Resource-Based Economy (RBE) and Neo-Aristocratism
A Post-Capitalist Proposal for a more Eutopian World
1. Exposé of the Concept
Our futurological ideal for the founding of a superior civilization consists of an extensive network of self-sufficient communities governed by their respective local «neo-aristocracies»—these will be made up of the most excellent citizens and those who are best suited for governance—and founded on an innovative post-capitalist economic arrangement of technological post-scarcity, intelligent cooperation, common access and across-the-board automation. This new form of society will transcend the outmoded ideological notions of the current capitalist-socialist paradigm and open a new path of human development and individual freedom.
In my philosophical writings I will denominate this concept of a self-sufficient community with its own localized neo-aristocratic government and based on RBE principles an «autofundium», alternatively anglicized as «selfstead», a newly coined latinism which combines the Greco-Latin roots «auto-» (self-) and «fundus» (farm, estate) and refers to a self-contained and independent human settlement. The coinage is modelled after the Latin term «latifundium» (large landed estate). Its plural form would be «autofundia» in accordance with the regular pluralization of neuter nouns in Latin.
All of the self-sufficient communities or autofundia within this new social order will be characterized by a widespread trend of political localism. A system of localized governing councils will replace the highly centralized forms of government of the globalist world of today. Community-level and regional governments will be the norm. Each community will make its own decisions with regard to the management of its self-contained economy without the interference of any overbearing national or supranational state. The residents themselves will have a lot of say in the direction of community development and will not be restricted by external bureaucratic influences. An autofundium may correspond to a complex of towns, a city-state or in some cases a whole subregional entity. Autofundist local governments will have the option to belong to broader political confederations for the purpose of mutual collaboration should they desire to do so.
A new class of wise and cultivated aristocrats will populate the localized governing councils and act as the leaders and administrators of their respective autofundium. These outstanding men and women will authorize new policies in light of the most relevant information and coordinate the various community projects and the creation of culture. The «neo-aristocracies» which we envision will be different from the outdated and lifeless aristocratic conservatism of Modern Europe. Their membership will not be based on the ownership of wealth nor on some inherited title of nobility but rather on spiritual superiority, nobility of character and supreme excellence. A few exceptionally learned and virtuous philosophers will be appointed as rulers and protectors of our communities. The world will witness the inception of an authentic aristokratíā: «the rule of the best».
In all of the autofundia the primary means of production will become public property and be controlled by the localized governing councils and therefore by the people themselves. Public agricultural complexes made up of vast industrial greenhouses will cultivate healthy and nutritious food for the whole community. Public factories will produce all kinds of useful goods such as clothing, footwear, household appliances and electronic devices. On account of the common ownership of the primary means of production, the productive process will be redesigned in order to supply human needs directly and our economies will no longer be at the mercy of large private companies which only seek to further their own financial interests at all costs and raise the pursuit of profit above the satisfaction of real demands. Of course, we make a clear distinction between private property and personal possession: while the most important industries such as food production, the supply of energy and housing will be under the control of the governing council of the autofundium, each individual will retain the right to possess his own plot of land and various intimate belongings and engage in his own economic activity (we do not support Bolshevik communism!).
In all sectors of the economy that are under the control of the local governments the most innovative technologies of our century will be harnessed to their full capacity in order to generate an unprecedented level of material abundance and thereby achieve a condition of technological post-scarcity for everyone. High-tech production has proven to be many times more efficient than traditional human effort. It has been the undisputed driving force behind the great increase of productivity and availability of many consumer products in recent decades. Manufacturing technology will continue to evolve and the productive capacity of our civilization will only grow exponentially. With time, and perhaps sooner rather than later, it will be possible for us to manufacture many goods with such a high degree of abundance that they can be simply given away freely to everybody in the fashion of a «gift economy». Of course, the attainment of such a condition of technological post-scarcity would only render the current market system indefinitely obsolete.
The fundamental principle of all of the localized economies will be one of «common access» to basic resources and services without any system of debt or barter. An ubiquitous system of usufructuarianism will replace any kind of market. People will have the right to access dwellings, plots of land and facilities that form part of the public property of their own community for a duration limited to full and adequate use. In each autofundium there will be established «public commons», similar to public libraries, from which all resident are permitted to borrow various kinds of specialized goods on a temporary basis. These will include an almost unlimited variety of electronic devices, specific tools, luxury items and vehicles. As it is obvious, this usufructuarian ethos will not only reduce a significant amount of squandering of resources and economic inefficiency but it will also serve to enrich the whole community materially. In the end, all human beings will benefit from a new social arrangement of communitywide shared abundance.
Thanks to new technological advancements the bulk of productive operations will be automated through innovative robotic systems and the whole population will be liberated from any kind of drudgery and the tyranny of employment. The monotonous tasks of manufacturing and warehousing that are automatable will be performed by legions of efficient and tireless machines and the manifold non-productive and superfluous forms of work of the present capitalist society which only exist in order to serve the artificial financial interests of the corporate elite such as those of the advertising industry and the insurance companies will be outright abolished. The minority of useful and non-automatable work that still remains will be shared out among residents of the communities in a workweek of less than ten hours. The modern notion of the «dignity of work» is a blatant lie. The stark truth is that an existence of relentless industry has always been nothing more than an unfortunate source of suffering and an unforgivable waste of human life. We value the liberatory power of automation. We desire the liberation of humanity from meaningless servitude and the subsequent «debanausicization» of society. In our neo-aristocratic culture drudgery will be despised and leisure and freedom will be exalted.
Within the context of this new economic system of technological post-scarcity and usufructuarianism commerce will reach its obsolescence and the concept of money itself as a medium of exchange will cease to hold relevance. The principle of common access removes the need for buying and selling. The abolition of work through deliberate automation renders the idea of a salary as a source of incentive totally superfluous. Contrary to popular belief, money has never been a good spur for creativity. A monetary reward only serves as an incentive when it comes to monotonous and stultifying tasks such as those of a production line, but these will be the first to be automated in each autofundium. Free from the need to «earn a living», each person will only dedicate himself to creative activities that are of personal interest and so he will have much more enthusiasm in everything that he does. The «tyranny of the paycheck» will no longer exist as a coercive force.
The condition of technological post-work characteristic of the new civilization will bring about a transcendental paradigm shift from the crass economic materialism of the modern world to a new aristocratic ethos of virtue and human flourishing. The new species of man will value art and erudition and take advantage of his condition of freedom for the cultivation of his own excellence and the exercise of his own creative power. Humanity will no longer be merely a pitiable herd of servile and thoughtless homines laborantes who only seek to «earn a living» in a soulless rat race like the wretched «modern man». The great aristocratic values of antiquity which elevate the human being and promote the most sublime genius will be revived on a universal scale and a great part of society will undergo a process of relative aristocratization. Gone will be the days of the weak modern «pseudo-virtues» of industriousness (i.e., servility) and self-abnegation. The world will usher in a new «Promethean Renaissance» of cultural splendor. The artist, not the toiling proletarian, will be deified as the ideal model of man.
2. Context and Philosophy
None of the traditional ideologies will ever be able to establish a worthier human society. The false right-left dichotomy which characterizes the political landscape of our time is nothing more than an illusory hologram which limits the scope of thought of its naïve followers with its narrow range of prefabricated viewpoints and its overly simplistic dialogues and embroils everyone in the most mindless tribalisms with its intentional promotion of hostilities and its petty mudslinging. We are presented with the same trite debates with regard to labor and capital or wages and productivity but the system of capital-labor-exploitation itself is never questioned. Each side frames its own viewpoint as an undisputable moral cause and proceeds to demonize all of those who do not share their one vision of the world, a mindset of «us versus them» which only leads to the most irrational «groupthink» and destroys all possibility of any kind of heterodox innovations. Current political notions become an unnecessary hindrance.
Capitalism and socialism are merely two facets of the same dystopian spirit despite their apparent antagonism. Both of them were born out of the same current of modern materialist thought and only serve to recast the whole of society into a nauseating beehive of relentless industry and reduce the greater part of people into the same unvarying robotic worker bee under the guise of «progress». Both ideologies promote a false illusion of «freedom». Bourgeois liberalism is based upon the «freedom» to exploit labor without restrictions or to consent to servitude in the context of the «free market», effectively constituting a social order of indirect coercion with pseudo-libertarian façades. The socialists envision the «freedom» of every man to work in their infamous «worker's paradise» without the oppression of a class society. Both ideologies extol the notion of work itself as a sacred idol. Conservative politicians never stop talking about the need to find a solution to the widespread unemployment and restore full employment despite the growing obsolescence of human labor. Their leftist rivals propose the implementation of a government program of universal full-time employment in the name of «equality». Neither one of these dystopianisms could ever imagine a new society of technological post-work or true individual freedom or an authentic humanist ethos distinct from their own dehumanizing economic materialism.
