A Post Capitalism World: Demonetization Of Everything

Jafar

It may anger/upset people, but actually Star Fleet is a little like communism; there appears to be little to no private property and there are no monetary funds anymore, humanity progresses as one unit albeit there's a command structure, an hierarchy, but that's something I've thought is necessary due to the human nature. Yet it's skill and ability which is determining what one does in the Star Trek universe and not wealth and possessions, since there are none.

For thousands of years, before the invention of agriculture, human lived in Socialist like society. No private property everything collectively owned by the group (clan). They do however fight each others (tribal wars) over possession of area / land needed for hunting and gathering. This is still prevalent to some society today.. (ie Native American tribes, Andaman island tribes, polynesian tribes etc..)
Thus it is 'nothing new' for human..

Even after the invention of agriculture, some group, at some point in time managed to form such socialist society.
An example is "Early Israelites" where land / area were collective owned by tribes, there were no King and only Judges to settle conflict between individual and/or tribes... (ref Bible)

Greetings and peace, all group

Nanotechnology in particular has a strong possibility of making money obsolete. If there aren't sufficient jobs, how can money function? Not everyone can be an artist. No construction, manufacturing, mining, recycling, waste collection/processing, energy production, farming, or medical jobs will be available. Gold and other "precious" metals won't be particularly scarce or precious either. Any space where living structure can be built will be important, but it is doubtful whether private property will be a concern when trillions of people need living space. Power will most likely be generated through geothermal energy--deep in the earth where it is too hot to live anyway. Another possibility is harnessing Brownian motion (a possibility for powering nanomachines) for power.

It will happened through combination of technological advancement...

The trend is apparent even today
A small example Things which requires so many space and >$10,000 is available now for everyone with less space and less than $100. What we have today in a handheld 'smart phone' replaced

TV set
Video Recorder
Walkman
Personal Computer
Phone Terminal
Pager
Photo Camera
Video Camera
GPS navigational device
Paper notebook
Your personal holy books (Bible, Quran, Torah what have you..)
Your latest novel to read..
etc..

And if all / majority of 'labor' are performed by machines, why would there be any need for "jobs"?
Every human will be "business owners" instead of workers..

Human did this in the past with "slaves".. another human being viewed as not a human being and can be owned and traded as if they are a 'property'. Which indeed caused problems from humanitarian perspective...
Machines / robots do not posed any problems from humanitarian perspective..

Real estate / space might be a concern due to it's limitation... yet human doesn't need much space anyway, except those who still maintained hunter and gatherer lifestyle. It's apparent today where most human are quite comfortable living in <100 sqm apartment and many cities has reached > 20 millions of population.

I'm concerned that technology may stagnate if people can't find a good enough reason to strive. For many, money provide that reason.

Interesting thought... but again for thousand of years money didn't even play any part in human life..
And with the advent of "digital currencies" people of today need to rethink or at least reform their perspective about 'money'.

With the absence of 'wealth / personal property seeking' as reason to strive my guess is human will (once again) found reason with their embedded motives of exploration and curiosity... Which has served well for many centuries in the past.. Exploration and curiosity was the main driver which makes human migrate and colonize (nearly) the entire planet earth.
What lies beyond the ocean? Oh there's another island there! Let's move there!

good_logic

Jafar,the system of money is deep rooted.
For example
Millions of pensioners(I am one of them now) draw our pension monthly . Millions of others are following behind all counting on this income to carry on the lifestyle dictated by society. If the "money system" is dismantled ,then a new way/system needs to accommodate these millions of people. How?

You also have the problem of "those who control the money systems" ,they will oppose any rebellion and a war will be inevitable. A long and nasty confrontation awaits such a revolution.

I cannot see the change happening in the next 100 years at least ,if ever.

Having said that, the individual holds the power, if only they realise and act simultaneously.
Although I am slowly "getting out of Babylon" ,I feel like a hypocrite sometimes because I draw my monthly salary and contribute to this system by spending it to help keep this system( paying bills, shopping...etc).

A vicious circle.
My deep instinct tells me "Get out of her" . If only I can! Help!!!!
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Jafar

Jafar,the system of money is deep rooted.
For example
Millions of pensioners(I am one of them now) draw our pension monthly . Millions of others are following behind all counting on this income to carry on the lifestyle dictated by society. If the "money system" is dismantled ,then a new way/system needs to accommodate these millions of people. How?

