I read this document:
http://www.unrisd.org/brett-scott
UNRISD Working Paper 2016-1
How Can Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Technology Play a Role in Building Social and Solidarity Finance?
Written by: Brett Scott
Certanly the author has it's own view, and it's not "crap"... but in my opinion it sounds like a whispering of communism and a capitalism "soft stoning". Because, even if the document is about "economy", Bitcoin, blockchain, cryptocurrencies, it's pretty clear that the author supports a lot the assistance way of act, I mean, there are som parts of the text:
Quote
In seeking to utilize cryptocurrency technology outside of a capitalist model, Faircoin is explicitly aligned with principles found within left-wing anarchism and autonomism. It has a much stronger focus on collaborative solidarity and autonomist self-governance, viewing equality and redistribution as more important than rigid protection of historical property rights.
Such an approach runs contrary to many financial inclusion narratives that suggest that economic inequality is due to external factors that stymie the efficient workings of markets, thereby creating market failures. For example, market-based approaches may identify poorly defined property titles as a cause of market exclusion, and therefore of poverty. The financial inclusion practitioner operating within this framework may seek to rectify that, in order to extend market systems into areas where they do not currently operate well. The theory is that this will give individuals within that situation a better chance of competing within the normal market.
A project like Faircoin, on the other hand, starts from the assumption that, while formal market systems may be a source of economic growth and individual enhancement, they are simultaneously the source of social inequality, individual alienation and community disintegration. Thus, rather than trying to find narrow solutions to individual hardship, initiatives like Faircoin seek to create alternative economic systems that bypass normal markets, and that rewrite the deep level rules of economic engagement. In particular they place heavy emphasis on the basis of economic life being mutual cooperation and solidarity, rather than individual competition for narrow economic success.
Such an approach runs contrary to many financial inclusion narratives that suggest that economic inequality is due to external factors that stymie the efficient workings of markets, thereby creating market failures. For example, market-based approaches may identify poorly defined property titles as a cause of market exclusion, and therefore of poverty. The financial inclusion practitioner operating within this framework may seek to rectify that, in order to extend market systems into areas where they do not currently operate well. The theory is that this will give individuals within that situation a better chance of competing within the normal market.
A project like Faircoin, on the other hand, starts from the assumption that, while formal market systems may be a source of economic growth and individual enhancement, they are simultaneously the source of social inequality, individual alienation and community disintegration. Thus, rather than trying to find narrow solutions to individual hardship, initiatives like Faircoin seek to create alternative economic systems that bypass normal markets, and that rewrite the deep level rules of economic engagement. In particular they place heavy emphasis on the basis of economic life being mutual cooperation and solidarity, rather than individual competition for narrow economic success.
And I really disagree that the "normal" market, and the "free" market leads to "social inequality, individual alienation and community disintegration"... and the author make lot of points were he uses the expression "left wing" giving the idea that been leftist or support some kind of socialist (or cooperativist) is something straightforward. And let's be honest... if captalism is so "bad" how could we have gotten where we are? Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are immersed in exchanging of products and services... lot of "new ways" of capitalism are emerging "like asking for a loan here in the forum", lot of startups are reaching higher grounds, lot of "small people" are having the chance to make good usage of programming, and like the author said (that's is what I agree) lot of people are putting in practice unimaginable ideas, just because of technology and so on.
So, why should we throw a stone in capitalism, since it's the wheel that keeps the economy (in the whole spectrum) existing? Why should cooperativism and solidarity might be used if all we want and all we know it's right in the individuality, self compromise and the secular way of making trades? If we all act in a left wing position, the world will become a vast communist-humanist-solidarist-cooperativist and the "normal people" (what a horrible expression) will be "truly" cut off by themselves in a way they will be thinking it will be a "way to survive" with "social unfair", represion and lack of helplessness but that is what they we got in the end of the story?
I don't know if I was clear, but I became altered after read this document.