Our Promethean Eutopianism entails a much deeper and more eclectic way of thinking and emphasizes the need to transcend the rigid and artificial schemes of thought of the modern capitalist-socialist paradigm. It proposes a bold heterodox combining of certain classical and premodern ideas and other futuristic and postmodern visions, which will constitute an intricate blending of the best elements of all of the ages up until now. We intend to merge the ancient model of aristocracy or rule of the best with the new ideal of post-globalist political localism and thereby transcend the unjust plutocracy and the overwhelming oligarchic dominion characteristic of the modern world. We desire to resurrect the noble classical attitude of anti-work and the concomitant positive valuation of leisure and cultivation of personal excellence and combine them with the futurological concept of liberation from drudgery through deliberate automation. We envision a revival of the most sublime humanism of the time of the Renaissance in conjunction with a new philosophical focus of creative individuality and elevation of art in the wake of technological post-scarcity. Our global vision is that of a unique synthesis of the aristocratic spirit of the past and the avant-garde idea of a post-capitalist resource-based economy.
The capitalist system with its inherent desire to accumulate more capital and intensify its exploitation of labor for the unlimited maximization of profit has undoubtedly been the cause of much social upheaval and untold misery since its inception despite its contentious claim to be the greatest driving force of human advancement and the only «rational» economic model. Since its forcible acquisition of vast common lands and its progressive privatization of resources, the capitalist class sought to turn all men and other living beings into sources of profit within their society of imposed morbid hyperactivity and funnel the most of the wealth into their own hands. The have-nots—those with neither capital nor land—were forced to accept the conditions of their new masters and sell their labor in exchange for a meager wage. For many, daily life would become little more than a cold and wretched struggle for monetary subsistence in an industrial dystopia in the face of the extreme commodification of all aspects of human life and the ruthless competition to which everybody was now subjected. The same condition of coercive wage slavery remains in force throughout the whole world to this day.
The dissatisfied proletarians and the socialist and anarchist types are correct in their will to rebel against the system which exploits them. Their instinct to fight for their own freedom is rather worthy of admiration and reminds us of the great rebellious zeal of the legendary hero Spartacus who refused to submit to a life of servitude. They are without doubt infinitely more natural and vigorous than the despicable gelding-man of our time who accepts his existence of relentless industry and cruel stultification without contention and even justifies it with hackneyed platitudes that the society of his masters has taught him. However, the stark reality that we must not forget is that the vast majority of those unenlightened plebeians lack any kind of true nobility or genuine Eutopian vision and therefore do not have the faintest idea of how to design a superior society. They will easily be led astray by the dystopian ideals of the rabble-rousers and the pseudo-philosophers of the left who wish to drag all men down to the ranks of the proletariat and erect a new homogenous society of forced egalitarian mediocrity. It is for this reason that we require a well-directed «neo-aristocratic» revolution instead of another poorly orchestrated socialist-egalitarian regression.
Only the aristocratic spirit has the nobility and the enlightenment to conceive a more Eutopian civilization. The task of designing the future of our species requires the wisdom of those types of learned men gifted with a certain sensibility way beyond the ordinary and must never be left in the hands of the vulgar cretins of socialist ideas. Neo-aristocracies comprised of our noble philosophers of worthier Renaissance ideas are necessary for the encouragement of all kinds of cultural excellence and the guidance of society towards a positive direction. They will be in charge of establishing new Promethean values that favor the most majestic creativity and generalized human flourishing and running simple communitarian economies that seek to supply human needs directly. Strong neo-aristocratic leaders are indispensable for the protection of our free communities from bourgeois scoundrels who only wish to enslave everyone for their own gain and the socialist and anarchist types who are determined to impose their own vision of banausic proletarian tribalism or otherwise sow chaos and plunge the world into the most brutish primitivism. The true aristocrat possesses a noble and paternal nature and feels compelled to care for his people. The modern ideal of «progress» or a socialist revolution will never create a more evolved world; authentic humanistic evolution of our species will only be possible upon a firmly aristocratic foundation.
The aristocratic societies of the past despised work. They saw it as nothing more than an unfortunate source of suffering and a necessary evil to be reduced to an absolute minimum. The strange modern notion of the «dignity of work» simply did not exist in the collective psyche of the great civilizations of the classical world. Ancient men were far too honest to entertain such nonsense. The position of the classical philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato could not be any further from the mindless exaltation of industriousness on the part of the various depraved ideologues of the modern age. They instead valued leisure as a necessary element for the cultivation of virtue and the development of an eudaimonic life and understood that banausia or hard toil, on the other hand, only exhausts the mind and the body and obstructs the development of reason and individual excellence. The truth is that the aristocratic vision of life and the concept of technological post-work intrinsic to our conceived RBE have a great deal in common regardless of how unconnected that may seem at first sight. It is not an exaggeration to say that the two ideas go hand in hand. I hypothesize that if high technology had been developed within the context of an aristocratic society rather than in a bourgeois and capitalist (i.e., liberal) one the various communities would have automated the bulk of their productive operations and thereby liberated their population from any kind of drudgery. Ancient men would have happily abolished the need for work to the extent possible through automated systems.
We regard commerce (in the sense of the dog-eat-dog business setting of the capitalist market) as an ignoble and contemptible practice despite it being an almost cultish object of worship in today's bourgeois world. The commercial attitude is contrary to the idea of a simple economy aimed at the direct supply of the needs of the community and only becomes a hindrance and a source of inefficiency once a condition of post-scarcity has become achievable. The bourgeois-merchant type has always been an ignoble exploiter who only pursues the increase of his own material wealth at the expense of everybody else. His greed for profit knows no bounds and his thirst for exploitation is insatiable. The bourgeois-merchant type is a heinous «herder of men»; his commercialization of all aspects of life requires the castration and the diminution of the greater part of human beings into the same servile and banausic gelding-man for the inordinate material enrichment of the few. Usufructuarianism and communitywide shared abundance are fundamentally antithetical to this avaricious bourgeois-commercial spirit. These more noble approaches aim to supply human needs in the most efficient way without any external factor (i.e., the profit motive) and facilitate the material enrichment of the whole community. If a resource exists in abundance (e.g., food, housing, energy) it will be distributed to whomever needs it free of charge. Such a practice would be unthinkable for the selfish bourgeois-merchant type who only wishes to commodify anything and everything and sell it for a private return (that scoundrel would rather destroy unprofitable excess food than give it away to the poor freely). In truth, commerce is counterproductive in a technologically advanced society; a system of universal common access is infinitely more beneficial for the majority of the population.
Defenders of capitalism present their ideology as the ultimate representation of «individualism». They assert the «right» of the individual to pursue his own self-interest regardless of the interests and needs of any wider community and denounce any kind of cooperative spirit as a form of «collectivism» hostile to the dignity of the individual. However, to those with discernment, the popular dichotomy of individualism-collectivism which these cretins of little intellectual depth promote proves to be glaringly simplistic and even somewhat laughable. The supposed «individualism» of bourgeois liberalism in reality has nothing to do with any kind of authentic individuality but rather only serves to atomize all individuals of a community and force them to become the same unvarying economic automaton in the pervasive capitalist market for the interests of the hegemonic class. All of those without capital inevitably end up being assimilated into the same lifestyle of relentless industry compelled by a system of economic tyranny. Only our heterodox vision of a post-capitalist RBE favors authentic individuality as its ideal of technological post-scarcity and its usufructuarian ethos serve to liberate everybody from any condition of economic servitude and allow each individual to pursue his own artistic and intellectual passions without being prisoner of the need for a salary. Communitarian cohesion is necessary for the preservation of true individual freedom.
The advantages of a post-capitalist RBE society are evident and undeniable by any objective standard.
First, its system of universal common access and its usufructuarian ethos will result in a greater level of material abundance for most people and the subsequent elimination of any kind of poverty. Unfortunately, under the current capitalist system which is based on the hoarding and the commercialization of resources for profit, almost all of the population is forced to submit to an exhausting workweek of 40 hours or even more just to be able to purchase access to their most basic needs such as foodstuffs, water, housing, energy and healthcare and even then many working people fail to achieve complete access to all of these. Under our envisioned communitarian economic model of direct supply, on the other hand, everybody will have complete access to food, clean drinking water, a house, a personal plot of land, energy, internet and medication on an unconditional basis or perhaps with the very reasonable condition of a small contribution of about five hours of work in the non-automatable productive operations of his respective community or in some community project. Nobody will suffer hunger or homelessness just because they do not have enough money.
Second, its condition of technological post-work achieved through across-the-board automation will foster a new culture of greater leisure and unrivalled individual freedom. Liberated from the woe of the need for employment, the people of the new civilization will be fully able to dedicate themselves to their true interests and pursue their own dreams and live their own way. They will no longer be forced to submit to the whims of an employer or perform actions that go against their own principles just for a meager wage. Every individual will have ample opportunity to cultivate their most excellent talents and lead a life of personal eudaimonia. The whole world will witness a great increase of artistic and intellectual creativity and a far-reaching explosion of cultural excellence. This humanistic and truly libertarian vision could not be any further from the wretched beehive of constant toil and unnatural self-denial which characterizes the capitalist society of today.