It is deeply rooted, and I never viewed money as evil or bad in the first place..

I think the invention of money is a 'genius'!
It stop people from stockpiling on things which are scarce and has real value..

In exchange they are stockpiling money which are available in abundance (basically unlimited) and has no real value..

Having said that, human (and also other mammals) have millenias of tradition of taking care of their dependent, the elderly, the handicapped, children etc..
Even before the invention of money, thus such tradition will not go away soon..
Much thanks to the embedded nature of 'empathy' within human specifically and all mammals generally..

You also have the problem of "those who control the money systems" ,they will oppose any rebellion and a war will be inevitable. A long and nasty confrontation awaits such a revolution.

Definitely...
And we are starting to witness the above as we speak...

With the advent of blockchain technology, mobile communication and digital currencies, the central banks backed by government or private institution who control the government (ie Federal Reserve in the US) are starting to wage their own 'confrontation' against the new form of currency which are controlled by 'the people'.

https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country_or_territory

The 'worst case' scenario of this invention will be the reduction of role of 'intermediaries' in traditional currency distribution systems. As traditional institution will be forced to adapt to the new reality or else they will be obsolete, gone and ceased to exist.

I cannot see the change happening in the next 100 years at least ,if ever.

It has started now, as we speak..

There will be 'shakedown' in economies system.. it just a matter of when...
It will be triggered by the fall of US Dollar, the (traditional) currency which act as the main pillar to the current system..

The discussion is now on what will happened after the 'shakedown'?
How the "Post Capitalism" world will look like?

SarahY

There will be 'shakedown' in economies system.. it just a matter of when...
It will be triggered by the fall of US Dollar, the (traditional) currency which act as the main pillar to the current system..

The discussion is now on what will happened after the 'shakedown'?
How the "Post Capitalism" world will look like?

I think people will try to revive capitalism in another form. Whether it'll be backing money to gold, cryptocurrencies or whatever.

Besides wouldn't some people be in a position of power and influence?? so will have an advantage.

Will people come together to make a difference? dunno doubt it. People are too uninformed (myself included) besides apparently our views can change if we feel we have no power to change things. i.e. might be against current banking but because I can't change it, just accept it as it is.

Anyway I would imagine more chaos because of greed and views of entitlement

imrankhawaja

because I can't change it, just accept it as it is.

bravo

my favourite way of thinking not only with crypto currencies or kinds of capital but also with life

we cant change our family group so accept it
we cant change our financial condition ( only in few cases a rich become poor or poor become rich) by using unfair means so basically we cant change our condition we can only inprove it a bit

example a person born in poor family and e works hard throughout his life and he only made a broken house with all his efforts thats his and 80% normals people achievemnet

but as soon he finished making his house the time period of his life almost finished
rotfl reality is he is stupid he must enjoy his life instead of making house the money he got make it useful becoz the house will b enjoying by somebody else why do such a effort for unreal purpose?

we cant change our nation/race so accept it
we cant change our religion so accpet it but with system (DEEN) its a matter of choice is it really?
we cant change anything at all apart from some illusional tricks what we think we are in control due to this we have to re-think our understanding regarding freewill

does freewill really exist or everything appear to us is a illusion by a master creator who make us think whatever we think ?

either way its a mystery lol

since then i started thinking about it the default fear what i inherited gone and i m relaxed also some of jaffar posts make me think with a neutral way

Jafar

I think people will try to revive capitalism in another form. Whether it'll be backing money to gold, cryptocurrencies or whatever.

Human like to control.
Ownership is a conception of 'control'.

Starting with 'land' (for hunting and foraging) thus they fight with each others in order to decide who will be eligible to control a piece of land needed to hunt and forage.
Then as agricultural revolution come in place, the concept extended to crops (wheat, rice, barley), goat, camel and cattle. Wealth during this period was decided by how many crops, goat, camel, cattle that you have and how large your control over land is, since money was not invented yet.

The majority episodes of the Bible is basically about a God who promised a piece of real estate (land) to be in control of a group of people, who claimed themselves as the chosen people (to control the land).

Then as trade flourishes, in order to make the trade easier, money was invented.
Money was then used as symbol of 'wealth' based on the belief that the money can be easily exchanged to land, crops, food or other needs.

The human tendency to control definitely will not go away.
Yet with the advent of technology the 'cost' to fulfill those needs will become much lower.

