this is a network-built decentralized state where the community influences laws and policies and comes together to buy land in archipelagos and create syndicates. We will have a universal basic income system. here is the link for the server of Virtusnovia: https://discord.gg/ZRBByfWr7r

https://youtube.com/c/ParticipatoryEconomy

They did some clever sketch work using his ideas. My first time hearing them, they seem fun.

r/srslywrong

Good evening everyone! I have been reading Michael Albert's Parecon: Life after capitalism and Michael himself quotes Milton Friedman on page 94 with the next sentence: the “greatest problem facing our country is the breaking down into two classes, those who have and those who have not... We really cannot remain a democratic, open society that is divided into two classes. In the long run, that’s the greatest single danger. And the only way I see to resolve that problem is to improve the quality of education.” I'd like to know where did Michael Albert get this quote from?

I'm involved with community radio and Green Party campaigning. What strategies for moving to Parecon, or organizing the beginnings of a working model? Do we link coops with an IPB? Gain office and try policy in a small Town? So many possibilities; where do we see potential?

Hi. This sub is sleepy. Maybe this will wake it a little.

Michael Albert is hosting a podcast called Revolution Z: Life After Capitalism. He discusses vision of a participatory society of course, also some politics, his screenplay, and more.

https://zcomm.org/revolutionz/

Edit: The picture above appeared by techno-magic. I didn't put it there. Cool abstractish image though.

I'm totally for the idea that people shouldn't be rewarded just for luck or talent, rather the choice of working hard. However, I just don't see how this is feasible when it comes to different businesses. Some businesses will have a lot more costumers than others, meaning they'll have more sales and consequently profit. Let's say people don't work as much in that businesses as a group of miners do, and yet there's still all this profit going into the business; who receives it then?

Hello everyone,

I am quite new to the concept of Parecon, and I am still unaware of many aspects of this model.

One of the fundamental principles in Parecon, as far as I understood, would be that your say in the making of a decision is proportional to how affected you are by that decision (Michael Albert uses the example of the stereo playing heavy metal music). For me this creates a serious normative problem. The stereo example is clear and easy, but what would we say of someone who feels affected by a decision because it's against his/her values? Or because it affects him/her indirectly?

Or take the example of a neighbourhood whose muslim population wants to build a mosque. The muezzin who shouts at 6 in the morning affects the non-muslims greatly, however there is some sort of difference between their interest and the one of muslims, because they have different kinds of reasons (by which I don't mean that those of the muslims are more relevant, rather just incommensurable).