“Zero Money”: First Principles Thinking About Monetary Value
Change the Money, Change the World (28)
Addendum 3 — Political strategy and tactics: DiEM25 Tech Sovereignty 2
Commentary 3: This is the second 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 will be grouped under the links to which they refer, so often these need to be referred to to see the context.
Commentary 4: 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 this posting I will continue, beginning with the subsection of the introduction 1.1
DiEM25 Technological Sovereignty 1 (Commentary 1 to 2)
DiEM25 Technological Sovereignty 2 (Commentary 3 to 7 Current post)
Commentary 5: The three subsets in this platform subsection, for achieving “Technological Sovereignty”, provide a nice framework of tactical domains for a strategy of democratizing the current technological power structure: the subsets of actions to establish a “Digital Commonwealth”, actions to “democratize the process of developing innovations”, and actions to “democratize governance of the processes of innovation development”. I will comment first now on 1.1 specifically and continue commentary on 1.2 to conclude blog entry 28.
First, before discussing the three subsets proposed individually, I want to recognize there are many tactical objectives indicated that may not initially seem to be about “Change the money, change the world”. My comments are not to question those tactics but to clarify why they should be taken in an effort to actualize monetary and fiscal renewal. I am trying to convince readers that this paradigm shift in monetary medium is the meta-strategy for which any other tactical groupings should be subsumed. The use of the term “renewal” in the text is adequate, but it suggests making new what exists. Far more accurate is the idea of “paradigm shift”, suggesting the eventual actualization of an entirely novel economic system. The other process proposed in the text is “regulation” which is most clearly understood to be working within the existing paradigm of technological innovation for the purposes of disrupting it. The disruption is to change its current outcomes of wealth disparity, which is at the root of the deprivation of disadvantaged peoples in the current economic system. Again the emphasis needs to be on a strategy of changing the money. I use a similar process substructure, as found in the essay preamble (blog postings 1 &2), but with a focus on the disruption of the economic choice and governance of the monetary medium.
The subsets of actions to establish a “Digital Commonwealth” include political actions for “Countering the power of platform monopolies” and for “Building the infrastructure for a digital commonwealth”. The subsets of actions to “democratize the process of developing innovations”, and the subsets of actions to “democratize governance of the processes of innovation development”, likewise propose specific political objectives. In all there are twelve tactics introduced will be explained further later in the outline of the Tech sovereignty platform. Its an impressive array of tactics on:
“1.Data Protection 2. cross-platform-interoperability 3. antitrust laws 4. Data Unions 5. Automated Decision Making 6. public data commons 7. digital rights for citizens 8. alternative business models 9. monopolistic Intellectual Property 10. socialising costs while privatising benefits of innovation 11.processes by which technological development is funded 12. decision-making processes”
This and all commentary focuses on a strategy for a new paradigm of technological sovereignty itself having a power structure that is decentralized and essentially about monetary governance. I see tactics 10 to 12 as higher register tactics under which the rest are subsumed. I propose utilizing blockchain managed crowd-funding of all tactical actions for transforming access to benefits, technological funding and all decision making. Every tactical action is to accomplish system change for decentralizing in distribution of wealth generation on a global computer network. This network will be of secure inviolable transparency and accountability.
I will continue with the beginning of the second section of the DiEM25 platform for Technological Sovereignty and its first subsection:
Commentary 6: Previously in this addendum I stated my most important thought about DiEM25 as a whole is its need to be clear about its ontological foundation. That ontology, it is proposed, is best an ontology of Subjective/Objective Idealism as was thoroughly presented in blog posts 5 and 6 in the main essay of which this is an addendum. I did provide a synopsis of the ontology in the previous posting to this one. I observed the introduction has no compelling strategic vision of the key disruptive technological change necessary. I asked: “what is that strategy which will definitively change the world, that strategy that will be the intent of all tactics?” — and pointed out that if the current political power structure has to be decentralized, to which I agree, but isn’t that power essentially about monetary governance? The key disruptive technological change as asserted will be ending the printed fiat money inflationary economic model. It will be ended with technological money of fixed scarcity, decentralized in its distribution of wealth generation on a global computer network. This network will be of secure inviolable transparency and accountability. The subsets of actions to establish a “Digital Commonwealth” include political actions for “Countering the power of platform monopolies” and for “Building the infrastructure for a digital commonwealth”. The tactics proposed for “Countering the power of platform monopolies” are detailed in the subsection 2.1:
Detailed in this subsection are the first four tactical objectives of twelve specific political objectives of the Technological Sovereignty platform of Diem24:
“1.Data Protection 2. cross-platform-interoperability 3. antitrust laws 4. Data Unions”
Commentary 7: The subsection provides some more salient information useful for formulating those four tactical objectives. It does not, however, specify exactly what tactics will be employed, rather it only discusses what problems those tactics will address. The overarching problem identified is that users of digital platforms create valuable information monopolized by the platform stakeholders, only for their own personal monetary gain. Not only is that value not shared with the people whose data is utilized, that very data is used to condition the users product and service choices. In my thesis, the immorality of this lies in the greed and hubris of how the monetary transactions are being governed by the centralized (monopolized) power of the stakeholders. I assume the political tactics will seek to undermine the two core principles on which platform monopolies rely: the network effect that impels use of a centralized product or service offering, and the lock-in effect of becoming exclusively dependent on a centralized access to certain goods and services.
Is it really not that the network effect and lock-in effect are immoral principles involved in our monetary transactions, but rather that an egalitarian distribution of value is circumvented? Distribution of wealth is instead monopolized by unnatural means: manipulating outcomes of wealth distribution rather than discovering equitable prices, and therefore wages (in this context meaning the value of information). In the thesis of “change the money, change the world” discovering equitable prices and wages means change for an entirely novel network lock-in effect. This network will be of secure inviolable transparency and accountability. It will be created with technological money of fixed scarcity, decentralized in its distribution of wealth generation on a global computer network. The monetary medium is itself digital information that serves as a unit of account, store of value and medium of exchange. It is a medium of money that can coexist and conform use of capital and labor so as to decentralize the discovery of appropriate prices and wages. At the same time, use of this technological money decentralizes the power that governs that determination. A complete overview of the digital monetary medium spectrum and the phases of transition for their integration in economic life is provided in the essay postings 13 to 20.
In the later subsections of the DiEM25 tech sovereignty political platform for democratizing consumer platform monopolies, I will be commenting on the four tactics as further specifics are provided. My objective is not to counter argue the implementation of those tactics, but argue they should be targeted at a monetary and fiscal paradigm shift requiring political activism.