Printing Press has greatly demonetized the cost of "Holy Books". (Bible, Quran what have you, which used to cost 3-4 years of layman salary to buy)
The freely available Android OS has greatly demonetized the cost of a smart phone.
Apps of holy books has demonetized Holy Books into 0 (Zero) a.k.a Free.
Internet has greatly demonetized the cost of communication, education and information spreading.
Quantum communication (very soon) will further demonetized the cost of communication, education, information spreading and entertainment.
Hydrogen (very soon) will demonetized the cost of energy (replacing fossil fuel such as Oil or Coal)
Genetics and Farm Automation will demonetized the cost of food.
Artificial Intelligence and robot will demonetized the cost of labor.

The future world of 'abundance' will also transform the view and culture of society.
And if we study the history; This transformational change might creates conflict.
In the same manner as the advent of agriculture has created many conflicts in the past and entirely transform the human society. (Agriculture -> Ownership/Control -> Money)

Besides wouldn't some people be in a position of power and influence?? so will have an advantage.

Power and influence will be spread and not centralized among the very few.
Democratization has eroded the monopoly of power and influence from hereditary king or queen. (In the past they used to claim their authority is coming from heaven, deities / gods)
Wide spreading of holy books has eroded the monopoly of power and influence from priest, sheikh, habibs. (In the past they used to claim their authority is also coming from heaven, deities / gods)
Cryptocurrency has eroded the monopoly of currency issuance from central banks.

Anyway I would imagine more chaos because of greed and views of entitlement

Definitely, as changes comes, conflict usually arises.. as proven by history.

Makaveli

Problem with technological communism is that intermediary elements will still remain as the capital and the capital is always in the hands of capitalists i.e. the holders of capital if we apply Marxist terminology. An example of an intermediary capital is the Internet connection. Yes, the Android diminished price for smartphones yet you still have to pay for the Internet. Even if you use public wifi it is still paid by the corporate structure, which runs it. Capital was different at different times, once it was land (still is now), then currency, now it becomes an intellectual property. There is always something limited to the capital holders whereas other social classes are either deprived of it or contain a small portation of capital, not enough to lead a "free" lifestyle. Freedom in capital terms is usually percieved as lack of a debt and obligations and that is only possible without intermediary transactions, such as bonds or obligations, which create value before the commodity is even ready. So is with other types of capital, except real estate and the land, the latter is usually used for pawn operations.

Another problem is the fact that the technological utopianism is oriented towards creation heaven on Earth, with robots doing all the work, if perfected. I remember a famous experiment on the rats, which after few generations of an artificial careless life started eating themselves and eventually died out within the experiment.

Methaphysically speaking a person is always one way or the other confined. From the beggining he does not choose who to be or wish to be born altogether, or at least does not remember any of his outer experiences. There is always an intermediary between a person and his essence of existence, family, background, setting, traditions, God, you name it. Orthodox Christian postulate of the freedom of will seems horseshit this way.

Jafar

Problem with technological communism is that intermediary elements will still remain as the capital and the capital is always in the hands of capitalists i.e. the holders of capital if we apply Marxist terminology. An example of an intermediary capital is the Internet connection. Yes, the Android diminished price for smartphones yet you still have to pay for the Internet. Even if you use public wifi it is still paid by the corporate structure, which runs it.

Zooming in on Internet now and how it has been demonetized and decapitalized.

Internet or the exact term is TCP/IP protocol was made available in PUBLIC DOMAIN.
No patent, no ownership, everyone is free to implement it.

Which made it an instant success and adoption, putting proprietary / patented rivaling protocol such as IPX, SNA, SS7, RSCS to their early retirement and death. Now everything is carried by TCP/IP whether it's Audio / voice call, Video, Document or Financial Transaction.

TCP/IP is a capital, knowledge capital available for free in public domain. No license fee or patent required.
Everything that run on top of TCP/IP (Audio,Video,Document etc..) is relatively demonetized since no license or patent fee is required.

To convey the TCP/IP signal, a physical medium is still required, whether it's fiber optics or radio wave. There is a cost required to deploy and maintain those physical medium. Fiber optics might be cut and need to be repaired, radio transmitter the same thing. Thus your payment for internet at X Currency are required to maintain those physical medium plus profit for those who maintain those medium.

