In recent times we have reported on and reviewed a variety of books and other publications which have made the case for a world without money and buying and selling. Some of these, such as Description of the World of Tomorrow: A World Without Money or Barter or Exchange: a Civilisation of Free Access by Jean-Francois Aupetitgendre and Marc Chinal and Moneyless Society: the Next Economic Evolution by Matthew Holten, are essentially ‘non-political’ in that they see the new society they advocate as evolving somehow ‘naturally’ through an extension of social developments they see as already taking place in the currently existing order. Others, like Half-Earth Socialism: a Plan to Save the Future from Extinction, Climate Change and Pandemics by Troy Vettese and Drew Pendergrass and Beyond Money: A Post-Capitalist Strategy by Anitra Nelson, see the change to a new moneyless, wageless, leaderless society of common ownership, democratic decision-making and free access as ultimately coming through revolutionary (albeit peaceful) channels with a focus on the need for political action by the majority to bring about that revolution.
Now to add to the list we have Unchained. Living Without Money by Justin Fairchild (2025, 269pp), which makes much the same case – and in its own refreshing and plausibly argued way. It falls very much into that first ‘non-political’ category, picking up as it does on many aspects of existing society and activities by certain groups and individuals which it sees as leading towards a different kind of society – one based on a moneyless form of living. In this objective it aligns closely with what the Socialist Party has advocated over the last 120 years: a wholly democratic society of meaningful work which frees all humans from the threat of poverty and where the government of people is replaced by the administration of things. This book staunchly argues the need for a move from – in the author’s own words – ‘a system built on scarcity and competition to one grounded in cooperation, equity, and access’.
Objections and roadmap
It also confronts very effectively indeed many of the typical objections to the possibility of this kind of society. Examples of this are the ‘human nature’ argument (ie, aren’t human beings selfish, competitive and aggressive by nature?), the ‘dirty work’ criticism (ie, ‘If there’s no money, who will take out the trash? Clean the toilets? Work in sewage treatment plants?’), and the ‘resources’ challenge (ie, would there be enough to go round?). The author answers all such objections in a convincing and well-reasoned way while providing evidence of the social conditioning that puts them in people’s heads in the first place and showing how these arise from processes fundamental to the society we live in – capitalism. He points to the way in which ‘capitalism centers money as the organizing force of life’ and ‘incentivizes cost-cutting over care, scale over sustainability, and individual gain over collective well-being’. At the same time he shows a compelling awareness of the difficulties of overcoming the existing mindset and of imagining a society without money, given that ‘the use of money is so woven into daily life’ and ‘shapes nearly every decision we make—from what we eat to how we live to what we dream about’. Yet he is clearly optimistic about the possibility for change.
But how? How will humans go about organising an interconnected world system of living without the intermediary of money? How will they, as the author puts it, ‘distribute food, housing, tools, and medicine without the invisible hand of the market or the coercive power of profit?’ To attempt to answer this, he lays out what he calls ‘a roadmap’, or ‘a framework’, for the ‘journey to a moneyless society’. And certain elements of this we would fully accept, in particular the idea that public dialogue and consciousness-raising are necessary to ‘normalize the idea that economies can be organized around needs and contributions, not scarcity and profit’ and ‘to inspire people to question the assumption that money is natural or inevitable, and to help them imagine alternatives’. We would also agree that, without widespread acceptance of the idea of a society based on need not profit, such a society could not be established. No minority group could hope to lead the majority to such a society until that majority understand it and are active participants in its establishment.
Governments and elections
But we would part company with the author in his idea that the necessary raising of consciousness can somehow be contributed to by governments. The previously mentioned ‘non-political’ nature of his vision means that he does not share (or has perhaps not considered) the Socialist Party’s view that the unchangeable role of any government in modern capitalist society is to defend and support the interests of the minority owning class – those who do not have the need to sell their energies to an employer for a wage or salary in order to survive. So we see as a non-starter his idea that governments can somehow be used to facilitate this process of ‘systematic transformation’ by granting, for example ‘universal access to housing, food and healthcare’, or bringing in ‘ownership laws that support open collaboration’.
