If you built it, will they come?

small tree growing in crack2

Julie Glasscock and Vladimir Alzamora
Kadagaya (www.kadagaya.org)

There is an increasingly large global community promoting, advocating and discussing a resource-based economy and many working on designing what such a future might look like. We can be sure that if such a wonderful society existed there would be no shortage of volunteers willing to try it out. However, the path from here to there, the so-called “transition” is much less clear. An RBE by definition is not a fixed-point utopia with a clear operation manual, but rather uses the scientific method to evaluate concepts and technologies to continuously upgrade and improve. Therefore, the transition period is not a clearly defined route that we implement when we have the time/money/resources, but rather should be a time of vast experimentation to test out all these ideas and see what works and what doesn´t.

So why does there seem to be much more interest in promoting the concepts than developing and living in RBE communities to test the theory in the real world? We speak from the experience of building such a community and finding it very difficult to attract people to help grow the community with us. In early 2014 we founded Kadagaya (www.kadagaya.org) after becoming disillusioned and unsatisfied with life in the system and inspired by the opportunities provided by an RBE-type society. We began a pilot project in Peru to evaluate the enabling concepts and technologies that have the potential to take us steps closer to an RBE. In the early stages of such a project, while the basic infrastructure is being constructed and daily life is not as comfortable as that in the system, it is easy to understand why joining the community is not so attractive. We have no shortage of volunteers (mainly travelers) excited to spend a few weeks or months in the jungles of Peru helping us build the community, but finding long-term/permanent residents is much more difficult.

In the transition period emerging RBE communities look a lot like self-sufficient communities or eco-villages and have some overlap with hippie communes and alternative/spiritualist groups. Even some of the groups that consider and label themselves as RBE communities incorporate spiritualistic, religious and other beliefs which are not consistent with RBE concepts. This can be problematic in differentiating ourselves and attracting people who are interested in growing as a community and working towards an RBE rather than a personal spiritual journey.

In general small “intentional communities” have a very high rate of failure. Community living can be difficult and these days it is something that is quite foreign to many of us. Although a lot of these communities are trying to be self-sufficient and escape the system, there are inevitably problems created by money, politics of management/ownership and ego. Therefore it is very important to focus on educating the community about human behavior, psychology and social interactions in order to understand ourselves and the original of these potential conflicts. We feel it is important for the community to grow together over time, which is why it is advantageous to have long-term/permanent members from the beginning, rather than joining an established community.

Of course there are numerous reasons why people prefer to join a mature community. Most of us are trapped in the system in one way or another (with mortgages, debt, family commitments etc.) and leaving that life for an alternative has financial, emotional and social risks. As we are highly social animals there a large element of discomfort in breaking social conformity and challenging the homeostasis of “normal life” (even when we recognize the negative effects of such a life). The current system (and in particular the media) very effectively uses fear to maintain the status-quo and hence most of us have a well-established fear of the unknown and tend to worry about what we have to lose. Even though there are big opportunities for improving our lives by living in alternate systems, very few want to be the guinea pigs. Despite the growing awareness and dissatisfaction with the system, perhaps life is still too good and things need to get really bad (e.g. another huge recession) before the risks of trying something new don´t seem so bad.

In the meantime, we and other like-minded communities, are working towards self-sufficiency, increasing our knowledge and consciousness, and testing enabling technologies. By interacting with the wider community of RBE supporters we hope to share our knowledge and experiences, helping others to make the transition and be ready to support those wishing to leave the system when they are ready.

We recognize that such a life of experimentation, exploration and relative isolation from the system is not for everyone. Explorers in the past ventured off into the unknown, some fearing they would fall of the edge of the Earth, motivated either by an adventurous spirit, or a life of necessity. While the process of building an alternate society seems like hard work, those who have realized that there is no other option for their life prefer this “hard work” (outside their comfort zone) to maintaining a life within the monetary system.

 “A ship is safe in harbor, but that’s not what ships are for.”

William G.T. Shedd

Recommended watching/reading


What can we learn from the Internet?