What if a physical medium is no longer required to convey the TCP/IP signal?
There is no need to maintain a physical medium, the cost will go down and your payment for internet will be near zero. You only need to pay for the cost of the end device. (your phone, laptop whatever)

That is what will happened very soon..
Thus further demonetize the fulfillment of human needs of communication / internet.

Freedom in capital terms is usually percieved as lack of a debt and obligations and that is only possible without intermediary transactions, such as bonds or obligations, which create value before the commodity is even ready. So is with other types of capital, except real estate and the land, the latter is usually used for pawn operations.

Bonds / Obligation is a matter of choice the other choice is to share the equity (ownership).
Bonds / obligations is not required to further develop the TCP/IP since it's equity has been shared to the entire world.

Having said that Direct peer to peer financing has also demonetized the "brokerage fee" for bonds / obligations.

Another problem is the fact that the technological utopianism is oriented towards creation heaven on Earth, with robots doing all the work, if perfected. I remember a famous experiment on the rats, which after few generations of an artificial careless life started eating themselves and eventually died out within the experiment.

Rats? Which experiment is that?

Having said that, Robots / Machines are great at doing repetitive works with 100% precision.
Driving taxi, manufacture a shoe / shirt etc..
But it's very very bad on innovation and creativity due to it's lack of ability to MAKE MISTAKES.
Mistakes is required to spur Innovation and Creativity.
Which only human can do.

Makaveli

Look up the Rat Paradise or the Rat Utopia experiment (Calhoun et al), it is usually percieved as the problem of overcrowding, yet this view is also challenged by another view, which advocates that the problem of its demise was distribution of resources among the population, I personally support the latter since it seems more likely to me.

Robots may not as of yet make critical decisions although some early patterns can be seen in Siri and analogous AI inventions. We will not, however, start using automated cars for at least another 150-200 years if anything, since the biggest objections is not even the technology itself, it is being tested already, but the dominative human nature. People like to drive, outdrive and cutt other drives off because that gives them a sense of domination and freedom. Automatic cabs in big cities is as well impossible since human factor on the road will anyway create difficult and dangerous situations for an automated cab, which will rely on artificial navigation rather than human instincts and common sense. Either everyone moves on auto cars or auto cars will only be limited to special zones, as they already are now.

In the techno-utopian discourse I tend not to take any sides, but would rather support Ted Kaczynski's anarcho-primitivism.

good_logic

Jafar brother, may I point out to you something really important you always miss out
THE SOURCE OF EVERYTHING THAT EXIXTS.
Your philosophy of "some humans are the origin " of certain ideas is false. There is only an original source ,one and only one of all that exists.

No matter who or what ideas are out there, the origin of all ideas/knowledge... is the creator.

you for example, your ideas ,your knowledge , ... are from some source/s. They do not originate from nothing . You have learned/copied/imitated/...someone, or have mixed up source/s. But you are not the originator of what you know/follow.
Similarly everyone else has got their ideas/knowledge from some source/s.

The illusion out there is that some humans are the original source/s of some ideas. No brother. That is a deceit and a lie.
GOD the Creator has taught /created /set up...here on earth all the knowledge that exist now and will exist in the future, but some people are deceived into thinking the "humans" are the cause/source"!!!!

What some humans have done is "corrupt/own/steal/..." the true source and come up with all sorts of systems/ways...some good ,some bad, some dangerous to seek/gain power / to replace the true source...This is the issue with what you keep discussing. This is called "not acknowledging the real Creator", setting up "other gods beside GOD Alone".. .i.e Idol worship" plain and simple.

Like it or not brother jafar, GOD is the sole authority. There are no other authorities . Hence ,in reality there is only GOD s system.
All other systems are an illusion and a false hope.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

Jafar

Jafar brother, may I point out to you something really important you always miss out

Your philosophy of "some humans are the origin " of certain ideas is false. There is only an original source ,one and only one of all that exists.

No matter who or what ideas are out there, the origin of all ideas/knowledge... is the creator.

you for example, your ideas ,your knowledge , ... are from some source/s. They do not originate from nothing . You have learned/copied/imitated/...someone, or have mixed up source/s. But you are not the originator of what you know/follow.
Similarly everyone else has got their ideas/knowledge from some source/s.

The illusion out there is that some humans are the original source/s of some ideas. No brother. That is a deceit and a lie.
GOD the Creator has taught /created /set up...here on earth all the knowledge that exist now and will exist in the future, but some people are deceived into thinking the "humans" are the cause/source"!!!!

