy" for more details.
In the meantime, most people would be allowed to continue living as usual. Farmers would keep farming, factories would keep producing- all "donating" really means is that you're ready to automate and produce goods for the RBE when the time comes and the technology is ready, which shouldn't take too long.
Many of today's rich are self-made people like you and I- and most have a philanthropic heart. Even if they don't want to part with all their wealth, by guaranteeing them a permanent stake in the future of society and the ability to sway events worldwide, the large majority of them would jump at the chance. Far from being a mere donation, it would be an investment in the future. Instead of fearing this change, the wealthy would welcome it.
No comments:
Post a Comment