You've not traced the story of money back far enough. Hunter-gatherers had trading. When agriculture began, so too did accumulation of overproduction. This was the beginning of colonialization and extraction. The beginning of slavery.
I do not think changing systems of wealth will work in the long run. And we will not return to hunter-gatherer days.
What is needed first is a change in consciousness from greed to sharing and empathy so that wealth can be evenly distributed. We are a very long way from this change.
Fair point on the deeper history. There's a lot more to trace and the essay had to start somewhere. I cover the full history of money (with research to back it) in the Emancipation Architecture document.
On the consciousness-first argument, I'd gently push back: every monetary system in history has shaped the consciousness of the people living inside it. We don't get the shift in consciousness while the architecture rewards the opposite. "The system determines behavior" to paraphrase Donella Meadows. But that's a longer conversation than a comment thread can hold.
The missing floor is not a better currency design, but the biophysical accounting of the Earth system. Value is not driven by circulation, but by alignment with regenerative metabolism. Demurrage operates on a monetary time logic, not a thermodynamic logic. A true bioregional framing would say that the river basin is the balance sheet, the ecosystem is the unit of account and human systems must reconcile to them.
Beautifully stated, James. We agree more than you might think. The Emancipation Architecture backs currency with ecological and productive capacity. The Bioregional Commons Trust holds land, watersheds, and living systems as inalienable assets. The carrying capacity assessment is literally the balance sheet you're describing. Currency issuance is tethered to what the ecosystem can sustain.
Where I'd push: "the river basin is the balance sheet" is a powerful sentence. I've been trying to make it operational for two years. The question I keep hitting is "operational through what medium of exchange?" You still need a mechanism through which humans coordinate economic activity within those ecological boundaries. That mechanism is money. And if the money encodes accumulation, growth, and extraction at its root, it will override the biophysical accounting no matter how well-designed the accounting is. Demurrage ensures the currency behaves like a living system: it circulates and decays, like nutrients through soil. That's thermodynamic logic expressed through monetary design.
Your framing and mine need each other. The ecosystem as unit of account is the destination. A currency designed to serve that accounting, rather than override it, is how we get there. At least that's how I understand it.
Your idea sounds to me like globalization technocracy where every blade of grass is satellite monitored and controlled. Good for the controllers, perhaps, but not for the rest of us.
Same technology, two possible uses. Satellites monitoring soil moisture to feed data back to the people stewarding that land is biofeedback. Satellites monitoring soil moisture to feed data to a distant authority that controls what those people are allowed to do is surveillance. I read the original comment as describing the first. I'm fairly sure James did too.
I respectfully disagree with both you and Michael. My belief is that consciousness precedes form. Mind, matter, self, and systems follow consciousness, not the other way around. Without a change in consciousness, humans will continue to develop systems to enhance colonization and extraction. Regenerative metabolism does not happen because it is of higher value, but because enough people realize it and put it into action.
We agree that consciousness matters. My entire body of work is about exactly that. Where we differ is whether consciousness shifts first and systems follow, or whether they shape each other. From the research I've dived deep into, the evidence strongly supports co-evolution, which is why changing the architecture matters. But I appreciate the exchange.
I like this conversation about consciousness and systems. I would say that the emergence and sharing of your ideas, Michael, is an expression of a new level of consciousness. And it is certainly true that more awakening/awareness is needed before we see such ideas more widely adopted. Keep going! Awakening is a constant unfolding.
Is consciousness individual and subjective, or is it in the collective "ether" that we tune ourselves to? I'm leaning towards the latter myself these days, and I've been doing the work for a while. I don't consider myself a wealth holder. I built a modest nest egg that should cover my "golden years" but it's in annuities and mutual funds that perpetuate the cycle. I'm not interested in positioning my portfolio for maximum gain as much as transitioning to regenerative system. How?
The frank answer is that the pathways are still being built. The Emancipation Architecture described in the essay is designed, the first bioregional community is in preparation, but the institutional infrastructure doesn't exist yet at a scale you could move a retirement portfolio into tomorrow morning.
What I can say is what I say to everyone who asks this question: start local (and since you've engaged with Joe Brewer, I know you know this already). Put some of your time and attention in these local projects before you put money anywhere. The relationships come first. The financial architecture follows.
