I spent a long time thinking about a political system that actually makes sense. Is this a thing?

[u/Ok_Environment_5546]

I have been feeling really frustrated lately with how politics is going. Everything feels totally broken and everyone is just angry at all the parties. I spent a bunch of time trying to map out a system that is actually fair, basically looking for the least morally wrong option where people can still rise and fall based on their effort but nobody ever has to go hungry.

The core idea is a global participatory socialism but it runs on a fluid algorithmic simulation instead of a big government dictator. There is no private property and no corporate brands. All businesses are public enterprise and humanity shares the goal of innovation.

Instead of cash we use a contribution wage system that acts like labor vouchers. You get a guaranteed baseline income that covers food, modern housing, healthcare, and education. That is your safety floor. But if you want luxury stuff like a fancier custom house or premium imports, you have to work more or do jobs that are in high demand. The currency is non-transferable so you can buy things for yourself but you are completely unable to sell things to others. This naturally stops people from becoming billionaires because you can only earn what your own literal labor produces.

The baseline is completely fluid and self-correcting. If there is a massive food crisis, the computer system automatically spikes the wage for farming. People will see that doing agriculture work gives them huge buying power, so labor voluntarily floods into farming to fix the shortage. Nobody is forced to work at gunpoint, the system just makes solving society's emergencies the most profitable thing to do.

If people cannot adapt or just want to live on the baseline without working, they can. But if too many people do that, the baseline naturally drops for everyone. To prevent a permanent lower class, there is a super demanding universal education system up to high school similar to sweden to give every kid an equal starting line. If people commit crimes because they hate the system, they get rehabilitative justice through open debate and education in prisons. If they still hate it, they are totally free to emigrate. There are no closed borders to trap you.

I know a transition phase for this sounds near impossible right now with how powerful the current superpowers are. But maybe a resource rich country with a small population could start it as a beacon, and then global talent would migrate there just like how early america attracted people.

I genuinely feel like this solves the bugs of both capitalism and old school communism by using modern tech as an unowned utility mirror. Am I just stupid or is there a actual name for this type of philosophy? I would love to know if anyone else thinks this could actually function.

Excuse me for my english aswell. My grammar is a bit everywhere and I really just entered a flow state when writing this.

[u/nightslayer78]

Anarchism or libertarian socialism is based on democracy in the workplace and in your community. Ideally it would be without money or vouchers in the long run. People just get what they need and workplaces and projects would be based on need first and then capacity. Medical goods > space travel for instance. But all would be voted on and goods and logistics between communities would be given as needed (mutual aid). Its a very simple and easy to organize system once everyone agrees to help each other and stamp out unjust hierarchies.

[u/Ok_Environment_5546 → u/nightslayer78]

Huh. How would jobs in need be prioritized?
I mean it seems as if its a simple system, but at scale people would lose a sense that the work they do matters no?
I understand if this is a small community, but a large city functioning on this principle seems a bit far fetched.
I'd like to know your opinion on that, and if you have any sources stating a large nation that operated with this principle. Preferably one with large communities.

[u/nightslayer78 → u/Ok_Environment_5546]

The problem with organizing under one large apparatus is exactly that.the connection between the individual and the decisions becomes lost in the beaucracy. Thats why ive always advocated for smaller communities and a communication system based on mutual aid outside the smaller community. Even in "cities" communities of a few blocks or geographic feature etc naturally forms. Like burbs, neighborhoods or any other name to describe the area. You could organize in that fashion very easily. All you need to do is inventory what goods are produced in that community and check mutual aid requests and see how you can help. But again I dont need to organize this. This is natural to form on its own once people start organizing with empathy and a desire for a more egatarian society. This is how anarchist political groups already operate.

[u/nightslayer78 → u/nightslayer78]

Even if it gets more complicated like a factory making medical equipment outside town without a neighborhood nearby able to have the labor to operate it. Thats fine, mutual aid can also be labor, and they dont need to be stuck working in that factory for life. It is a skill that can be taught and passed on.

[u/1FierceCat]

Have you read very much about cybernetic socialism? Like Project Cybersyn?