Third, its social arrangement of intelligent cooperation instead of fierce competition for resources will inevitably give birth to a more communitarian spirit that is infinitely more conducive to the healthy development of individuals and the societies to which they belong. Unlike pseudo-individualistic bourgeois society in which human life is degraded to an absurd rat race for economic prosperity and we are encouraged to view others only as means to selfish ends, our new communities will be based upon a sense of authentic respect for all human beings and other sentient creatures. Human relations will be built upon a foundation of sincerity instead of only the pursuit of personal benefit and a willingness to betray. People will be more disposed to help one and another and share their knowledge and their personal talents. There will no longer exist that despairful mindset of paranoia and distrust produced by fear of scarcity and a dehumanizing hypercompetitive environment. Human beings will be regarded as ends in themselves.
It should already be quite clear that the post-capitalist RBE society which we propose would be decisively superior to the capitalist dystopia of extreme dulotism and pathological neuroticism in which we have found ourselves throughout the last two centuries. I leave these words of wisdom expressed herein for the succeeding generations who may hold the ability to understand them.
It is important to note that our Eutopian vision of usufructuarianism and technological post-work is not based solely on the modern notion of utilitarianism or «the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people» but more specifically on our noble ideal of the formation of a higher model of man. What we desire to cultivate is a new human species of greater godlikeness and truly Promethean qualities to transcend the servile and thoughtless herd of naturalized banausic slaves of our present age of spiritual decadence. Our dream is the relative aristocratization of humanity. Men who are aristocratic by nature—those who are born with great gifts for leadership and philosophy and an unusual nobility of character—will be chosen as the foremost representatives of the various local neo-aristocracies and the leaders and legislators of their own respective autofundium. Souls of the greatest excellence are those who are destined to rule. Men who are semi-aristocratizable will take advantage of their new condition of abundant post-work leisure for the development of their varied creative faculties and the forging of themselves into more complete individuals. They too will contribute to the creation of a superior artistic and intellectual culture in a new era of widespread enlightenment. Even mediocre men will see their condition improved. Those ordinary souls with neither artistic brilliance nor intellectual inclination will at least enjoy a new way of life of greater adventure and recreation without being subjected to a long work schedule of continuous stultification. In the end, aristocratism will become the normative societal ideal and the Promethean spirit will be reborn in a new fertile ground of human excellence.
The new world which we envision will be considerably pluricentric and localistic. Many autofundia based on RBE principles will be dotted throughout the land and in some cases political confederations will connect various individual autofundia and constitute regional governments. There will be cultural and linguistic zones instead of countries and nation states. The free movement of people between all of the different zones will be permitted. I would like to mention that not everybody will live in the autofundist communities (i.e., the civilized world) nor will they be forced to participate in a RBE system if they do not wish to do so. Some people will choose to inhabit certain regions of the «outer wilderness» and form there their own independent communities based on whatever principles they choose. Perhaps they will lead a primitive life of hunting and gathering or construct their own tribal villages on the plains and in the woodlands. We have no interest in forcing everybody to be a member of our form of civilization. May every person do whatever he wants. I deem that this political arrangement will facilitate the maximum degree of freedom and please various groups of people. The aristocratic types and lovers of high civilization will happily receive our Eutopian vision drawn by its noble Renaissance spirit. The utilitarians and some of the more reasonable socialists will also support it due to its economy of technological post-scarcity and universal common access and its usufructuarian ethos. Finally, even the anarchist types will be able to find satisfaction in the proposal knowing that they will be allowed to form their own anarchic societies in the «outer wilderness» free from any kind of systemic coercion. I confess that I feel some degree of admiration for the anarchist types. Their spirit of rebelliousness and their readiness to fight against the oppressive norms of bourgeois society are considerably more worthy than the attitude of voluntary submission of the typical «modern man». The only ones who will not benefit from this political arrangement are the capitalist types who only seek to monopolize resources and subject everybody else to their own system of ruthless exploitation.
History has taught us that nothing in this world ever remains the same. The spirit of the epoch changes, societies go through great metamorphoses and political and economic systems evolve. Every few centuries there is an overarching paradigm shift. The directionality of the evolution of our civilization depends largely upon our own collective consciousness. Our societies can evolve in a positive direction becoming more harmonious and more conducive to human wellbeing or they can degenerate in a negative direction suffering great increases of decadence and becoming more dystopian. I propose that the adoption of a new post-capitalist RBE system will mark a definitive point of divergence from the present dystopian tide and usher in a new dawn of illuminating Promethean values and universal human prosperity. New economies will be designed in order to satisfy of human needs directly rather than human beings only existing in order to satisfy the needs of an absurd economy. Arrangements of communitywide shared abundance will replace the cutthroat competition and the extreme economic inequality of the present capitalist dystopia and a policy of positive automation will serve to liberate humanity from the current stultifying laboral culture and give rise to a new form of existence based on personal freedom and eudaimonia. I foresee that this kind of Eutopian economic model will be established in a future time of severe crisis when the global economic system is on the verge of collapse and more people have become aware of its unsustainability in the long term. I also predict that the first RBEs will emerge in the various countries of the Mediterranean world which presently find themselves almost in bankruptcy under the present world banking system. Perhaps the Mediterranean race will once again be the guiding light of a new era of unequalled human advancement as it was in the age of the Renaissance.
3. Resource-Based Economy: Topics of Discussion
Our proposal for the founding of a more Eutopian futuristic society deviates radically from both the existing status quo and all of the conventional alternative ideologies. Not only does it present a strong objection to modern liberalism but it also transcends the central notions of other currents of political thought such as proletarian socialism, fascism and anarchism, effectively constituting an authentic heterodox way. Therefore, it is only natural that many people express certain doubts with regard to the nature and the feasibility of the concept. In this subsection I will attempt to clarify some of your doubts and explain in brief our position pertaining to certain matters.
1. Supposed similarities with other ideologies: Isn't a RBE system essentially the same as communism (Marxism-Leninism)?
Many people who are accustomed to the ethical vision of liberalism which predominates in a great part of the Western world will display certain skepticism against our principle of common access and our usufructuarian ethos as opposed to the current system of private property and commerce. They will inevitably associate them with the nefarious communist ideologies which took hold of the various countries of Eastern Europe and a great part of Asia since the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. However, our envisioned RBE system differs fundamentally from any kind of communist ideology in multiple important aspects and has nothing to do with the philosophical writings of Karl Marx or any other communist thinker.
First, our futurological vision favors political localism and the self-rule of independent communities with its system of autofundia and is opposed to the highly centralized forms of government preferred by communist parties. We expect every community to reach its own autarchic condition and be governed by its own localized governing council without the interference of any pervasive central state.
Second, our futurological vision proposes the minimization of human labor through its programs of across-the-board automation and outright condemns the pathetic glorification of hard toil and proletarian life by the various communist ideologues. We consider that the condition of relentless industry to which modern man is subjected is nothing more than a shocking disgrace and a total waste of human life. We desire to liberate all living beings from the oppression of drudgery and establish in its place a new culture of maximum leisure and individual freedom. This ideal of anti-work finds its inspiration not in modern leftist thought but rather in the premodern aristocratic worldview.
2. The problem of «laziness»: In the absence of any system of monetary reward won't people lack motivation to act?
Money is not really a very good source of incentive for action. A regular wage only becomes necessary when it comes to monotonous and tiresome tasks and in the context of a situation of systemic coercion (i.e., the need for a monetary income in order to survive) such as the one which we see today. Generally human beings are considerably motivated to act even without any monetary reward when it comes to the things that truly arouse our passion. How many people spend countless hours dedicating themselves to their own artistic pursuits or various volunteering projects without receiving a dime?
In a RBE system, the greater part of productive operations will be automated by inanimate machines and the workweek will be reduced to a mere fraction of what it is right now. People will be free to pursue their own dreams and dedicate themselves only to activities that they like. Everybody will have emancipated themselves from the obligation to seek a regular wage (which in reality serves to coerce the have-nots into dedicating themselves to things that they don't really want to do). There will always be interesting community projects. Many people will happily contribute their own knowledge and labor on a voluntary basis for the development of their own town or city. The volunteers will be willing to collaborate with much enthusiasm because they will be able to choose in which projects they would like to participate and with what kind of schedule they would like to work and enjoy for the first time a social arrangement free from economic tyranny. The idea that everybody would simply spend each day loafing around in the absence of the proverbial economic «carrot and stick» is nothing more than a baseless bourgeois lie. Most people wish to act in some way or another either with or without a monetary reward.
Besides, what society commonly denominates «laziness» is more accurately a natural and rational response to an absurd economic system which forces people to spend most of their waking hours performing some mind-numbing and degrading task that would totally bore anyone of sound mind. An indolent disposition is in most cases a simple byproduct of an unnatural way of life centered around imposed morbid hyperactivity and indirect coercion. It is ironic that work itself is the cause of a great deal of so-called «laziness». This problem will only disappear once its source has been abolished.
3. The abolition of work through automation: But isn't it true that every man must earn a living?
The idea that every man must «earn a living» through relentless industry which deeply pervades the collective consciousness of the modern world is merely an artificial moralistic notion which emerged out of the Protestant religious thought of the 16th century and was popularized in the following centuries with the arrival of the bourgeois industrial spirit. It did not exist at all in the classical world during the height of its magnificence. Ancient men were considerably more honest than the depraved modern moralists: they admitted that work only degrades man and always sought to minimize it. We the neo-aristocrats also recognize the humiliating nature of work and reject as absurd any notion of its «dignity». We do not care about the fictitious moral rules of the rigged game of the present capitalist masters.
