This is what really boggles my mind. Doesn’t anyone understand that capitalism fundamentally does this? Even a barter economy does this. Wherever you honor HAVING you create a system that centralizes wealth. Wherever you have quid pro quo economics you will have centralization of wealth. Communism is capitalism’s evil twin and both of them are joined at the hip of quid pro quo. Communism uses quid pro economics and theoretically shares all wealth equally however in order to enforce this model various authoritarian regimes have sprung up and you get two class systems (arguably faux communism seeing as in true communism there would be no classes) but even if you could in some way get all of the members of a community to agree to live in a commune mentality and get that ideology to scale you’d still be using quid pro quo. But why trade? Why use quid pro quo in the first place? Quid pro quo is based on the concept that one is honored for what they have rather than what they give. And if one is honored for what they have rather than what they give one naturally is inclined to what to increase their wealth. And given mankind’s desire to compete, be it for possessions, territory, mates, food, affection, status, whatever, then one obviously wants to attain wealth and the corruption of “communism” starts and you end up with a move back to the other end of the spectrum back to capitalism. Now everyone complains about capitalism being evil because all the wealth is centralized at a very few that compete for it. There are poor that are neglected and class division and people cry out “we need to make things equal again!” But the problem here is this: Quid pro quo by it’s very nature is about creating competition. If you require tit for tat and more importantly you are valuing what people have rather than give you are immediately saying “We want a society where people compete and have an elite few with all the wealth.” The opposite of capitalism is not communism, it’s not socialism, it’s not state intervention, it’s not using tax dollars to give to the people, it’s not government regulations of business. The opposite of capitalism is a gift economy. The opposite of capitalism is GIVING people things and promoting that kind of culture, be it open source, or feeding the homeless, or just giving gifts to those in need.
You want to do something radical with your party? Don’t tax like all the others. Instead set up an initiative for voluntary donations. Track who needs what and who donates to whom and then when someone gives to someone on that list send them a thank you card or a phone call or something. Acknowledge and honor them. Better would be having the recipient do that but hey you can only do so much. If someone donates a large amount maybe put an ad up in the newspaper or on tv or something acknowledging that. Write a program that connects people one to one so that they don’t get that “millions of people need my help” apathy feeling and instead connect personally with an individual like them and can emotonally connect. Don’t buy government software but rather use open source software. Save your govenrment some money for crying out loud! Promote FOSS! Promote a culture of giving rather than having. What does having wealth mean if one hoards it and doesn’t use it to benefit others?
Another key component is consumerism and it’s arch nemesis self reliance and self sufficiency. If you want to promote real change then promote self relience. Renewable power, self sustaining homes, community gardens, urban agriculture, self directed education, decentralized production technologies like those found in the Open Ecology project or even something as basic as promoting 3D printing. In short transfering the means of production back to the end users as much as possible and decentralizing production, innovation and creativity. One of the greatest tragedies of the industrial revolution is that everything became centralized in factories, even farming largely became mechnized in the form of factory farms, and so we need to transfer that production power back to the people so that we’re not just buying things but rather creating them as well.
No I haven’t read your link yet and I’m sorry I kind of just jumped and flew off and seemed to have written an essay here but you did ask for our thoughts here. Frankly I don’t think party politics is going to solve this because it’s still part of a top down authoritarian paradigm which needs to go but if you want to play that game these are my thoughts on the system. And yes there’s more where that came from.