On the annuities and mutual funds: you're describing the exact position most people are in. Savings locked inside instruments that perpetuate the cycle, with no obvious exit that doesn't feel like jumping off a cliff. I don't have a clean answer for that yet. Anyone who tells you they do is selling something. What I'm building is designed to eventually provide that exit. It will be a place where modest savings can land inside a regenerative system and actually sustain a life. We're not there yet. I'd rather say that plainly than pretend otherwise.
I hope you'll stay close to this work. The "how" is coming. 🙇♂️
Chris Dixon's "Read, Write, Own" changed my perspective on blockchain and crypto. Unfortunately, they've been mostly captured by the system they seek to free us from. I thought helium was a real world example but maybe it's a victim of the same short-sightedness. I think the answers already exist in different forms and the work is really a matter of connecting a variety of perspectives.
The challenge with *most* (there are exceptions) Web3 initiatives is they replicate the same class-based mentality that fiat currencies have baked into their design, which means wealth gets concentrated among the few. Bitcoin itself had good intentions, but was hijacked along the way (a good book is "Hijacking Bitcoin: The Hidden History of BTC" by Roger Ver (2024): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CXWBCWDR). So your observation that they get captured is spot on.
The answers most certainly do exist, as a multi-disciplinary approach. I've prepared such a paper that brings together 93 peer reviewed papers across a range of disciplines. There is one more paper to come that brings together a concept called "a policy window" (governance) and Panarchy Theory (ecology and living systems). The paper turns the current Middle East crisis into a turning point for those willing to do the work. These papers are available to anyone who asks.
Hi Michael, amazing work, project, and opportunity to bring into reality the possible world for all to collaborate collectively toward the common good of humanity and in harmony with nature. Do you foresee the 'currency' to be physical or digital, or both? To what extent do technology and existing infrastructure dovetail with what is being set up to serve the new bioregion? And have you envisioned the participation of retirees in the Gen X or near-age boomer group whose retirement, philanthropy, ceded inheritance, specialties can be offered to the project as a place to retire to? It would seem that this could be a possible collaboration avenue that may offer some kind of eventual assisted living funded by wealth, physical assets, inheritance... How does this project connect into the greater regional and national economic landscape?
You've not traced the story of money back far enough. Hunter-gatherers had trading. When agriculture began, so too did accumulation of overproduction. This was the beginning of colonialization and extraction. The beginning of slavery.
I do not think changing systems of wealth will work in the long run. And we will not return to hunter-gatherer days.
What is needed first is a change in consciousness from greed to sharing and empathy so that wealth can be evenly distributed. We are a very long way from this change.
Fair point on the deeper history. There's a lot more to trace and the essay had to start somewhere. I cover the full history of money (with research to back it) in the Emancipation Architecture document.
On the consciousness-first argument, I'd gently push back: every monetary system in history has shaped the consciousness of the people living inside it. We don't get the shift in consciousness while the architecture rewards the opposite. "The system determines behavior" to paraphrase Donella Meadows. But that's a longer conversation than a comment thread can hold.
The missing floor is not a better currency design, but the biophysical accounting of the Earth system. Value is not driven by circulation, but by alignment with regenerative metabolism. Demurrage operates on a monetary time logic, not a thermodynamic logic. A true bioregional framing would say that the river basin is the balance sheet, the ecosystem is the unit of account and human systems must reconcile to them.
Beautifully stated, James. We agree more than you might think. The Emancipation Architecture backs currency with ecological and productive capacity. The Bioregional Commons Trust holds land, watersheds, and living systems as inalienable assets. The carrying capacity assessment is literally the balance sheet you're describing. Currency issuance is tethered to what the ecosystem can sustain.
Where I'd push: "the river basin is the balance sheet" is a powerful sentence. I've been trying to make it operational for two years. The question I keep hitting is "operational through what medium of exchange?" You still need a mechanism through which humans coordinate economic activity within those ecological boundaries. That mechanism is money. And if the money encodes accumulation, growth, and extraction at its root, it will override the biophysical accounting no matter how well-designed the accounting is. Demurrage ensures the currency behaves like a living system: it circulates and decays, like nutrients through soil. That's thermodynamic logic expressed through monetary design.
Your framing and mine need each other. The ecosystem as unit of account is the destination. A currency designed to serve that accounting, rather than override it, is how we get there. At least that's how I understand it.