What some humans have done is "corrupt/own/steal/..." the true source and come up with all sorts of systems/ways...some good ,some bad, some dangerous to seek/gain power / to replace the true source...This is the issue with what you keep discussing. This is called "not acknowledging the real Creator", setting up "other gods beside GOD Alone".. .i.e Idol worship" plain and simple.

Like it or not brother jafar, GOD is the sole authority. There are no other authorities . Hence ,in reality there is only GOD s system.
All other systems are an illusion and a false hope.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

This is out of topic..
But nonetheless I give out a comment.

Of course God is the source everything.
You were, are and always will be living in God's system.
The absolute power and all controlling such that every events that happened all in accordance to plan.
No human or alien or anything can replace God's system as such nothing can replace it.. since every events up to tiny details all happened in accordance to God's plan.

The act of any entity of "not acknowledging", "Idol Worship" according to you is also all in accordance to God's plan as nothing can go against His plan.
What I write on this thread what you will write on this thread what anyone will write on this thread it's all also in accordance to God's plan.

The revelation of TCP/IP, Quantum Positioning, DNA/RNA, Neural Network Algorithm and Trillion of others is all God's revelation. Only fools will say that God's revelation has ended.

The phenomenon of Demonetization, Decapitalization, Devaluation of Money/Currency or any other phenomenon is all in accordance to God's plan as well.

God is not in conflict with anyone or anything as nothing can do things if it's not in accordance to God's plan, as God is the ultimate source of everything.

But again that is not what's being discussed here..
What's being discussed here is the phenomenon of Demonetization, Decapitalization and how human economical system will next evolve to.

And of course all will happened 100% exactly as God's plan.

Jafar

Look up the Rat Paradise or the Rat Utopia experiment (Calhoun et al), it is usually percieved as the problem of overcrowding, yet this view is also challenged by another view, which advocates that the problem of its demise was distribution of resources among the population, I personally support the latter since it seems more likely to me.

You mean 'scarcity drives aggressiveness and insanity' ?
Then just look how human behavior drastically change on big city metro at rush hour.

But as the capacity of metro get expanded and scarcity gradually lowered, human behavior will also change towards less aggressive.

And scarcity is going against the observable trend..
The observable trend is tendency towards abundance which drives demonetization.

https//gmoschooldotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/evans-adapted-final1.jpg

Graph of food production over time, arable land is constant yet productivity soars.

Robots may not as of yet make critical decisions although some early patterns can be seen in Siri and analogous AI inventions.

Siri or any other machines cannot make mistakes, thus creativity and innovation also non existent.

We will not, however, start using automated cars for at least another 150-200 years if anything, since the biggest objections is not even the technology itself, it is being tested already, but the dominative human nature. People like to drive, outdrive and cutt other drives off because that gives them a sense of domination and freedom. Automatic cabs in big cities is as well impossible since human factor on the road will anyway create difficult and dangerous situations for an automated cab, which will rely on artificial navigation rather than human instincts and common sense. Either everyone moves on auto cars or auto cars will only be limited to special zones, as they already are now.

Human factor on the road is the driving factor to make car travel the most dangerous means of travel as proven by statistics.

Airplane safety has greatly increased after the introduction of Autopilot on Airplane. Statistically the safest means of travel at the moment.

It only a matter of time for autopilot to make it's way to cars which shall also greatly increase the safety of car travel.

In the techno-utopian discourse I tend not to take any sides, but would rather support Ted Kaczynski's anarcho-primitivism.

It's not a conflict per se and nobody need to take any 'side'.

But so far Malthus has been proven wrong and I believe so will be Mr Kaczynski.

Makaveli

There was no scarcity in the experiment, that's the point, the were in abudance of everything, including space. There are other natural processes involved in the demise, but then again first generation lived in prosperity.

It only a matter of time for autopilot to make it's way to cars which shall also greatly increase the safety of car travel.

Cannot agree, because of the points I mentioed, namely

Human factor on the roads, the autopilot in the sky and autopilot in metropolis are quite different phenomenons;
People like to drive themselves, get rid of that and you take away the illusion of freedom and control, which will demand other serious social modifications, which may eventually transpire into technocratic dystopia.

Aram

People will have to like other things to do then, like embracing an interest for technology. Autopilot isn't ruining everything one can do.

