The post Autogestió: adventures into the new economies of Catalonia appeared first on P2P Foundation.

Abstract

“Libre-currency proposes a self-issuance, or co-creation of units by the people of the monetary system for the people. Calculated on a mathematical equation with three variables: number of human members alive, their average lifespan and monetary mass, it ensures symmetry on space and time. As no material value is absolute in space and time, Libre-currency is rooted on our unique common value among humans on Earth: being alive on Earth!

Symmetry in space: at a time T, everyone wherever he is, co-creates its part of money at the same amount. Symmetry in time: an old generation could not co-issue more than the next, and the next more than the former. Therefore it’s sustainable as it’s valuable for everyone everywhere; no one can deprive others even next generations. Respect, innocuity and sovereignty are embedded in the DNA of Libre-currency, as every human member is an equal co-creator of the currency, independently of its production, unconditionally of its status. People are co-producing their universal dividend because they are humans alive. Organizations can also be part of the monetary system but they aren’t co-issuing units, only trading.

As Bitcoin, Libre-currency algorithm generates monetary units. But unlike data mining, here algorithm relies on the three variables; unlike proof-of-work, it’s people’s proof-of-life that determines recurrent and periodical creation of units (per day, week, month…). Thus each human member’s wallet increases evenly according to the universal dividend co-created. Then members, human or organizations, can use their units to sell and buy among them as any currency. A blockchain ledger records either recurrent issuances or transactions exchanges.

According to experimentations, issuing money with Libre-currency creates favourable conditions to behave toward social changes and sustainability, as it’s intrinsically fair, abundant, transparent and decentralised. People are responsible, equal and free, and Libre-currency insures durability and reliability.

Moreover each monetary community self-manages its Libre-currency. The only needs are a way to regularly validate that people are alive meaning having a “proof-of-life” mechanism (e.g. through web-of-trust-certification process) and a Libre-currency-algorithm-blockchain. Yet Libre-currency is only solving monetary issuance, other mechanisms have to be set by the members (prices, taxes, finances, marketplaces…).”

Find the full article here.

Photo by Ratchanee @ Gatoon

The post Essay of the Day: Libre-Currency for Sustainable Social Change appeared first on P2P Foundation.

In their own words:

“Bancor protocol is an initiative of the Bprotocol Foundation, a nonprofit organization based in Zug, Switzerland. The Bancor protocol enables anyone to create a new type of cryptocurrency called a smart token, which can hold (and trade) other cryptocurrencies. This allows the smart token’s contract to serve as its own market maker, automatically discovering its own price(s) and providing liquidity to other currencies, thereby removing the need for a second party in cryptocurrency trades. Every smart token is always liquid at some price point.”

But does such crypto-capitalism solve any of our fundamental social and environmental problems?

James Quilligan doesn’t think so, and explained why in a Facebook thread:

“This project looks to me to be on firm ground when it comes to tracking the relative value of commodity currencies. It appears to be determining value mostly outside of the world’s sovereign, political monetary systems and HURRAH for that. Time will tell if this new Bancor is a genuine monetary tool; but in the meantime it is well-situated to being a very *useful guidepost for arbitraging in mainstream commodities markets* — but wait! isn’t that what this new Bancor is (theoretically) determined to prevent? What’s happened to the purported independent valuation which is set apart, uncontaminated from the conventional economy? Or is this just another scheme based on generating surplus value?

What’s happening now in the field of crypto-currencies is that blockchain technologies are becoming increasingly disruptive by staking a bigger claim to citizen/consumer access and representative use-value than the Central Banks of sovereign nation-states. Wow! No contest! Argument conceded! This is why blockchain is indeed the future. HOWEVER, precisely because blockchain is so potentially disruptive to the political status quo and has no international support from the Central Banks, it is bound to remain more of a financial product than a monetary product, at least until the present monetary system breaks down in a geopolitical crisis and a new one is created, which is the emerging reality. (And by the way, Central Banks are actively discussing getting their hands on blockchain technology and using it to devise this new international monetary system under a new sovereign banner.) When this happens, will the new Bancor be a player at the table? Or will the new Bancor survive this chaos purely as a financial investment scheme? Or even survive at all? I’m not optimistic on any of these counts – and here’s why.)

Let’s not forget, Keynes’ Bancor stemmed from his proposal for an International Clearing Union, which adjusted the trade imbalances between sovereign states on an annual basis. Keynes’ Bancor (had it been realized) would have expressed a monetary value between sovereign states that reflected the financial adjustments between those nations with fiscal surpluses and those with fiscal deficits. This was necessary, Keynes believed, so that all people would be guaranteed adequate purchasing capacity to meet their everyday needs, much in the spirit of the commons (except that Keynes conflated human need with effective demand.) Is that what this new Bancor has in mind? Not at all. So it’s quite misleading when these new Bancor folks take Keynes’ terminology, then style it as a monetary device which evolves out of his thinking.

Don’t get me wrong, I am the world’s biggest critic of all things sovereign. The Era of Sovereignty has wrecked the world in every way possible. If world society doesn’t soon evolve beyond sovereign states, the ecosystems of the planet will be in major collapse. This is why I’m fully supportive of initiatives that are aimed at creating independent value on a decentralized basis. Indeed so. Yet supporters of blockchain have yet to see the Duality that they are creating in attempting to supplant the centralized, international monetary system with their own centralized, technologically sovereign system. Is this what we really want, another world founded on Technological Sovereignty? Have the Blockchainers actually discovered a new kind of metaphysical value? Uh, no: it’s just the latest version of ‘supply creates its own demand’, detaching society further away from an ecologically-based and more equitable society.

The key to making this transition is devolving real monetary power to decentralized political entities, whether that means citizens, or their participatory decision-making units, in order to increase the purchasing capacity and meet the needs of all citizens. Is that what this new Bancor has in mind? No sign of that at all.

When the new Bancor joins or creates an International Confederation of Commons, with metrics for currency value that are based on both the availability and sustainability of the world’s resources in meeting the needs of everyone, now and in the future.

Let me be clear: commodities markets are not a proxy for either the commons or for meeting human need. The sustainable economic measure of human need is the resources that are directly available to a population within a given ecosystem, not in a given market. When I see those metrics on sustainable value emerge from this Bancor group, I will be persuaded that it understands the political and ecological circumstances necessary for creating decentralized monetary power beyond commodity value differentials. And on that day, I will acknowledge that Bancor’s tool has lasting monetary value, rather than simple financial value. Until then, every time I hear the word BANCOR, it will trigger in my brain the classic meme from the Who, “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.:

The post James Quilligan on why the Bancor protocol does not solve any fundamental problem appeared first on P2P Foundation.