Your idea sounds to me like globalization technocracy where every blade of grass is satellite monitored and controlled. Good for the controllers, perhaps, but not for the rest of us.
Same technology, two possible uses. Satellites monitoring soil moisture to feed data back to the people stewarding that land is biofeedback. Satellites monitoring soil moisture to feed data to a distant authority that controls what those people are allowed to do is surveillance. I read the original comment as describing the first. I'm fairly sure James did too.
I respectfully disagree with both you and Michael. My belief is that consciousness precedes form. Mind, matter, self, and systems follow consciousness, not the other way around. Without a change in consciousness, humans will continue to develop systems to enhance colonization and extraction. Regenerative metabolism does not happen because it is of higher value, but because enough people realize it and put it into action.
We agree that consciousness matters. My entire body of work is about exactly that. Where we differ is whether consciousness shifts first and systems follow, or whether they shape each other. From the research I've dived deep into, the evidence strongly supports co-evolution, which is why changing the architecture matters. But I appreciate the exchange.
I like this conversation about consciousness and systems. I would say that the emergence and sharing of your ideas, Michael, is an expression of a new level of consciousness. And it is certainly true that more awakening/awareness is needed before we see such ideas more widely adopted. Keep going! Awakening is a constant unfolding.
Awesome!🤓
Is consciousness individual and subjective, or is it in the collective "ether" that we tune ourselves to? I'm leaning towards the latter myself these days, and I've been doing the work for a while. I don't consider myself a wealth holder. I built a modest nest egg that should cover my "golden years" but it's in annuities and mutual funds that perpetuate the cycle. I'm not interested in positioning my portfolio for maximum gain as much as transitioning to regenerative system. How?
The gazillion dollar question, Paul: how.
(And I tend to align with collective ether too).
The frank answer is that the pathways are still being built. The Emancipation Architecture described in the essay is designed, the first bioregional community is in preparation, but the institutional infrastructure doesn't exist yet at a scale you could move a retirement portfolio into tomorrow morning.
What I can say is what I say to everyone who asks this question: start local (and since you've engaged with Joe Brewer, I know you know this already). Put some of your time and attention in these local projects before you put money anywhere. The relationships come first. The financial architecture follows.
On the annuities and mutual funds: you're describing the exact position most people are in. Savings locked inside instruments that perpetuate the cycle, with no obvious exit that doesn't feel like jumping off a cliff. I don't have a clean answer for that yet. Anyone who tells you they do is selling something. What I'm building is designed to eventually provide that exit. It will be a place where modest savings can land inside a regenerative system and actually sustain a life. We're not there yet. I'd rather say that plainly than pretend otherwise.
I hope you'll stay close to this work. The "how" is coming. 🙇♂️
Chris Dixon's "Read, Write, Own" changed my perspective on blockchain and crypto. Unfortunately, they've been mostly captured by the system they seek to free us from. I thought helium was a real world example but maybe it's a victim of the same short-sightedness. I think the answers already exist in different forms and the work is really a matter of connecting a variety of perspectives.
The challenge with *most* (there are exceptions) Web3 initiatives is they replicate the same class-based mentality that fiat currencies have baked into their design, which means wealth gets concentrated among the few. Bitcoin itself had good intentions, but was hijacked along the way (a good book is "Hijacking Bitcoin: The Hidden History of BTC" by Roger Ver (2024): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CXWBCWDR). So your observation that they get captured is spot on.
The answers most certainly do exist, as a multi-disciplinary approach. I've prepared such a paper that brings together 93 peer reviewed papers across a range of disciplines. There is one more paper to come that brings together a concept called "a policy window" (governance) and Panarchy Theory (ecology and living systems). The paper turns the current Middle East crisis into a turning point for those willing to do the work. These papers are available to anyone who asks.
Hi Michael, amazing work, project, and opportunity to bring into reality the possible world for all to collaborate collectively toward the common good of humanity and in harmony with nature. Do you foresee the 'currency' to be physical or digital, or both? To what extent do technology and existing infrastructure dovetail with what is being set up to serve the new bioregion? And have you envisioned the participation of retirees in the Gen X or near-age boomer group whose retirement, philanthropy, ceded inheritance, specialties can be offered to the project as a place to retire to? It would seem that this could be a possible collaboration avenue that may offer some kind of eventual assisted living funded by wealth, physical assets, inheritance... How does this project connect into the greater regional and national economic landscape?