Homo sapiens is badly suited to drive automobiles unless changing themselves into more logical and controlled beings, where it is better but yet not as good as a programed computer at precision, although a human is better at improvising. It's the primate traits which primarily make the human a poor driver.

SarahY

Maybe I?m a pessimist but what will stop people from being greedy or even envious? Some people have everything they need but want a better version of it or get bored and want something different. Our society drives materialism so being content with what we have can be difficult.

You?re right in society things are getting decentralised which is good, more power to the people.

Demonetizing of everything will still have costs just less, we still pay for it. So eventually more people around the world will have what we see as luxuries for a lot less. I dont know if it would be completely demonetised. anyway even with technology improving, people will continue to look for ways to improve things. just when we think something is good, something better comes.

I don?t really know much about Anarcho-primitivists though in such a world people will need to compete for their own survival? I don?t see why a hierarchy can?t form or how it will be fair. Ever seen Bear Grylls -The Island?

Jafar

Maybe I?m a pessimist but what will stop people from being greedy or even envious? Some people have everything they need but want a better version of it or get bored and want something different. Our society drives materialism so being content with what we have can be difficult.

Human just like their cousin the Chimps are by nature greedy fellow..
It can be good and it can be bad it depends..
The urge for something better drives innovation, the endeavor to find a way to make things better..

Demonetizing of everything will still have costs just less, we still pay for it. So eventually more people around the world will have what we see as luxuries for a lot less.

Of course, as it's a gradual change.. an evolution... getting less and less and less...

In the past, the holy books such as Torah Scrolls, Bible, Quran was a thing of luxury.
It cost 3-4 years of regular joe's salary.
Owning a holy book functioned as a symbol of social status.
A luxury that can be enjoyed by less than 0.1% of the total population.

Now the "Holy Apps" is virtually free, downloadable to your phone, you only need to pay the cost of data transfer.

I dont know if it would be completely demonetised. anyway even with technology improving, people will continue to look for ways to improve things. just when we think something is good, something better comes.

Exactly and it is called progress..
Nothing wrong with it.. it's actually very very very good.

Makaveli

People will have to like other things to do then, like embracing an interest for technology. Autopilot isn't ruining everything one can do.

It is true, but from what I see in the technotopian discourse is hedonism i.e. the ability to enjoy economic prosperity without the need to invest one's time into final production. We can obviously observe technological prosperity in the post-industrial/post-modern countries, where economy and monetization is for the most part based on services, except for agriculture, but even there most agricultural products are improted and exported and little is provided for the local market, except for dairy products. Production of final commidities is mostly limited to the so called Third World, where slavery is still experienced on a wider scale rather than here, where many people live off of welfare or do some bullshit jobs like running a Youtube channel partnership.

So we are moving towards the economy where even services are no longer demanded. An example would be self-checkout machines in supermarkets where you can pin products yourself and pay for it without the need to wait in long queue. That's obviously comfortable but where does it lead on the wider scale?

Monetization is used as an intermediate transaction between a human time spent on work unit and final production. One has to invest time in order to make a household or national economy work. In case everything is ran by machines the only thing that seems to be left to the rest of the dwellers is maintenance of machines. This will create a strong caste division between those "scholars" aka engineers who maintain the machines and the rest who will either be limited to a limited amount of services or lead a hedonistic lifestyle altogether. That's where we already are headed, and if it won't be for the next major cataclysm I am afraid that's the observable future of the next 40-50 years, not that I wish for the next major war though, however in case people remain confined to the system and they still are, they will keep taking arms for false illusions like the sovereignty of the state.

It's the primate traits which primarily make the human a poor driver.

It is also a trait which makes humans develop means of transport. Not everyone is a poor driver, yet there is nothign spiritual about being a good driver either, it depends on whether or not a driver complies with the rules, respects other drivers and pedestrians and what his aim of driving his, is he trying to show off or if his primary aim is to get from point A to point B, what his motivation for driving is. But even then driving is a collective procedure and cooperation as you never know who creates the dangerous situation or is drunk driving. Wheel was invented by Sumerians and even to this day we still unconsciously, philosophically speaking, share some of their civilizational traits by using conditions to improve our everyday lives. Wheels are everywhere now, on the roads, in the mills, factories et cetera, that's a part of archaic heritage in us. Probably other traits of archaic periods are love for comfort, respect for gracefulness and praiseworthiness, idolization of a fellow human and other civilizational traits.