In our envisioned world, the dehumanizing assumption that man only has value when he contributes something of utility to an alien economic system and thereby justifies his own right to exist will be purged in its totality and a new truly humanistic ethos will take root according to which economies should exist only as a means for the satisfaction of the needs of human beings without any external condition. We intend to transvaluate this dystopian value of the servilization of man into a new Promethean value of human sovereignty. Our approach is purely pragmatic and totally devoid of any kind of strange moralistic sentiment: we only seek to reduce or eliminate any kind of drudgery through the technological advancements of our age and thereby develop a new post-work culture focused exclusively upon human wellbeing.
4. The possession of wealth: Isn't capitalism a fair system because it allows for the most hard-working to own more?
In a RBE system, public commons and a widespread usufructuarian ethos will remove the need to buy and hoard various goods for private use since anybody will be able to borrow everything they need on a temporary basis in a new social arrangement of communitywide shared abundance. The whole community will become a lot wealthier in the material sense for a lot less individual effort. This innovative order of intelligent cooperation and common access will surely prove to be much more efficient in the greater context.
It is important to note that the desire itself to own more for only oneself as a symbol of higher status is merely a subjective cultural concept which results from a long process of social conditioning within a highly specific cultural context. Each year billions of dollars are spent in the advertising industry for the purpose of convincing consumers of the supposed utility of thousands of totally useless and superfluous products. In reality most people are not that materialistic by nature. The new culture will value first and foremost the utility of products. The trend of defining oneself by what one owns will be forgotten. People will be judged by their individual creativity and their nobility of character.
5. The human instinct: Aren't human beings competitive and greedy by nature?
The truth is that, in contrast to the bourgeois claim of the inherent absolute selfishness of man, the vast majority of human beings tend towards mutual cooperation in times of relative abundance and only become competitive and greedy in periods when vital resources are scarce. Our natural cooperative spirit was what allowed us to survive long ago when our ancestors lived from hunting and gathering and relied upon their tribal community. The same instinct to share with our fellow man and help the most needy among us still remains alive in our primal psyche despite many years of the teaching that «greed is good».
Bourgeois liberalism is an anomaly. A small minority of insatiably avaricious sociopaths have taken it upon themselves to rewrite history and recast forcibly the whole of society in their own image and likeness. The capitalist businessmen have turned human existence into little more than an inhuman rat race for basic subsistence by means of their artificial system of private property and their extreme commercialization of practically all resources. They have created a situation in which they are able to take advantage of the desperation of the multitude of have-nots and exploit them ruthlessly for the funneling of the greater part of wealth into their own hands. Their conviction that human beings are competitive and greedy by nature is merely a projection of their own twisted thought.
In a RBE system, the principle of common access and the usufractuarian ethos would serve to remove this cutthroat mindset and restore a healthier cooperative spirit among people. The dysfunctional sociopathic types would fall to the bottom tiers of society where they belong.
6. Localized governing councils: Aren't these a form of dictatorship in which the most influential are able to make important decisions that affect the rest of society by virtue of their greater power?
That kind of system already exists in the present capitalist order. It manifests itself as an infamous plutocracy in which the wealthiest are able to leverage their enormous fortune to exert influence over others and refashion various aspects of society for their own selfish ends. Those who have the most money tend to have the final say. In our envisioned world, on the other hand, the wisest philosophers will make important decisions following a defined process of rational deliberation unhindered by any external distraction such as money. Reason and scientific thinking will be the primary means of decision making.
7. The feasibility of a RBE: Wouldn't such a utopian vision be impossible?
The cynical naysayers are willing to dismiss our proposed RBE system as nothing more than a ridiculous pipe dream despite never having considered it with much earnestness. The defenders of the status quo wish to make us believe that there could never be any other economic arrangement that could function other than their own as though capitalism were already the final apex of social evolution. However, even a brief observation of the general trends of the new century will reveal that many of the requirements for the establishment of our desired form of post-capitalist economy are already being fulfilled.
First, the many technological advancements since the middle of the last century have served to generate hitherto unprecedented levels of material abundance and it is not an exaggeration to say that a condition of realizable technological post-scarcity is on the horizon. It is already technically possible to produce a great deal of goods with such volume that they could be supplied to everyone free of charge in the fashion of a «gift economy». The current market system is only becoming an unwanted inconvenience. In a RBE system we would simply continue with this observable trend of ephemeralization this time in a new context of common access and usufructuarianism.
Second, the acceleration of automation in practically all of the sectors of the economy is bringing an end to many forms of employment and giving rise to a new condition of generalized «technological unemployment». The machines are already able to perform the greater part of productive operations with a level of efficiency much higher than that of any human being. Human labor is becoming increasingly obsolete in the face of the productive superiority of automated systems. Despite this society at large remains in a state of denial with regard to the situation. To this day many politicians do not stop talking about the supposed need to «create more work» as though that were the only thinkable option. But «technological unemployment» only continues to increase. In a RBE system we would simply welcome this undeniable trend. We would happily allow the automation of the bulk of productive operations (along with the abolition of all superfluous non-productive forms of work) in order to establish a new culture of technological post-work.
To these we may add the more humanitarian mode of thought and the collective desire for a more conscious world of the new generation. Ever more people are beginning to question the common dogmas of the existing paradigm.
Our proposed RBE system is already technically feasible. Indeed, we would have already initiated the shift to this type of more evolved society if only we lived in a more rational world. The real problem is that a small number of oligarchies of great influence have monopolized the important means of production along with the greater part of the planetary resources and we remain imprisoned by their artificial monetary system and their coercive economic arrangement. Those forces obstruct our evolution towards a superior order of technological post-scarcity and individual freedom with the insistent prolongation of their own anti-economy of hoarding and commerce aimed only at the pursuit of private return. The installation of our envisioned RBE communities will only be possible once the current hegemonic order has been dismantled.
8. The capitalist argument: Hasn't capitalism been a great driver of human advancement?
In my opinion, capitalism has been rather inefficient if we take into account the fact that this kind of economy has already been in existence for more than two centuries, not to mention the great havoc which its more dystopian aspects have wreaked upon human life. The truth is that throughout the first 150 years or so of its history its supposed «progress» was rather slow and everyday life would hardly improve at all for ordinary people (in many regards it became much worse with the dreadful urban conditions and the growing economic inequality). It was only under late capitalism in the second half of the 20th century that we began to see authentic improvements in the quality of life and that is almost wholly due to recent technological advancements, the same development which ironically renders the capitalist system obsolete. I would venture to say that the centrally controlled economies of fascistic states tend to be considerably superior to the «free market», but I digress.
Defenders of capitalism tend to take for granted that their preferred economic model is the only driver of human advancement and that all of the technological advancements of the modern age would not have been possible if it were not for their sanctified «free market». However, how do they know this? Isn't their claim merely an unprovable assumption? Perhaps capitalism is not the only possible path towards a high-tech society. Perhaps there are various other evolutionary courses that may unfold under other historical conditions or have already unfolded in other faraway worlds where life has reached the Sapiens stage of its evolution. In what direction would our civilization have evolved if the classical world had not fallen? How would the typical economic arrangement have been if another kind of rulership had risen to prominence since the Enlightenment? How might the evolutionary courses of the economies of the infinite advanced extraterrestrial civilizations that populate the universe have been? In this reality of infinite possibilities capitalism will not be the only path. Anyway, the system is now becoming increasingly obsolete and dysfunctional and it is certain that there will be multiple better options in our century.
9. The transition to a RBE system: How will we establish it?
The topic of the method of transition to a RBE system is perhaps the most complicated of all. I do not have a single tangible solution. I can only offer some hypotheses and probable scenarios.
Shift of consciousness on a societal level: A significant part of the population begins to distrust the world monetary system and capitalism itself and perceive the absolute obsolescence of the current socio-economic order. This scenario may occur in a future time of severe crisis in which unemployment and economic inequality reach a new height and increasingly more cases of shameful corruption on the part of the reigning authorities come to light. In that moment many people cry out for a more viable alternative and our philosophers and supporters make a great effort to popularize this new paradigm. After achieving a substantial shift of consciousness, many people collaborate at a grassroots level to erect new systems of common and usufructuarianism in their respective communities. We create our own local RBE systems which make the current market system obsolete. We form alliances and political confederations with other communities of this kind and take measures to export our heterodox model to other regions of the planet. This scenario entails a bottom-up approach and an emergent and organic evolution.
Revolution by force: While our ideal method of transition would be a rather peaceful paradigm shift in a post-collapse situation, we must take into account that all important social changes thus far have involved a violent struggle and that the current power elite will likely do everything possible to preserve its own power. It would be naïve to believe that the capitalist class would simply assent to our attempts to establish a post-capitalist system based on communitywide shared abundance. It would readily resort to violence in order to suppress any kind of «insurgency» against the status quo. With this approach, first we present our socio-economic model as an alternative to both capitalism and socialism and seek to expand our support base. Once this is large enough, we form local revolutionary armies and coordinate an armed rebellion against the reigning corporatocracy. We take possession of the vast resources and the means of production which the corporate elites have hoarded for so long and use them for the formation of our own RBE communities. The capitalist class has always made use of violence for the subjection of others. Perhaps we also must adopt violent means in order to liberate ourselves from their system of economic tyranny.
