“Zero Money”: First Principles Thinking About Monetary Value
Change the Money, Change the World (30)
Addendum 3 — Political strategy and tactics: DiEM25 Tech Sovereignty 4
Commentary 13: This is the fourth posting in this addendum. The series comprising this addendum provides commentary on the specific agenda for Technological Sovereignty on the platform of the Democracy in Europe Movement. DiEM25 is the regionally developed leading model for The Progressive International. Commentaries are grouped under the links to which they refer. These need to be referred to to see the context.
Democracy in Europe Movement and the The Progressive International
Commentary 14: In the first posting in this addendum I provided commentary on the introduction of the specific agenda for Technological Sovereignty on the platform of the Democracy in Europe Movement. In the second posting I continued with commentary on the single subsection of the introduction, followed by commentary on the second section of the DiEM25 Technological Sovereignty platform and its first subsection. The third posting in this addendum completed commentary on the second section. In this posting I begin with the third section (3.):
DiEM25 Technological Sovereignty 1 (Commentary 1 to 2)
1. Introduction: For Democracy to Be Possible, Technology Must Be Democratised
DiEM25 Technological Sovereignty 2 (Commentary 3 to 7)
1.1. Three Interlocking Transformations to Achieve Technological Sovereignty
2. A Digital Commonwealth for the 21st Century
2.1. Democratising Platform Monopolies
DiEM25 Technological Sovereignty 3 (Commentary 8 to 12)
2.2. Towards a Digital Commonwealth
DiEM25 DiEM25 Tech Sovereignty 4 (Commentary 13 to 15 Current post)
3. Free Knowledge for Democratic Innovation — the Role of Intellectual Property and Education
Commentary 15: This section extends the discussion of problems to be resolved by “democratization” to the imbalanced distribution of wealth in IP regulation. I think the text of this introduction is very weak. It focuses on the obvious needs of having a high quality infrastructure for tech innovation through “human collaboration” for the “common good”. Well who else would collaborate? Again, as indicated in earlier comments, I support DiEM25 taking a direct confrontation against the immorality of the collaboration of powerful and wealthy elite members of society by exposing the actual theft of value from the rest of society that is being perpetuated. This is an opportunity for DiEM25 to become via the Progressive International the only worldwide hard money party. Yes, needed is the reforms for egalitarian IP and Education in line with the tactics outlined in this section, yet it must be explicitly recognized that the immorality of a fiat inflationary economic regime is the mechanism of theft for the governance by the greedy cabal of Central Banks, the two-party USA political monopolies, and the corporate donor class. What solutions are possible in the context of this platform section:
3.1. Transforming Intellectual Property (IP)
Legally created monopolies for recognizing creators and giving them an opportunity to recover investment of time and money is the essence of why IP should exist. Concentration of wealth however can provide ability for those with IP rights to expand those rights in time duration and in scope of the original domain for which the initial IP rights were granted. Using wealth to obtain political support for relevant legislation changes regarding IP rights without decentralized oversight not only leads to those kinds of expansion of rights but also increasingly the invention of new rights that are questionable as to adhering to why IP rights existed in the first place. This is especially true since the transferability of IP rights was initiated, such that creators forfeit recognition and profits to buyers such as marketers and distributors. Another problem has arisen when publicly funded research and development is privatized through creation and transfer of IP rights to privately held entities such as corporations who share profits only with their shareholders in perpetuity .
Central to why these immoral developments exist, immoral because they all essentially hoard profitability that should and could benefit the whole of society, is the lack of decentralized oversight and verification of IP rights by the whole of society. The theft is only possible because sovereignty over wealth became centralized through the printing of fiat currency with no basis in actual value such that distribution of an ever inflating loss of buying power serves a few at the expense of the many. This is why “change the money” is critical to changing the world of IP rights along with the many other problems with the current economic paradigm.
A mind experiment is useful to see what is at stake in understanding the importance of education of everyone on the meaning of tech sovereignty for the collective of individuals in society. This mind experiment also illuminates the key importance of a decentralized monetary and fiscal policy employing a sound medium of exchange. The knowledge necessary for a democratic debate around technology does not currently exist. Instead, determining which technologies should be developed, funded and regulated is in the hands of a narrow group of individuals who may not always have the benefit of the many as their goal. They are motivated only by their particular political views and the values and opinions only they hold. This determination is theirs due to the concentration of wealth they may or may not rightfully deserve. But they steal the privilege of making decisions affecting everyone.
Imagine that determination was decentralized among the entire population. That is anyone and everyone could decide what is done with the entire wealth of society. In that case education of everyone to understand, at least to a certain extent, the technology concerned is needed. There is of course an issue of impracticality in a completely decentralized determination, but “democratization” means favoring decentralization not ignoring it or avoiding any degree of it. At the very least, it is a moral imperative that determinations are not made in the pursuit of profits for the few at the expense of the many. That latter objective is what dominates current monetary and fiscal policy. This is why “change the money” is critical to changing to an emphasis on education sufficient for broader understanding of society concerning tech development.
I refer the reader to the several sections of the main essay that are linked below for further information on the technology of the range and efficacy of digital currencies and cryptocurrencies available for evolving a new monetary and fiscal paradigm. There are many extensive projects available and needed to create applications for smart contracts and tokens to provide block chain transparency and verification and democratic value distribution for each and every tactic listed in sub-subsections of both subsection 3.1 and 3.2. Adoption of new monetary technology offers a lifeboat for much of society to escape the grip of Central Bank and political party perpetuation of fiat money, including CBDC attempts to co-opt our personal monetary tech sovereignty.
Change the Money (1) Preamble — Monetary value true by nature
Change the Money (5) Introduction (1) — Zero Money & First Principles
Change the Money (8) Part 1 (A) The technological solution
Change the Money (10) Part 2 (A) The Naming of the Beast
Change the Money (12) Part 3 Ending Inflation and embracing deflation
Change the Money (13) Part 4(A) — Phases of transition 1
Change the Money (17) Part 5(A) — Adoption, adaptation & activism
Change the Money (25)Addendum 1 — Politics: Author & Ontology
Change the Money (26) Addendum 2 — On the series of addendums
Change the Money (27)Addendum 3 — DiEM25 Tech Sovereignty 1
Change the Money(28)Addendum 3 — DiEM25 Tech Sovereignty 2