I dont really know much about Anarcho-primitivists though in such a world people will need to compete for their own survival? I dont see why a hierarchy cant form or how it will be fair. Ever seen Bear Grylls -The Island?

It depends on whether or not humans will learn horizontal cooperation without vertical hierarchy. As of now they haven't learned it nor will learn it in observable future, on the national scale at least. Without learning horizontal ways of life and "caring for thy neighbour" one can't achieve any of the 19th century utopias, be it socialism or various form of anarchy. That's the primary commodity of those socities and this is why they are called utopian, because they require paradigmatic shift.

amin

Demonetization of everything? Dont think it will happen,

"Wealth" is seen here as blessing of God or sign of God in along with wealth we have other needs like health, Skills etc that nature provides us with, as long as nature itself is diverse and measure what one gets what, its not going to happen and here Indian's belief system revolves around this diversity of God's signs and worshiping.

Does healthcare costs anywhere decreasing, or in the business of education does it got any cheaper?

Jafar

It is true, but from what I see in the technotopian discourse is hedonism i.e. the ability to enjoy economic prosperity without the need to invest one's time into final production.

Which is good then? The time can be invested in something else..

We can obviously observe technological prosperity in the post-industrial/post-modern countries, where economy and monetization is for the most part based on services, except for agriculture, but even there most agricultural products are improted and exported and little is provided for the local market, except for dairy products. Production of final commidities is mostly limited to the so called Third World, where slavery is still experienced on a wider scale rather than here, where many people live off of welfare or do some bullshit jobs like running a Youtube channel partnership.

Not entirely correct.
USA, China, Japan, Rusia has their economy strongly founded on commodities (Oil, Wheat, Coal, Electronic Devices, Car etc). Yes cars and electronic devices are commodities nowadays.

So we are moving towards the economy where even services are no longer demanded. An example would be self-checkout machines in supermarkets where you can pin products yourself and pay for it without the need to wait in long queue. That's obviously comfortable but where does it lead on the wider scale?

Automation leads to efficiency, why human need to invest their time to do all of that boring and routine stuff?

Monetization is used as an intermediate transaction between a human time spent on work unit and final production. One has to invest time in order to make a household or national economy work. In case everything is ran by machines the only thing that seems to be left to the rest of the dwellers is maintenance of machines.

Management of machines, improvement of machines.
And do other things that machines just cannot do.. the creativity works, writing novels, making movies / music, explore the universe, creating apps / software to be run on the machines etc..

This will create a strong caste division between those "scholars" aka engineers who maintain the machines and the rest who will either be limited to a limited amount of services or lead a hedonistic lifestyle altogether.

Unless everyone will eventually turned into 'scholars'...
Which infact already happening..

Merely 5 centuries ago in order to be regarded as "scholars" one only need to be able to read or write. As the majority, 80% or more from the population cannot even read or write.

https//preview.ibb.co/g8MxZ8/spu_ea68c8_ogi2_3cwn3bmfojjlb56e.jpgl

With such definition, 90% of the population today are already scholars.

That's where we already are headed, and if it won't be for the next major cataclysm I am afraid that's the observable future of the next 40-50 years, not that I wish for the next major war though, however in case people remain confined to the system and they still are, they will keep taking arms for false illusions like the sovereignty of the state.

And you're not even thinking that conflict / war will actually be fought by machines?
(ie Drones, Guided Missiles, ICBM)
Guided Missiles are basically "Automated Version" of Japanese Kamikaze Fleet or Islamic Suicide Bomber for that matter.

It depends on whether or not humans will learn horizontal cooperation without vertical hierarchy. As of now they haven't learned it nor will learn it in observable future, on the national scale at least.

The trend is already happening on worldwide scale...
Wikipedia, Open Source Movement, CryptoCurrency, Citizen Astronomy just to name a few and many other "Peer To Peer" model of interaction.

Without learning horizontal ways of life and "caring for thy neighbour" one can't achieve any of the 19th century utopias, be it socialism or various form of anarchy. That's the primary commodity of those socities and this is why they are called utopian, because they require paradigmatic shift.

It does requires paradigmatic shift.
And just like any other paradigmatic shift; it might resulted in conflict.
Between the "Status Quo" / "Conservative" vs "Progressive".

An example; as told by history was between the "Nomadic Hunter Gatherer" (The old lifestyle) vs "Sedentary Agricultural Farmer" (The new lifestyle)

Makaveli

Which is good then? The time can be invested in something else..