Rogue state: A national government rebels against the world monetary system and leads the establishment of the first RBE society. It creates a condition of autarchy and converts its existing public infrastructure into public means of production for the creation of new communitarian economies with the help of our supporters. Then similar developments emerge in other countries and we seek to form international alliances and political confederations. At present there are various countries which are on the verge of bankruptcy due to the collosal debts which they supposedly owe to the central banks. Among them stands out the Mediterranean nation of Greece. The central banks which represent the global power elite demand the surrender of a large part of the public infrastructure of those countries in the event of nonpayment of debts. If the national governments do not accept their ultimatum they threaten them with expulsion from the world monetary system. In my opinion, it would be better if the anti-system elements of those governments opted not to pay the fraudulent debts and to expel those criminal banking cartels (an act of defiance which would imply the preservation of all of their public infrastructure). After liberating itself from the predatory world monetary system, the rogue state could establish its own heterodox economic arrangement and become the pioneering agent of a new paradigm shift on a global scale. This scenario entails a top-down approach and an interventionist and directed evolution.
10. Citizenship and residence: What if I am not satisfied with my current community and wish to move to another one?
In our new world there will be a high degree of freedom of movement. Each person will have the right to request a transfer to another autofundium (town, district, city, cultural zone) if he so desires provided that there are available places (every habitat has its own natural carrying capacity). Sometimes there will be some kind of waiting list for the most popular locations and each individual community will state its own requirements for new residents (e.g., mastery of the local language, knowledge of the local customs, etc.). Each person will also have the freedom to leave civilization and choose to lead a more primitive life in the «outer wilderness» if he so desires.
Some will surely ask: But won't everybody wish to move to some «groovy» location such as Los Angeles or New York? Not necessarily. One must bear in mind that for each person who wishes to come to live in a particular city there will be an urban resident who cannot stand urban life and wishes to move away to somewhere else. The truth is that now many people are motivated to live in one of the large metropoles only by the need to seek a source of income within the current monetary system and would happily relocate to the countryside if they had the opportunity. I conceive that with the arrival of a RBE system the world will witness a great return to nature as the greater part of human beings choose to live in rural areas, homely towns and smaller cities.
11. Scientific research: How will scientific and technological advancements be stimulated in a RBE system?
A plurality of public «non-profit corporations» (NPCs) distinct from the profit-seeking corporate companies of the current capitalist dystopia will recruit the foremost experts and undertake all kinds of projects of scientific, technological and medical research not for the pursuit of profit nor for market share but solely for the collective benefit of the human species. The best people will come together and collaborate in new lines of investigation not for a regular wage nor out of obligation but rather because of an earnest desire to discover new scientific advancements and contribute to human knowledge. All participation will be on a voluntary basis. Each researcher will dedicate himself to the fields that impassion him.
Under this new order science will be free from the corrupting influence of money. All projects will be decided by the wisest philosophers of the governing councils in conjunction with the input of the public following a great deal of deliberation. Research will no longer depend upon the funding of small groups of private investors motivated almost exclusively by the prospect of profit. Some non-profit corporations will contribute to the development of innovative automative technologies, new sources of renewable energy and new methods of construction. Others will strive to further medicine, surgery, genetic engineering and much more. There will also be programs of space exploration, international laboratories for the investigation of quantum physics and other projects of cutting-edge science.
12. Restaurants, coffee shops, bars and other commercial establishments: What will become of these kinds of services in a RBE system?
In the current society many people go to these kinds of venues and pay in order to consume exotic meals and drinks prepared by an expert chef or bartender. There even exist theme-based venues which allow us to experience the national delights of a particular country such as Chinese restaurants, German beerhouses and French winebars. Some will ask: How will it be possible to enjoy these things in a post-commercial world?
First one must ask himself why these kinds of businesses exist in the first place. In many cases the answer is convenience. In this capitalist society of constant hyperactivity many people are always excessively busy with their overwhelming work schedule and therefore prefer to seek a quick and ready-made solution in every instance. They stop by at a coffee shop to take a ready-made coffee before arriving at the company, go to a restaurant to eat with their coworkers during break and then attempt to relax at one of their preferred bars after a long day of toil. If we really think about it, this culture of specialized services which characterizes modern life only exists because of this so frantic pace of life.
In a post-work society machines will take care of the greater part of productive operations and everybody will enjoy a lot more leisure time. It is no longer necessary to seek the greatest convenience and moments of escapism at every opportunity. Those who wish to relish Chinese food will be able to learn how to make it themselves either in a self-taught format through the internet or with some cooking club in their neighborhood. Self-reliance and multi-skilledness will be the norm in the new civilization. Each individual will learn a wide variety of things from childhood and into adulthood. Many people will share their knowledge with others in community seminars. There will no longer be so much dependence upon specialists for everything. Many aspects of life will be a lot different in a RBE system.
13. Sport, music and cinema: How will these artistic pursuits evolve in a RBE system?
Those of you who are familiar with my other philosophical writings will know that I give great importance to art in all of its manifestations. Art is what truly elevates the human being and gives meaning to this life. In our new society, local and regional governments will do everything in their power to support the many artistic activities and promote cultural excellence.
There will still be official leagues for elite sport throughout the whole world. These will be regulated by official bodies comprised of veterans and other experts. The athletes will participate because of their desire to compete and their great love for their respective discipline. They will not do it for a monetary reward. This detail will be considerably beneficial in the long run. It will mean that only the most passionate athletes will appear in competitions and that there will no longer be cases of washed-out MMA fighters and other competitors who continue to compete and risk head trauma and other serious health problems just because they need a paycheck. Sport will be for glory and love. Local governments will organize also many amateur sporting events for regular people.
Certain renowned non-profit corporations will direct spectacular musical and cinematographic productions that include the best artists and actors. These with their concerted efforts and their elite technical expertise will ensure the highest level of quality in music and cinema. Musician and filmmakers will strive to create great masterpieces not for box-office receipts but rather in order to achieve the greatest artistic perfection. We will no longer see thousands of sloppy movies made only to pander to an uncultured public and make a profit in the easiest way possible. The world will witness a new renaissance of musical and cinematographic excellence. Many regular people will also make their own home-made musical, cinematographic and theatrical productions and publish them through various public channels on the internet. The best will become famous.
Here we conceive a rather interesting dynamic: the state protects the creative industries and promotes individual creative freedom at the same time, a situation which was rather common in the classical world.
14. Crime and punishment: How will we deal with offenders in a RBE system?
There will be an extremely low crime rate in a RBE system due to the principle of common access and the usufructuarian ethos. Everybody will be able to obtain everything they need free of charge from the public dispensary of their respective community and borrow a wide variety of goods from one of the public commons and therefore no kind of theft will be necessary to survive. Moreover, this new social arrangement of intelligent cooperation instead of the cutthroat competition of the present dystopia will serve to reduce the neurotic behaviors of society and increase the level of consciousness of the greater part of people.
Nevertheless, it would be naïve to think that all kinds of crime would simply vanish into oblivion with the arrival of a RBE as though the world had become a perfect utopia. After all, we are human beings and often we allow ourselves to be guided by our emotions and primitive instincts instead of reason. There will still be cases of murders motivated by envy or passion or some personal dispute. There will still be acts of juvenile mischief that end up going too far (boys will be boys). We will have to design social systems to deal with the various kinds of crime.
Public order will be maintained by groups of volunteers who will alternate as policing agents. This set of public officials will be few in number and their policing schedules will be light due to the paucity of crime in the RBE system and the libertarian policy which will decriminalize all acts that do not result in harm to others. Repeat offenders of trivial misdemeanors will be condemned to forced labor for a duration dependent upon the seriousness of the offenses. This punishment will serve as a strong deterrent against recidivism since our ethos regards menial work as a source of humiliation. Serious criminals who pose a threat to society will be banished to penal colonies located in certain regions of the «outer wilderness» and monstrous serial killers and child abusers will be executed by guillotine following a formal trial.
15. Love affairs and marriage in a RBE system
It is most likely that the dynamic of love affairs and marriage will change considerably in a post-capitalist society of common access and usufructuarianism. The absence of money as a medium of exchange and a requirement for survival will have in my opinion a positive influence on interaction between both sexes. People will no longer marry for such superficial and selfish reasons as economic prosperity and the prospect of a large inheritance but rather solely out of an authentic spiritual bond and a sense of mutual admiration. There will no longer be external coercive forces in the search for a partner.
With neither money nor private property personal improvement will be the only way to attract a partner of high quality. Men and women who sculpt their bodies through programs of physical training, cultivate their various artistic talents, achieve great things within their respective community and refine their own spirit will be considered the most attractive. It will no longer be enough to own an awesome sportscar and a beautiful house with a private pool to get a trophy wife. Physical and spiritual excellence will be the sole criterion for sexual value.