Internet pioneer Danny Hills has a TED talk about the early days of the Internet. On that talk we see that the Internet, on its early days, was essentially an obscure network based on trust.

Today, the Internet is much bigger, and much more important. Despite its massive importance, governments and corporations are constantly on the lookout for opportunities to mess with it, reducing its usefulness for their own profit and power gain. They get away with this because it is technically feasible to do so, and it is in the reach of their power.

The technical reasons behind this vulnerability are not particularly interesting for this post. The interesting part are the responses the Internet community is deploying to this perceived threat of control. These responses seem to fall into the following three categories:

The first kind of response is to fight in the political space to keep the Internet open. This essentially means that, as members of our societies, we get together and complain to those in power and to each other until they change their minds. This has stopped the progress of bad laws such as “SOPA” and “PIPA” in the U.S. We will call this approach “begging.”

The second kind of response is to start designing an alternative to the Internet that would not be controllable. Designing theoretical alternatives, or prototyping these designs, is not really too difficult. The harder part is seeing how these alternatives would grow beyond isolated localities adopting them and into a global mesh that would, eventually, be easily accessible by anyone, like the current Internet. We will call this approach “forking.” Not really “forking,” as these networks would probably end up talking to each other, but it has to be conceived as to stand on its own, as if it were a fork.

The third kind of response is to build a network that’s better than the Internet in some sense, but on “top” of the Internet, that is, an application using the Internet, as opposed to beside it, as a “physical network” like the Internet. That’s what the “peer-to-peer networks” do. They are not “networks” in the same sense that the Internet is a “network.” In academia, you would say that these peer-to-peer systems, such as BitTorrent, FreeNet, Napster, Bitcoin or GNUNet, are “logical networks” or “overlay networks.” They are networks “overlaid” (built on top of) an existing “physical” network such as the Internet. We will call this approach the “overlay” approach (sounds simpler than “if you can’t beat them, add a layer on top of them that makes it do what you want.”)

So, in the case of transforming the system known as the Internet, what is the correct approach? The answer is, of course, all of them. When a system is as important as the Internet, then it is not a matter of “which is the right way,” but which is the right way for you. All of them are valid, and we’re going with whatever works.

I have a hunch that these paths can be translated to the paths we have available to transforming “The Economy” into a “Resource-Based Economy” or “Love Economy” or “Gift Economy” or whatever it is that we would call it. That problem is, similarly, very important and worthy of all kinds of response we can come up with.

We have many people enacting the first response, of “begging” the current governments and corporations to do things differently.

The second response, of “forking” the current systems, is similarly receiving lots of attention. Simple and small-scale designs, such as designs for specific villages or communities, have been working for decades. Some communities even cut economic ties with the rest of the human world, essentially creating a private “world” where they can claim to exercise a “world-wide” and pure resource-based economy — but you still have to at least negotiate land ownership with some existing country, last time I checked. Larger-scale designs, on the other hand, if not deployed, at least are the focus of much discussion and study.

The third path, I think, is where we would start making some interesting progress.

Consider the following: given any criteria for allocation of the existing money tokens in circulation, which one of the following two entities would be more likely to be capable of capturing more of it?

The first entity is a group of people who each live on their own apartment, and drives each day, on their own car, to the same job site where they work. When these people meet, they pay each other for things, and every transaction is taxed by the local government.

The second entity is the same group of people, but now using a gift economy of some sort between them. They not only share things, being more physically efficient, but they also avoid having their internal economy be implemented using taxed government tokens. Whatever government money they hold in total, it disappears slower from each individual’s bank account simply because they are not taxed for circulating it internally.

Yes, money is a fiction, a convention. But so is any economic game. Even if you have a global network of computer processes monitoring all world’s resources, the representation of these resources is still a model, still a game, still a fiction. An error in modelling of the world’s resources would produce sub-optimal allocation, much like the current government money systems produce sub-optimal allocation. A much better model is still a model.