Yes, as I said, maintenance of technology. What else is left? Hobby? Truth seeking? Watching movies? Hedonism? It's not about doing something productive or counter-productive, this is already here, we can decide in most cases what to do with our lives. The problem is one's place in society.

Not entirely correct.
USA, China, Japan, Rusia has their economy strongly founded on commodities (Oil, Wheat, Coal, Electronic Devices, Car etc). Yes cars and electronic devices are commodities nowadays.

Russia, and China are not post-industrial nations, they are industrial. Industial and non-industrial societies differ in whether services prevail production of goods in economy, or if the economy relates on free market, services and international trade. China is the world's factory and Russia is still addicted to the "natural needle" (an expression when someone is addicted through using a needle to inject a substance), i.e. it's national economy or relative advantage is solely based on gas and oil. Both Russia and China still have awful conditions for international trade with the EU and other "Western" subjects.

Automation leads to efficiency, why human need to invest their time to do all of that boring and routine stuff?

Yes, and that in turn will create a strong social stratification based on those that run and maintain the technology and the rest. It is not just about investing one's time into anything but being a personal economic unit, i.e. having busyness in the economy.

Unless everyone will eventually turned into 'scholars'...
Merely 5 centuries ago in order to be regarded as "scholars" one only need to be able to read or write. As the majority, 80% or more from the population cannot even read or write.
With such definition, 90% of the population today are already scholars.

I think I explained figuratively what a "scholar" is in a technocratic case... someone who has access to a part of the capital (technology in this case) and maintains it, the rest will rely on the final product. Of course it will not solve the currency problem nor will it eliminate a money in a form we are used to it, simply because technological capital will NOT be equally distributed within the economy and among its sectors and economic units, i.e. consumers, producers and conductors. In that case technology and the comfort, which comes of it will not be equally distributed and there will be levels of comfort, randing from a personal robot-cook to an ability to fly to any part of the world just because, not because you brought the ticket.

And you're not even thinking that conflict / war will actually be fought by machines?

It seems you genuinuly believe that it will be the machines that will be primarily targeted/take damage in those wars and not the human population or infrastructure, which if substantially damaged will also decrease the economy and move the nation into a lower state of survival. That will also meas the "cannon fodder" will once again have to marsh in crowds.

The trend is already happening on worldwide scale...
Wikipedia, Open Source Movement, CryptoCurrency, Citizen Astronomy just to name a few and many other "Peer To Peer" model of interaction.

I fail to see how those examples relate to horizontal interaction. Open source IT property and Wikipedia are used for one's own interest, to post or program what one wishes. In fact, in most cases these operations lack any interaction at all. Declaring something open source comes from capital holder and this alone is not horizontal by definition. The same with Apple technology, just because you own an iphone does not make you a special economic unit, outside of consumption. The capital and the key property still remains in the shareholding. Horizontal means

You have the right of a say;
You respect yourself and the other as a unified subject;
Decisions are made collectively and not based on the approval of the higher-standing institution.

I can edit the page on Islam yet the army of Muslims will still prevail in their amount and influence to change the stuff back to what it suits them. Because I do not have the rights to property or capital, religion in this case. I do not judge or establish canon, based on hierarchy of religious ministry. The same can be said over any delegated right, such as use an open source software as you wish, because you was delegated that right, you did not have it innately. Same with the rest of technological freedom. Now they have robots to have sex with, yet based on observable information on it they will turn off automatically if you perform some actions on it which the system will consider a rape or a morally-wrong sexual action. What kind of right, freedom of choice and liberty let alone horizontal interaction it is? You are delegated the rights but your existence remains under strict control. In fact, levels of control were increasing since 1950's when technological growth was rapidly expanding and the level of freedom decreased proportionaly to the increase of technological prosperity.

It does requires paradigmatic shift.
And just like any other paradigmatic shift; it might resulted in conflict.
Between the "Status Quo" / "Conservative" vs "Progressive".
An example; as told by history was between the "Nomadic Hunter Gatherer" (The old lifestyle) vs "Sedentary Agricultural Farmer" (The new lifestyle)

And who will control the "North" and the "South" sides this time (the civil war between the agricultural capitalists and industrial capitalists)? Technocratic corporations. The problem with techno-communistic ideas is its part where it talks about "making people free" and "solving the slavery problem".