I consider that this kind of situation is not only more natural but also more conducive to eugenic breeding. Unfortunately, under capitalism, many people of a dysgenic constitution (e.g., obese, ugly and wimpy men) are able to get an attractive wife merely by virtue of holding an executive position in an important company and a large amount of purchasing power. Inferior specimens manage to elevate themselves artificially through their pathetic fiction of money and their servile disposition which is their only «virtue». In a RBE system only true physical fitness, real accomplishments, charm and human quality will be of value.
Some will ask how mediocre men will be able to date in a post-monetary society. I believe that their concern is valid since there is already a considerably high level of male involuntary celibacy throughout the modern industrialized world. I theorize that much of the mediocrity with regard to sexual value has its cause in the dysfunction of this present society which has become highly unnatural in many aspects. Many men and women do not have the free time to keep themselves in shape or develop their bodies due to their enslaving work schedule. Many men and women suffer from multiple neuroses because of this modern way of life of extreme hyperactivity and end up in social isolation because of their inability to fit into this excessively materialistic culture. There are very few involuntary celibates in tribal and premodern societies. Besides, people with bad genetics will be able to benefit from gene therapy in the near future and that will be available to anybody who needs it in a RBE community.
4. Reflections and Comparisons
In the 20th century, the world saw the consolidation of three distinct ideological ways: 1) Democratic liberalism, which defends a «free market» economy, private property rights, bourgeois values and representative democracy and is represented primarily by Anglophone nations such as the United Kingdom and the United States of America; 2) Socialism-communism, a set of anti-liberal ideologies which advocate revolution of the working classes, government administration of the means of production, economic equality and social justice and have as historical landmarks the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China; 3) Fascism-nazism, an anti-democratic and anti-communist political movement which is characterized by totalitarian state corporatism, a centrally controlled economy, militarism and ultranationalism and is typified in Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany. Although democratic liberalism managed to establish itself as the hegemonic ideology of the post-war world, these three opposing currents persist to this day and have their ideological proponents. However, I contest that all of these ideological ways include at their foundation dystopian elements which only stultify and debase the human being (a banausicizing pro-work ideology, anti-intellectualism and anti-individuality) and inhibit true human freedom despite their various pretensions to «progress» and «liberation».
Democratic liberalism constitutes a bourgeois ideology focused solely upon the maximization of profit for the capitalist class. It mindlessly extols business and therefore «busyness» (eternal industriousness). It transforms the greater part of men into the same beggar of work through systemic coercion and «market forces» and denounces any kind of «idleness» as a moral failure. The liberal spirit is totally anti-intellectual despite its empty lip service with regard to the importance of education. Only technical knowledge and professional qualifications are valued. Art and true erudition are disregarded. People are taught only that which is necessary so that they may function as an efficient economic automaton. Even the «freedom» of «liberalism» is glaringly false. It denotes nothing more than the privilege of unbridled indulgence of the wealthiest of society. All others find themselves subjected to the authority of an employer and to the tyranny of capital. Their fictitious democratic rights are no good to them.
Socialism-communism is even more work-obsessed than democratic liberalism despite its mission to emancipate the proletariat from its ruthless exploitation at the hands of the bourgeoisie. It glorifies proletarian banausia as its loftiest ideal. It envisions a «workers' paradise» in which every man receives the «blessings» of a government program of universal full-time employment in the name of «equality» (participation in such a program is never optional). The socialist-communist spirit is characterized by an almost medieval obscurantism. It imposes a single state ideology which may not be questioned. It outlaws various lines of investigation which contradict its official vision labelling them as «bourgeois pseudo-science» and limits art to a mere tool of propaganda. Socialist-communist morality is at its foundation an extremely pathetic form of mass «groupthink». Everybody is forced to support the same materialist worldview and the same proletarian values. All dissidents will be demonized as «class enemies».
Fascism-nazism has for its slogan «work, family, fatherland». This supposed third way also seeks to reduce all human beings to another cog within its pervasive state corporatism. At first sight, the fascist movements may seem more noble than the avaricious bourgeois spirit and the mediocritizing socialist-communist proletarianism with its ideals of «fatherland» and «Volksgemeinschaft» (people's community), but it soon becomes apparent that many fascist ideologues are also staunch defenders of endless servitude. The fascist spirit promotes irrationalism and widespread vulgarianism. It idealizes the sentiments and over-simplification. It wishes to maintain the people in a state of ignorance and as unenlightened workhorses. Fascist societies subordinate the individual to the will of a monolithic collective and, in the same vein as socialism-communism, enforce a variety of mass «groupthink» this time based upon the identity of the ethnic or national community. They deny their citizens their civil liberties and coerce them to adopt a standardized way of life. They impose a single religious ideology tied to their nationalism. They make dissidents into a scapegoat upon which to pour their belligerence (this may serve to unite society against a «common enemy»).
Right-libertarianism* purports to be a fourth way and a representative of authentic economic and personal freedom. However, this strange ideology which emerged in the middle of the 20th century merely constitutes a defense of the bourgeois liberalism of the first way and a justification of big business and unlimited corporate power. It is nothing heterodox or revolutionary. Right-libertarianism defends the current arrangement of private property, monopolism of resources and systemic coercion. It supports with great enthusiasm the same condition of servitude for a wage which proves to be without doubt the greatest enemy of true individual freedom (not some abstract «state» or any other right-libertarian boogeyman). It proposes to retain an extremely reduced state despite its position of anti-statism so that it may enforce the artificial property laws of the hegemonic class and serve as a means for the suppression of rebels (most proponents of this ideology are minarchists rather than anarchists). In reality, a self-styled «libertarian» is nothing more than a conservative who does drugs and bangs hookers. His vision of «freedom» is nothing more than an unrestricted playground for the super rich.
*Right-libertarianism refers to a pro-capitalist ideology which appeared in the United States in the 1940s and usurped the existing term «libertarian» for its own cause. Previously in European countries, particularly in France, «libertarian» referred to an anti-authoritarian who advocates individual freedom and social justice (social equality and mutual aid), i.e., a social anarchist. Throughout this article when I say «libertarian» I am referring simply to the tendency to favor individual freedom and not to right-libertarianism which is at its foundation a glaringly pseudo-libertarian vision.
Our concept of a post-capitalist RBE system based on common access and usufructuarianism forms a separate current which is imbued with a truly Eutopian spirit and embodies true humanism. It constitutes an authentic heterodox way which transcends the multiple dystopianisms of the modern world. Our neo-aristocratic vision rejects any notion of the «dignity of work» as total folly. It proposes instead a deliberate effort to minimize labor through across-the-board automation and thereby achieve an emancipation of all men from the greatest evil and source of oppression that exists in human society. It advocates a simple communitarian economy that is designed to supply human needs directly with an absolute minimum of human effort. Machines will become the new slave class. Our humanist philosophy places emphasis on the true intellectual and cultural development of the human being. It recognizes art as the greatest source of meaning in this life and actively promotes its creation. It aims for a «Promethean Renaissance» of human excellence. Our envisioned system is without doubt the one which allows for the greatest degree of individual freedom. One will be free from any kind of economic coercion due to the condition of technological post-work and the principle of common access. One will be free from any kind of state coercion due to the legislative minimalism of the localized governing councils. One will be free from any kind of familial coercion since he will no longer depend upon any patriarch or matriarch or owner of the home with greater economic power and will easily be able to establish his own independence in the event of a conflict of ideas thanks to the communitywide unufructuarian system. This is the face of a truly libertarian society.
Some theorists propose some kind of mixed arrangement in order to remedy the failures of late capitalism. They advocate the introduction of an innovative policy of «universal basic income» within the framework of the present system with the purpose of tackling the problem of growing unemployment in our rapidly changing technological society and eliminating the bulk of unnecessary poverty. This measure would serve to liberate many people from the looming threat of destitution and the present condition of systemic coercion. Everybody would enjoy a greater degree of economic security and personal freedom. Nevertheless, while this proposal would be a step in a more positive direction it would not solve any of the greater problems of this dystopian society in which we live. The whole world would remain prisoner of the will of the global banks and the corporate monopolies. We would continue to be ruled by their corrupt governments and poisoned by their food products laden with toxic chemicals. Their economy of consumerism would continue with its squandering of finite resources only for profit. If some day politicians and economists decide to implement this kind of reform it will undoubtedly be with the intention of preventing any kind of popular uprising motivated by hunger and desperation and holding on to their own position of power. They don't really care about the needs of people. A policy of «universal basic income» would only be a patch-up solution and even a factor conducive to the prolongation of the present dystopia. In my opinion, transition to a post-capitalist RBE system would be the best option.