What this means is, instead of abolishing the fiction of money, why not just satisfy it? Get together with some people, and agree to collectively play the game better than those who won’t build their own gift economies and who will live physically inefficiently. Then just watch the cash pile grow. The government will have no rule it can design to not reward the people who actually want to build something different. And the more “money” you have… well, let’s just say that, in the current system, having money is not exactly a bad thing. Want to build Jacque Fresco’s futuristic town? Amassing a few hundred billion dollars couldn’t hurt. It is all fiction anyway. Gather the fiction, then give it to people who still want it. These people will give you access to the land you need to build a town, as well as deliver all the resources, material and mental, that you need to build it for the first time. Since it is a sustainable town, once it is built, you have one place that doesn’t need money.

The “overlay” path is not without its own difficult challenges, however. When you design an overlay, be it for the Internet or for the human environment sharing problem, you have to keep two worlds in your head instead of one, and constantly remember which kind of thinking goes where. If you are not careful while designing your peer-to-peer system, you may end up recreating its supporting layer without intending to. Having money may cause us to exclusively “buy” our way into simply surviving on the fruits of the global unsustainable production machine, instead of taking whatever first step, even if small and feeble, towards freeing ourselves from depending on these unsustainable (destructive and violent, really) systems. I can “have” a million “dollars,” but that shouldn’t stop me from personally spending part of my day trying to grow some tomatoes.

Final note. Becoming a billionaire solving practical problems and then donating it to charities that also solve practical problems, or funding start-ups that want to “innovate,” is not what I’m talking about here. That’s simply trying to do good within the current economic and financial system, and validating and reinforcing it in the short term. This would be simply using the existing network as it is presented, not using it in a way that makes it emulate what a competing network would be. It is certainly possible that this alone — a “correct” application of business as usual — may bring about sufficient “real” transformation that problems disappear on their own through sheer business, technological and scientific ingenuity. That is, the beautiful communities based on trust and gifting that we envision are actually just around the corner — if only we would let the great Capitalist dance finish its performance on this planet, then we would see how wonderful things could and will be. Then again, it is also possible that trying to grow a new system as a mere “product” of the diligent application of the current system will continue to not work.

Original Post : thinking.nfshost.com/wiki/index.php?n=Main.OnResourceBasedEconomies


Short Film Stories From a Resource Based Economy

As you all might know, I decided to “take a couple of years off” from the Waking Up movie to gain more experience, get a bigger network of movie production contacts and the likes.

One of the things I would do to gain more experience is of course to make more movies. I’ve had some ideas to some shorter and longer films thrown at me, but non that would be very easy to accomplish on a small budget. And, of course, I would like to make films about a resource based economy or with an RBE setting of some sorts.

So, the idea I got was to invite you guys to write new stories and short film scripts that can be accomplished on a small budget. And if you don’t feel up to it yourself, invite others! 🙂 Target script writers around the web and inform them of this.

I figure 10-30 minute scripts would be good. And the setting would be closer to our time so that the technology and surroundings can be more or less what we have today. It can be stories from the transition period, just after the transition period or in some kind of future in a setting where we don’t have to use any CGI or show any new types of non existing buildings or technology.

The important aspect of the stories would be the values of the people. It can be stories of young people, old people, researchers, scientists, artists, factory workers, car sales people, teachers, anything! The only ‘criteria’ would be to somehow show the values of a resource based world. Whether it is about generosity vs. greed, compassion vs. indifference, sharing and giving vs. trading and buying/selling, ownership vs. usership, money vs. gratitude, you name it!

It will be a much ‘freer’ approach than with the Waking Up movie which is based on one particular idea (Ben waking up from cryo) and set to a future far away with a whole new technology, and thus will end up as a much more expensive film to make. I really hope to make the Waking Up movie one day, with all the bells and whistles, CGI and special effects. But, as I have said before, there should be many films made about RBE, and with this new approach we can be the ones that starts this!

I also thought that since this would be something very different from the Waking Up movie website (which will still exist until we get around to making the Waking Up movie), there should be a separate website. I thought that ‘RBE Stories’ would be a good name for this new website, and bought the domain www.rbestories.org (www.rbestories.com was actually taken by a guy who gives away his stories there for free. He is practicing RBE without knowing it…! 😉 ).