Of course, there is one aspect of the current system of government that can be used to establish a marketless, free-access society – and that is the ballot box. Democratic political action by the majority class (ie, wage and salary workers) can be the instrument for establishing the kind of society whose salient features are laid out in this book. But this can only happen once this majority has the necessary consciousness and understanding of the society they wish to establish and take the necessary political power to do that. So, though, in these circumstances, a transition in people’s thinking and decision-making will have taken place, the new society will be brought in by a political revolution and not just a social ‘transition’ with capitalism being democratically voted out of existence. The point is that this new society cannot coexist with capitalism, not even, as the author has it, ‘in transition’, where, as he would like, ‘hybrid models—local currencies, time banks, free stores—can operate alongside capitalist economies’.
‘Contributionism’
Having marked this difference in perspective with the author, we can only welcome his overall vision and indeed his interesting attempts to draw a picture of a society in which ‘cooperation replaces competition, access replaces ownership, purpose replaces profit’. To this society he gives the name ‘contributionism’. He talks about education in it as being ‘holistic – teaching emotional regulation, empathy, and conflict resolution from an early age’, and as ‘no longer preparation for a career’ but ‘preparation for a life of meaning, contribution, and community’, teaching ‘people to care, to think, to connect, and to act, and nurturing ’potential, curiosity, and joy’. As for economic organisation, he lays down, in broad terms, that ‘planning and transparency replace pricing’, but also offers much more detailed proposals, stating, for example, that ‘without markets, goods must be distributed differently’, with ‘direct resource allocation’. Some ‘working models’ he puts forward are ’centralized or decentralized hubs where people access food, clothing, tools, or medical supplies based on need’, ‘digital or in-person boards where people list what they need and what they can offer with matching taking place automatically or through community coordination’, and ‘rotational use systems’ where ‘items like cars, equipment, or appliances are used on a rotating basis, tracked by open systems’. He stresses the potential of automation and AI in this process, whereby ‘resource use is tracked, shared, and constantly rebalanced to reflect actual needs, not artificial demand’. And sharing our own insistence on fully democratic organisation and decision-making, he goes on: ‘Decisions are made publicly. Everyone has a voice. Governance becomes a tool of the people’. And all this with ‘no cash, no boss—just shared trust and transparent systems.’
Wide-ranging
He has thought-provoking insights into a range of other areas too. Examples of this are the forms that art, culture and creativity would take in his ‘contributionist’ society and how ‘crime and punishment’ would be approached (‘justice is no longer synonymous with punishment’ but ‘becomes restorative—focused on healing harm— and transformative—focused on changing the conditions that created it’, and ‘without a system of winners and losers, the desperation that drives theft, fraud, and exploitation fades’). He recognises of course that no human society can eliminate all disputes between groups or individuals (‘a moneyless society does not assume perfection’), but he has clearly reflected closely on how dispute resolution in the society he is arguing for might be managed and his views on conflict resolution are nothing if not instructive and broadly summed up in the insistence that such resolution should be ‘rooted in values of restoration and community’.
In a relatively short space, it is difficult to do full justice to the wide-ranging exposition of ideas that this book presents. However, to give some idea of both its depth and breadth, we would draw attention to examples both of the trenchant nature of the author’s overall take on capitalism and of his characterisation of some of the salient features of the ‘contributionism’ (we would call it ‘socialism’) which he advocates to replace it. So, it is worth quoting the following: ‘While capitalism has generated immense material wealth and technological progress, it also rewards exploitation and short-term thinking. It incentivizes cost-cutting over care, scale over sustainability, and individual gain over collective well-being’; ‘Without money, work becomes cooperative by necessity … Instead of rigid hierarchies, decision-making is decentralized and democratic. Projects are launched based on needs, and people opt in where their interests and abilities align’; and ‘without profit pressure, decisions can center on resource stewardship, renewable energy, and ecological balance—not quarterly returns. Finally, as the author also writes: ‘A moneyless society doesn’t claim to be perfect. But it directly addresses the root issues [of] inequality, alienation, and environmental ruin.’
Howard Moss
Blogger's Note:
Oct 2022: Description of the World of Tomorrow: A World Without Money or Barter or Exchange: a Civilisation of Free Access by Jean-Francois Aupetitgendre and Marc Chinal
Jan 2023: Moneyless Society: the Next Economic Evolution by Matthew Holten
Mar 2023: Half-Earth Socialism: a Plan to Save the Future from Extinction, Climate Change and Pandemics by Troy Vettese and Drew Pendergrass
Oct 2022: Beyond Money: A Post-Capitalist Strategy by Anitra Nelson
No comments:
Post a Comment