A RBE of intelligent cooperation, common access, usufructuarianism and technological post-work, based on the scientific method and focused solely on the direct supply of the needs of each community, would be a form of civilization characteristic of an infinitely more enlightened humanity. The present capitalism and any one of its conventional ideological rivals are nothing more than conditions of barbarism. If we begin to think at a more cosmic level, it should be obvious that the more evolved races of this vast universe—those which have already managed to undertake interstellar voyages across enormous distances or even manipulate space-time itself—will have already designed economic systems of universal abundance and liberated themselves from any kind of drudgery through their awe-inspiring technological advancements. It would be absurd to think that the most advanced extraterrestrial beings would waste time competing fiercely among themselves for resources that can already be produced in superabundance or spend their days doing ridiculous «jobs» for an income. Those are only things of the bumpkin humans of this planet which without doubt finds itself in one of the darkest backwaters of the galaxy. This present system of irrational hoarding and stultifying economic servitude is already a great hindrance to any kind of authentic human advancement. Our civilization will not be able to reach any higher stage of its evolution until we transcend the dystopian ideologies of today and develop a system that is much more cooperative, harmonious, scientific and focused on human beings.
Addendum: Miscellaneous Thoughts
1. With this article I intend to outline a personal Eutopian vision which transcends the limits of the illusory dichotomy of capitalism-socialism and puts forth heterodox ideas with regard to how the most farsighted men may design a better society for all of humanity. A «Eutopia» refers to a conceptual model of a new form of civilization that is designed for the maximization of human fulfillment and that, unlike a fanciful and unachievable «utopia», bases itself on the scientific method and is feasible in accordance with the technological capabilities and the logistical constraints of its time. My Eutopian vision consists of a unique synthesis of so-called «neo-aristocratism»—a restoration of the premodern humanist and aretegenic values typified in the ages of classical antiquity and the Renaissance and the creation of a form of society and governance founded on them—and of an innovative post-capitalist resource-based economy (RBE) characterized by technological post-scarcity, intelligent cooperation, liberatory automation and communitywide shared abundance. While the concept of a RBE is not an original idea and there already exist various groups which have outlined its principles and advocate its establishment, as far as I know, no other author has ever attempted to synthesize it with a classical or Renaissance ethos or infuse it with a deeper humanist sense. Many of the existing RBE projects such as the Zeitgeist Movement, for example, are too mechanistic for my liking, basing themselves almost solely on the modern ideal of utilitarianism. They lack a more developed philosophical direction. I myself, on the other hand, join the concept with my own neo-aristocratic philosophy and place emphasis on the development of human excellence or the relative aristocratization of humanity in the wake of the attainment of technological post-scarcity.
2. I turned away from the great circus of the political landscape many years ago. Following some foolish runnings with various leftist ideologies and then with right-libertarianism I realized that none of the mainstream political currents are able to offer any real solution to the many problems of this world or create a society that is more conducive to human wellbeing and I became a «post-political» thinker. As the post-left anarchist Bob Black writes in his classic work «The Abolition of Work», unions and management agree that we ought to sell the time of our lives for survival, although the haggle over the price. Politics of the right-left kind only serve to limit our thought with their hackneyed and simplistic platitudes and keep us in a highly reduced bandwidth. Only the scientific method and the intelligent application of technology will be able to give rise to a more Eutopian level of civilization. Upon perceiving this, I gave up all of my previous political prejudices and began to take interest in the various futurological proposals and the concept of post-scarcity. From there I adopted the ideal of «Eutopianism»—the quest for the formation of a more evolved society directed by science and technology—as opposed to established political notions and outlandish utopianisms.
3. Now I say with regard to conventional politics: I am not a believer of capitalism because I do not want to be a corporate slave nor am I a believer of communism because I do not want to be a proletarian.
4. And what about anarchism? The truth is that I have considerable respect for some anarchist currents and their proponents despite my own aristocratism. I admire their love for individual freedom and their willingness to fight against oppressive authority. I laud their opposition to both the system of economic coercion of bourgeois society and the mindless praise of work of Marxist ideologues and their rejection of the various moralisms which only serve to servilize man and deprive him of his individuality. The anarchist type longs to be his own master and refuses to submit to the draconian demands of oppressors. In this regard he is a lot more natural and vigorous than the typical modern man of the herd who is content to be a miserable economic slave of the capitalist class and a passive follower of a dystopia of total stultification. The anarchic spirit is a thousand times preferable to the banausic servitude of so-called «liberalism».
5. Nevertheless, anarchism lacks constructive organization and aretegeny and is unable to bring about a superior civilization. Anarchic societies can only achieve rather low levels of development and are never conducive to the creation of art and high culture. Indeed, many anarchists openly oppose civilization itself and advocate a return to a non-civilized life. I myself am a lover of superior civilization such as that of the classical world and subsequently that of the Renaissance and I recognize that a truly aristocratic society is indispensable for the genesis of any kind of human excellence. It is solely for this reason that I cannot be an anarchist in full and I identify instead with the aristocratic spirit despite my own semi-anarchic instincts. Often we are able to respect the will and the intentions of others without going as far as to support their conclusions.
6. A component of the aristocratic spirit is nobility. Nobility is closely connected with the yearning to improve the condition of humanity and strive to forge nature into something better, something more conducive to human eudaimonia, an instinct which embodies the fundamental essence of the concept of «civilization». In this regard the noble being is always inclined towards idealism. The ignoble being, on the other hand,—and this is very typical of the bourgeois liberal—, is given over only to the pursuit of personal gain within the framework of his present condition and lacks any kind of Eutopian ideals or higher transcendence. His only goal is to survive and pursue economic prosperity. He is guided only by the most insipid realism. The bourgeois liberal only seeks his daily bread in his meaningless rat race without any concern for the general wellbeing of society. The anarcho-primitivist only seeks to subsist through hunting and horticulture in his world of uncivilization. Only the man of aristocratic instincts longs for the elevation of the human being, the creation of art as an end in itself, liberation from the asperities of life and the pursuit of all kinds of supreme excellence. This is born precisely out of his loftiest idealism.
7. Many anarchist types will oppose any notion of aristocratic civilization because they loathe the tendency towards exploitation of class societies. It is no secret that almost all of the aristocratic civilizations of antiquity divided their population into freemen and bonded serfs and enjoyed a substantial amount of slave labor, although in many cases the slavery of the classical world was considerably more lenient than the wage-based employment of modern capitalism. However, that time has passed. Now we live in a high-tech world. Our proposal to automate the bulk of the productive operations of civilization beginning with the monotonous and boring tasks and then do away with all of the non-productive and superfluous jobs of the present money-based society will serve to eliminate the need for human exploitation and thereby build a new form of aristocratic civilization free of any kind of slavery. We will utilize the superior technology of our age to overcome the oppressive aspects of an aristocratically organized society and create a social order that is freer for everybody.
8. Let us not forget that anarchism and socialism in their modern political sense emerged as a radical reaction to the ruthless exploitation of the proletariat at the hands of the bourgeois class. Capitalism itself was the progenitor of these revolutionary currents. Many people found themselves forced to join such movements due to the ever crueler yoke which the bourgeois class was hanging around their neck. It was necessary for their collective survival. There is no need for anarchism and socialism in a society with little exploitation and coercion. They are both simply a response to a deeply sick and dystopian state of civilization. In our RBE system of technological post-work and true libertarianism, anarchism will only exist as an optional way of life; those who prefer a primitive and non-civilized existence will be free to enjoy such a life in the «outer wilderness» which will exist between our neo-aristocratic autofundia.
9. A power structure such as a state or a governing council is necessary for the protection of true individual freedom. This is another honest criticism of anarchism. A governing body with legislative authority and military power is able to establish laws that guarantee the civil liberties of its citizens and make use of police or military intervention in the event that some hostile or tyrannical entity attempts to encroach upon a recognized right of another. In anarchic societies, on the other hand, the strongest are often able to coerce the weakest with impunity by virtue of their superior force and the destiny of dependants always lies in the hands of some patriarch or matriarch without any guarantee of their civil liberties. Paradoxically, a state based on highly libertarian principles (decriminalization of all victimless «crimes», legislative minimalism, an anti-coercive ethos, etc.) is freer than anarchism. Only draconian governments that seek to reinforce the exploitation and coercion of people for the benefit of a hegemonic class such as those of capitalist and socialist societies are incompatible with the libertarian spirit (anarchists are correct in their opposition to the present oppressive states).
10. Excessive moralism exists primarily in highly coercive societies in which a servile and self-abnegating disposition is conducive to or even indispensable for social and economic survival. In capitalist societies, for example, the greater part of people are forced to adopt certain behaviors and attitudes and even certain beliefs if they wish to maintain their livelihood and get ahead in the pervasive capitalist market, hence intolerant bourgeois morality. There is no recognition of the true desires of the individual. If society regards «sexual deviation» as a taboo, for example, homosexual and transsexual people will suffer a great deal of repression even at the hands of their own family and few will dare to lead that kind of lifestyle in public (if they manifest those tendencies they will not be able to find work in the «free market»), and likewise, if society is opposed to the use of psychedelic drugs then many psychonauts will find themselves pressured to abstain from such substances out of fear of losing their source of income. Economic coercion also translates into a plethora of anti-libertarian pruderies.