The new website isn’t up and running yet, but I will install a new WordPress theme on the domain soon, and also open a new Google Docs collection for the stories. The new initiative will be 100% open source and public domain as in the CC0 license: creativecommons.org/about/cc0.

To take this even further, it will be open for both screenplays and stories that can be made into screenplays. And since it is all public domain, it will be open for all film makers on the planet to pick and choose whatever stories that might appeal to them to make films out of them. The films can be crowd funded through IndieGoGo/Kickstarter or the like and be published to YouTube. Films can even be shot on cell phones without a budget! It can be all levels of complexity.

All the stories will be open source and can be further developed by the online community. They can also be branched into other stories and be shortened/lengthened or built upon. The website can be a resource in terms of imagining the resource based economy and what it can be like. The stories can both be read as they are by anyone and be a resource in themselves, but also be made films out of. When films are made, the film team (director/producer/writers, etc.) will have the final say in how the story will be on the screen.

I would of course be one of the film makers that would be very interested in this and will follow whatever appears here closely. I hope more film makers and writers will find this interesting and join this project! If there’s a story that doesn’t appeal to me personally, maybe it will appeal to some other film makers. If there’s a very appealing story that appeal to more film makers, well, then maybe there can be a collaboration, or maybe there can be more film versions of the same story!

What do you think?


Douglas Mallette Lectures on a Resource Based Economy

I filmed this lecture and interview together with The Zeitgeist Movement in Oslo, Norway. Douglas Mallette gives here a somewhat deeper look into what a resource based economy is, how technology will play a role, and how RBE can be implemented in society.

The lecture:

YouTube Preview Image

 

The interview:

YouTube Preview Image

 


The Awakening of Humanity

“How can we get a resource based moneyless economy without a global totalitarian dictatorial regime? Wouldn’t we have to kill off populations to preserve resources for others?” Someone asked this recently.

It’s a very good question, and one I’ve been asking myself several times. The only answer I can come up with to this is this:

  1. The global population in general has to have a ‘spiritual awakening’ where we see all people as One, as we see our close family and friends, wanting to share equally with them.
  2. In addition, the ‘no money’ paradigm has to be seen as more beneficial for everyone than the money paradigm we’re in now. People have to share more and more without money, and this praxis has to ‘take over’ from the trading praxis we have today with money.

I can see many evidences for both of these directions today. There is a huge global rising awareness about ‘who we are’, about consciousness, about how our thoughts influence the world, etc., both within and outside science, and there are more and more people doing things ‘for free’ all over the planet. I am thinking about everything from volunteers in, which you find millions of, in all kinds of projects and organizations, free software (like Linux, WordPress, etc. etc.), free information (Wikipedia, + + + + + + ), and free efforts in all kinds of places.

Throughout history, there has been several ‘paradigm shifts’, like when the earth turned from flat to round, or when the earth was not longer the center point of the universe, but actually circled around the sun.

We’ve been living in a ‘money paradigm’ for millennia, and I think we are on the tipping point today. On one hand, money has a bigger stronghold on the planet than ever before, with millions of people in need of money, not knowing about anything else. On the other hand, there’s a strong rising of people wanting to simply share and stop this whole ‘money charade’ and create a moneyless society.

In any case, most people on the earth are fed up today with the situation we are in, and something has to happen. Which way we will fall depends on the totality of the people on this planet. But the more people wake up and become aware of the ‘no money’ possibility, the bigger is the chance that we will get there.

So, I can not see any ‘totalitarian world regime’ controlled by machines. Far from it. What I see, IF we get a no-money-paradigm, is something completely different.

What we have to try to picture is HOW WILL PEOPLE ACT WHEN WE SIMPLY SHARE, RATHER THAN TRADE.

How will people act? And what will the world look like?

Of course, most greed has to be gone, most ego has to be gone. We have to realize that what we do for others we actually do for ourselves. And this can be illustrated well when one person makes an invention that will benefit both her AND society. When someone comes up with an idea to a betterment of something, one usually does that because it is something that one wants oneself. So, to realize this invention through the joint effort of others will of course a very exiting thing. It has got nothing to do with money. The same goes for art, or food, or basically everything you can imagine. Creating and sharing something and taking part in this is what it is all about. Not hoarding, competing and trading. This is a game we have played for so long. Now it is time to change.

People think that ‘we need money’. They live in this mindset and that is why everything is the way it is on this planet right now. The so-called ‘scarcity’ is money based. There is no real scarcity, and there definitely is no need to ‘kill off’ parts of our population to ‘save resources’. All of these thoughts are based in the old money mindset. There’s more than enough land, water, food and resources on this planet for everyone and then some. I have to say it again; ALL scarcity is money based. All scarcity is PERCEIVED. The system NEEDS us to feel this scarcity for the system to stay alive. If we were to wake up and realize that there’s abundance all around us, and that with our own minds, we can create more of this abundance, the system would simple cease to exist. And of course, the system doesn’t want that.

‘Famine’ is economically based, not environmentally. Today, we have the ability to change, design and help nature give us it’s best, and at the same time create sustainability. We can produce food for everyone, there’s no doubt about that. 50% of all food is thrown away today. And this is because of our economic system, the monetary based market system. It is because food needs to be sold to those who have money. If is was simply given away instead, based on who needed it, one could streamline the distribution 100% without waste. This is but one example of the wasteful system we have today.

The capitalistic system produces more waste than any other system on this planet. Which means that without this system, but RBE instead, the resources we HAVE will go a whole lot longer. That’s the point of RBE. It is resource based, not money based. There IS enough resources for everyone WHEN they are managed properly.

Instead of hundreds of TV and computer producers competing with each other, releasing hundreds of new models each year, each model doing almost exactly the same, and depleting resourced needed to produce these models, a resource based economy would never let that happen. In RBE, we would rather produce ONE model, the best. Or maybe 5 models, of say different sizes, to cater for some different needs. But we don’t need one model WITH USB, and one model without. ALL models would have USB, if you see what I mean. There are minuscule differences on different models of products today, only to give the manufacturers more to sell, and the consumers (it’s a shame we are called ‘consumers’) a so-called ‘choice’. In RBE, we would focus on producing the best, most efficient solutions for everything. We would focus on not producing any waste, and make lasting products for all people of the planet to enjoy for a much much longer time than today.

So, what will society be like when people wake up from this mindset? If people woke up, say, tomorrow, what would happen…?

Well, that is many things. With a ‘no money’, ‘no property’, mindset based on sharing, accessibility, compassion and real resources instead of trading, competition, ownership and fake money, we would:

  1. Close down all banks and other so-called ‘financial institutions’.
  2. Get rid of the so-called ‘government’ and develop a direct computer aided democracy instead, to take care of real needs, rather than fake ‘money needs’.
  3. Start to survey what we actually have in terms of resources on this planet. Both human, animalistic, plants and minerals. Both locally and globally.
  4. Start to make sure everyone has what they need in terms of food, housing, clothing, medicine, etc.
  5. Start to develop new more efficient and automated distribution systems.
  6. Start to develop and use new sustainable energy and materials.
  7. Start to respect each other more and more.
  8. See this planet as ONE HOME for everyone, and think in terms of all people on this planet, rather than ‘this country’ and ‘that country’.
  9. Get rid of all artificial borderlines.
  10. Get rid of all military.
  11. Start to organize ourselves based on need, want, skills and abilities, rather that ‘heritage, race, money and greed’.
  12. Educate everyone about real and important aspects of life.
  13. Not get too many children, knowing that we have to stay within the caring capacity of the planet.
  14. Not need to punish each other, but rather help each other reach our full potential and get well of any disease.
  15. Work together to develop the best technology for the planet and everyone.
  16. Still have ‘jobs’, some more desirable than others, which of course depends on your interests, but be able to change ‘job’ more often, and do tasks that are really fulfilling, because you will know that what you do is actually needed here on the planet.
  17. Utilize this planet and this world to work for everyone in every way, everywhere.