11. However, in a non-coercive society such as the one which we envision, people are no longer forced to conform to the arbitrary moralisms of a class of tyrants and a more libertarian ethos prevails. Under our RBE system of technological post-work and universal common access (i.e., without any economic coercion), a great number of homosexuals and transsexuals would leave the closet and live as they please knowing that they are not going to lose their access to resources just because of their sexual orientation (people do not depend on employment in a RBE society) and all psychonauts would openly take psilocybin and speak about their psychedelic experiences given that they are no longer beholden to the whimsical rules of an employer. In the absence of any economic penalization for these actions, it is most likely that most people will adopt a more relaxed attitude towards them and society by and large will shed its baseless moralistic notions and become progressively more libertarian.
12. Besides, the pluralism of governments and the free movement between communities and regions will serve to maximize the freedom of the individual. If somebody does not feel free or content in his current autofundium for whatever reason he will easily be able to request a transfer to one of the many other RBE systems where they do things differently. He will not have to worry about not finding a source of income thanks to the cooperative arrangement of common access to resources. Neither will he have to worry about housing since he will be able to occupy a house of his new autofundium on a usufructuary basis. Needless to say, this kind of system would be a lot freer than the present capitalist society in which almost everybody is subjected to «market forces» and the moralistic sensitivities of their so-called «superiors».
13. Human beings are communitarian beings despite all of the endless vindication of the «selfish man» on the part of bourgeois ideologues. Absolute individualism is nothing more than a myth detached from reality. We tend to feel more at ease in a community setting. We are inclined by nature to cooperation and collaboration with others. That is not really surprising given that our most primeval ancestors came together in tribal groups and faced the hostile elements of nature looking after one and another. It is precisely to this cooperative instinct that we owe our survival as a species throughout the millennia. When these community structures are lacking human societies begin to develop a myriad of neuroses and social dysfunctions.
14. The most capitalistic and hypercompetitive societies tend to be the most dystopian and neurotic despite their frequent pretension to «progress». They are plagued by high levels of paranoia and antisociality and a glaring lack of empathy and social cohesion. These in turn beget countless instances of depression, social alienation, alcoholism, substance abuse and violent behaviors. This is very much the case in Anglophone countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States. Societies of a greater cooperative spirit and social cohesion, on the other hand, tend to be a lot more conducive to human wellbeing and display considerably less instances of the neuroses mentioned above despite their lower level of material wealth. A strong sense of community is highly important for the healthy development of human beings.
15. I am of the opinion that entheogens such as Ayahuasca and psilocybin are able to serve to increase the level of empathy and prosociality among human beings and thereby encourage a cooperative spirit. These ancestral substances reconnect us with our natural instincts and allow us to experience a wonderful sensation of interconnectedness with all other living beings. They fill us with love for our fellow man and make this modern way of life of total egoism and ruthless competition seem absurd. It is not an exaggeration to say that entheogens are catalysts of the awakening of our higher consciousness (there will be a reason why they are forbidden by the majority of present governments despite their low level of toxicity and their relative harmlessness). In my own version of a RBE society entheogens such as Ayahuasca and psilocybin not only will be legal but they will also be promoted for their sensitizing power and their medicinal uses. There will be here and there places of cultivation and spiritual retreats for the taking of these ancestral substances.
16. In the novels of Aldous Huxley we find a clear contrast with regard to the use of mind-altering substances. In the utopian society of Pala of «Island» the moksha medicine, a fictitious entheogen similar to psilocybin, is ingested in order to achieve enlightenment and self-discovery while in the dystopian society of «Brave New World» narcotics are used in order to pacify and control the masses. The dystopian society of today outlaws entheogens and therefore psychedelic experiences yet at the same time promotes alcohol and tobacco and various other kinds of addictive substances.
17. It is undeniable that relentless work, an object of worship and an inescapable obligation in any modern dystopia, only makes people stupid and ignorant. It exhausts the mind and the body, deprives its victims of their time, destroys all enthusiasm for creative pursuits and personal development and subverts any expression of true individuality. Many of those affected by this obvious yet rarely acknowledged social evil only long to lay back on the sofa in front of the television set and seek out the easiest forms of escapism after a day of that mind-numbing abuse. Relentless work only generates a kind of «laziness» and listlessness in a large part of the population. Far from the unending mindless praises of its supposed «dignity», the modern work life is totally degrading and meaningless and leads to the nihilization of life. It should be evident that human labor is a necessary evil to be reduced to an absolute minimum as ancient men considered it.
18. The defenders of the present system will always claim that this way of life of constant toil is somehow necessary for «progress». Those cretins will speak of the «blessings» of modern civilization such as HD televisions and killer drones ad nauseum. However, their argument is fallacious. These days the greater part of productive operations can be substantially automated thanks to new technological innovations and the notion of human labor is becoming increasingly obsolete, hence the high rates of «technological unemployment» which exist in many modern industrialized societies. There is no reason for people to continue to work a 40 hour workweek as they do at present. But supposing that their argument were valid and that this level of civilization really did require this much human sacrifice day after day, in that case perhaps their notion of «progress», which is at its foundation simply a subjective valuation despite its pretension to «objectivity», would not really be worth it. A more simple life would be a better aspiration if our focus is the maximization of human wellbeing. But I am speaking in hypothetical terms. We already know that the current scope of automation has the capacity to minimize the need for human labor considerably.
19. The modern notion of «progress» is rather illusory. These days everybody has a smartphone and a tablet device but very few people can afford to buy a home and many people do not even have access to healthy food (most commercial products contain toxic chemicals). As if that were not enough, a large amount of human beings find themselves constantly stressed because of the excessive demands of their meaningless «jobs» and suffer severely from depression, anxiety, social alienation and work-induced alcoholism. What «progress»!
20. Most office slaves do not support the notion of work precisely for the modern ideal of «progress», however. Their thought turns out to be a lot more perverse. They are cognizant that they suffer due to their monotonous work life and they want all others to suffer as much as they do. What is more, those naturalized slaves have built a morality founded on suffering according to which only those who suffer may be considered «worthy», hence their vitriolic contempt for «slackers» and the «unemployed». We on the other hand do not fall for their pathetic moralism and pettiness. We do not desire universalized suffering. What we seek is the liberation of the whole of humanity from any condition of dehumanizing servitude through the full technological automation of the productive operations of civilization and the subsequent introduction of a new post-work way of life.
21. Ancient aristocratic societies tended to despise merchants (in many regards the historical forerunners of the bourgeois class) and praise instead noblemen, philosophers, artists, warriors and farmers. Why did they hold a negative image of commerce and people who enriched themselves through its practice? It is possible that they were conscious of the detrimental consequences of an economy dominated by those ignoble scoundrels (i.e., based only on the pursuit of profit and the ruthless exploitation of others) and that they sought to prevent its establishment in their world. Ancient men valued civic responsibility and simple economies aimed at the direct supply of the needs of the community.
22. What is the place of religion and spirituality in our envisioned RBE system? We support religious freedom as part of our libertarian ethos. Each religious, esoteric or philosophical community will be allowed to exist in our societies with the only condition that do not disturb public order or promote subversive activities. Troublemakers will be expelled to the «outer wilderness». We value the contribution of people of diverse religious and esoteric backgrounds. Maybe many individuals of a spiritual inclination will find themselves drawn to our Eutopian principles due to their sense of transcendence and their superior idealism. By the way, I dislike the materialist-mechanistic ideological position of the Zeitgeist Movement and its foremost representative Peter Joseph. I believe that his anti-spiritual opinions have no relevance with regard to the fundamental objectives of the movement and only serve to alienate many religious or spiritual people on whose support we could count.
23. I foresee that the kind of society which we propose will emerge first in the Mediterranean world rather than in the Anglophone nations. I deem that the various nations of the South of Europe such as Spain, Italy and Greece are the most suitable seedbed for the birth of a new form of civilization based on our principles. First, the collective psyche of the Mediterranean race is very different from that of Anglo-Saxon societies. The peoples of the South of Europe are the descendants of a much older cultural tradition and as such are characterized by a more elevated psychic maturity. They give great importance to community and social cohesion and know how to value human wellbeing. Capitalism with its extreme egoism, its material greed and its praise of laboral ergomania is extremely foreign to the Mediterranean ethnic spirit. These peoples who are more communitarian and bons vivants by nature will be more receptive to the idea of a RBE society. Second, the various Mediterranean nations enjoy a considerably high level of public infrastructure despite not being as materially wealthy and politically influential as Anglophone societies. It would be relatively easy to establish RBE systems with that degree of resources and technology in conjunction with their more communitarian disposition. The Mediterranean race has been the originator of many great innovations of European civilization such as the republics of the classical world and then in a later age the Renaissance which revived classical wisdom. Perhaps it will be from this same extraordinary people that the next phase of human civilization will emerge in the form of our envisioned Eutopia.
24. I ask you to look beyond the prefabricated viewpoints and the limiting beliefs of this present dystopian society and consider other heterodox ideas for the building of a better future. Never limit the scope of your own thoughts. Capitalism is becoming increasingly obsolete and dysfunctional. Socialism has no solution to the problems of humanity. Both are empty and anachronistic ideologies which do not reflect the present times. None of them are able to create a worthier world. What we need is another more relevant way. We propose this Eutopian vision of technological post-scarcity and human flourishing. We believe optimistically in the possibility of a future of light and prosperity.