When we truly get out of our money mindset, this is all feasible. Not only feasible, but desirable and the best we can all experience. ‘When we all share, we all get more’. Instead of being limited to ‘one car each’, we could have automated cars (Google have developed that already) that we can simply order when we need it. Much fewer cars would be needed, and we would all have access to a whole lot more cars!

Access, rather than ownership would be the new value, when people really open their eyes. Instead of ‘owning land’, we could use land where and when we need it. We could travel anywhere we want. We could move to anywhere we want and live anywhere we want. We could basically DO anything we want, as long as we all live in this NEW MINDSET. As long as MOST PEOPLE live in this ego-, money- and propertyless mindset, this mindset of giving, sharing and collaboration, this world will change automagically based on this mindset.

This whole blog is about ‘what it will be like’ and ‘how society will work’. This blog is about visualizing this new society, keeping a steady focus on this until we get there, and then keep focussing and creating. Not focussing on what we don’t want. We have to constantly imagine, visualize and focus on what we want in order to get there.

These new times is not about ‘grabbing positions’, ‘running in the rat race’ or ‘competing for resources’. No, these new times is about realizing that every little thing I do, I do not only for myself, but for everyone. For everyone to benefit. Even if it is me making myself a better person in any way, this will also benefit others and the whole. When everyone benefits from what I do, I will benefit too. In a much much higher degree than ever before, because it will all be free. For everyone. Even the richest of today will be freer, since they too will benefit from this new society. A society where true collaboration and sharing is possible and where everyone can travel freely everywhere and contribute anywhere it is needed.

It is about doing things for the joy of doing them. Just like I do now. I write this because I enjoy using my mind to visualize this new world. Not for money. Not for any egotistical reasons. Not even to be credited, as I even do this anonymously. I write this because I believe this world will be a better world to live in. Both for me, and for everyone else. And everything written here I share freely for anyone to copy.

So, in answer to the question I would say that this new world will not work through any dictatorship of any kind. No, it will be created through the awakening of Humanity, and work through self governance, with people deciding over their own lives wherever they might live, or want to live. And it has to be based on the notion that ‘it is better to share and collaborate than to trade and compete’. This notion has to be the NEW BASIC VALUE, like money and trading is the basic value today.

It has to be like this: Instead of the majority of people thinking ‘what’s in it for me’, the majority has to start thinking ‘what’s in it for all of us, both locally and globally’. This mindset has to WIN, somehow.

Many people think this way already today, working ‘for free’ on projects, but they haven’t realized that it might be possible to build a world totally with this mindset. Even those people; volunteers, developers of free software, artists, doctors that work for free, etc. etc. think that ‘yes, I suppose we need money to build roads, hospitals and schools and to pay for resources, teachers, doctors and nurses’ and so on. Actually, most people don’t even think this. Most people think of money and ownership as AIR: It is something that’s always been here, that always will be here, and that we can’t live without. Most people doesn’t really think about the possibility that we can live without money. It doesn’t occur to them. It didn’t occur to me either, until I heard about TVP and TZM a couple of years ago.

Now I see these ideas are spreading like an unstoppable wildfire. Projects are popping up everywhere. New thoughts are emerging. More resources are shared. More people are collaborating.

As you can see, the new ‘no money’ mindset will change this world so drastically in itself, that it is difficult to imagine exactly what it will look like in praxis. But if you imagine a world where the emphasis lies on global cooperation, rather than competition, global sharing, rather than hoarding, free travel, rather than restricted, a focus on fast development of new efficient technology, rather than sticking with old outdated models, global and local direct democracy, rather than fake politics, and compassion rather than cynicism, well, then you’ve come a long way in picturing this world.

And if you’ve read this far, you’ll probably be interested in seeing this:

YouTube Preview Image

 


You Never Really Own Anything

Ownership. Property. This is mine. This is yours. Do you think you own anything? You don’t. Ownership is an illusion. So is property. Why? Because all the things you use are only used by you temporarily before they are passed on or thrown away. Be it food, clothing, cars, property, furniture, cell phones, air, water. You never say to anyone ‘Don’t breath here! This air is mine!’. Of course not. Air is still free, and no one claims to own it. Water is also in a large degree free, but is becoming more and more privatized. Food, clothing, cars and land has become utterly privatized. Still. You don’t, and never will own anything of it.

You use it.

You don’t own it.

At best, all you can say about ownership is that ‘this is in my possession now and as long as I am using it’. That is the most ‘ownership’ there is. Everything that you ‘own’ is only ‘yours’ temporarily. It is only borrowed or rented. Your food goes into you and comes out again. So does the water. Even your body is on loan. When you die it goes back into the circulation. Ownership is an illusion. Still, it’s an illusion bought by humanity. But it is no more than an agreement that say’s that ‘ok, we will have a system here that gives some the right to claim vast resources of the planet for themselves, while others get nothing’.

There’s no ownership in nature. There’s only coexistence, with every part fulfilling their task, and every part being fulfilled in doing so. In a moneyless society and resource based economy this is how we will look at ownership, since this is the only ‘ownership’ there is and ever will be. Having a paper that say’s you own something doesn’t make it more ‘yours’ in the big scheme of things. Whatever you ‘own’ can be lost in the blink of an eye.

Today ownership is almost equal to accessibility. The more you own, the more access you have to things in life. The more land you own, the more cars you own, the more houses you own, etc. The problem is that you are only one person and cannot possibly make 100% use of all the things you own. Even if you only own one car and a guitar. You will never be able to use whatever you own all the time.

If, however, you didn’t own anything, but had access to virtually everything this planet and humanity can offer, you would ‘own’ more than the richest people on this planet will ever own. I’ll say this again, because this is the most important thing there is to grasp when it comes to concept of non-ownership:

If you didn’t own anything, but had access to virtually everything this planet, and humanity, can offer, you would own more than the richest people on this planet will ever own. The whole planet would be yours to use. Of course, this means that all borders and visas would have to go too.

In a resource based economy everyone will have access to virtually everything on this planet. Today we think that if this was the case, everyone would rush to the same places and go for the same things, because that is what is seemingly happening today. ‘Everyone’ seem to run after the same things. And sometimes, yes, some things are more popular than others. But we must remember that a lot of this is due to advertising and promotion seeking a certain behavior among the population fulfilling the profit motive of the capitalistic system.

One example of a moneyless system in today’s society is the library. Sometimes you have to wait for books to come back, yes, but more than often the books you want to borrow are there for you. If the whole world was like the library, you might have to wait a while going to a certain beach or holiday resort if it was full for the time being. But, there would be lot’s and lot’s of other places to visit in the mean time, just like there would be lot’s of other interesting books to read while you were waiting for the one you wanted. Maybe you’d find other, even more interesting books to read, and places to visit, in the mean time.

The idea of ownership builds on the notion of scarcity. The thought that there is not enough of places and books for every one of us. Therefore, it is best to hoard as much as we can while we can. If we don’t, we risk being without, not having access and having to live a poor life.

Not owning anything could be the best experience humanity has ever had. It would result in the most abundant lifestyle anyone on this planet could ever dream of. Not owning anything is a notion built on the opposite of scarcity. It is a thought that when we share, everyone will have many times more than what we would ever have if we were to own everything we wanted. This includes the richest of the richest people on this planet. No one, I repeat, n o   o n e, can own the whole planet. Even though someone certainly tries to do just that, it will never happen. In any case no one would ever be able to use the whole planet for themselves only. You can’t swim on all the seas, climb all the mountains or eat all the food.

Some people try to own as much as possible, thinking this will bring the best lifestyle for them, not realizing that sharing will bring more to everyone, even them. Of course, we can not all have our own private jet or private beach. But we would have access to more jet’s and beaches than we could ever use in a world with no ownership.

So, since we don’t own anything anyway, since ownership is nothing more than an illusion bringing lack to the world, why not simply abandon it. Of course, this is not something that is done over night. Many people are ready for it, even rich people. But just as many people are afraid of it and far from ready. For it to happen this thought has to manifest itself throughout the population and take root. Humanity have to break free from the thought of money, property and ownership and open it’s eyes to the new virtually unlimited possibilities a moneyless society and a resource based economy can offer.