their ideas strapped by their futurist elements and given at least a theoretically emphasis on economic organization will be nothing but plain Anarcho-Communism because there is plainly a gift economy here but instead of a gift economy enforced by self managed economic organizations we have gift economy enforced by computers that is the only difference in economical theory between Anarcho-Communism and RBE.

that's correct but this needs a transitional period even if it's achieved as well as whit Anarcho-Communism this RBE can't implement its ideas directly after they achieve a revolution because let's be real here these 2 systems can't be achieved trough heavy reform it's impossible so we can't implement this directly like that because it will have disastrous consequences we need to 1. abolish money but keep vouchers because in abolishing vouchers too a gift economy in a non rationed decentralized society will lead to the complete depletion of resources so until we restructure the economy we need a transition stage most people agree to see this stage as Anarcho-Syndicalism as i do and 2. a gift economy can't work in a fossil fuel society so in order to achieve RBE or Anarcho-Communism we need this transitional stage until we arrive in a post-fossil fuel era because we can't go directly from a capitalist society to a RBE society because it's impossible capitalism creates too many obstacles and one of them is the use of fossil fuel .

I had the same feeling, that his whole project was simply a futurist fantasy that this old man was enjoying. But more and more I realize how thorough and extensive it is. We have to keep in mind that this man has worked his entire life (he's 93) on developing these ideas. So it is important that we not underestimate his thinking. I feel like I've only heard a fraction of his ideas.

Most people are put off because almost everything he says is so profound, and due to our conditioning by our current society, his ideas seem unimaginable. Also, I think people are put off by all of his crazy designs that he has on his website. People see that and they are like, "uuuuuuuuuuuuuh......okay...wow... that looks like it's from a Sci Fi movie." But the truth is that all of his ideas are so damn developed and well rounded that he has ventured into fleshing out even the tiniest details such as architecture and little specifics about everything. It's insane all the little obscure details and subtlties that he has figured out. Due to this insane complexity of ideas and overwhelming information about the system, it simply seems crazy. But once you take the time to look through all of his work, he actually sort of starts to seem sort of brilliant (and might I remind you he's as clear headed as ever at 93), or maybe he's just experienced. We have to remember that he has spent his entire life facing questions about his system. Can we really think that he hasn't encounter every question out there that can be conceived? It seems obvious to me that he has had plenty of time to develope solutions and answers to the problems and questions that face his project.

A little lecture.

The Venus Project London Lecture - October 2009 - Part 1 of 2 from The Zeitgeist Movement on Vimeo.

The Venus Project London Lecture - October 2009 - Part 2 of 2 from The Zeitgeist Movement on Vimeo.

Well i don't see any difference between Participatory economics , Anarcho-Syndicalism and other anarchist economic theory and the RBE . I mean this dude proposes the same thing but he advocates mechanized economic redistribution . This dude is a technocratic socialist as the old the very old so called " Utopian socialists " so i like him i listen to him but i don't see any new thing in what he says .

He isn't really saying anything new. He does have many brilliant technological designs that will solve many of our problems. I rally behind him because his movement actually has potential in America. He's not simply an economic or political theorist who simply writes papers. He works towards making it an actuality by designing all of the vital minute details through a holistic understanding. It's not really about him presenting anything new, it's about the potentiality of it being actualized.

I understand but even if a machine can rationally redistribute social wealth i don't know how can that actually work . Because we see here a new coordinator class like in the former Soviet Union this actual class is this machine which redistributes social wealth according to the standards it was designed . The only people fitted to redistribute social wealth is those who create social wealth . A machine or a coordinator class can't know the needs of the people only the people know their needs . That's why self managed economic organizations are created and maintained because everything comes from below from the masses from each according to his ability to each according to his need . Economic redistribution is in tandem whit the needs of the masses in this way . Machines are not fitted and will never fitted to do this .

Read " Fields , Factories and Workshops " and " The Conquest Of Bread " By Peter Kropotkin and " Parecon Life After Capitalism " i strongly recommend these books after reading these 3 books i guarantee you will loose a slight interest in the RBE .

Participatory economics would work now. But I'm not ruling out RBE working someday.

It can't work because needs can't be measured by machines it's impossible . The cybernetics field in an extremely distant future maybe can emblem something in humans so resources are redistributed upon need. Kropotkin's theory is the opposite here you are mistaking society is based upon the organization of the whole workplace and the whole workforce. Workers Cooperatives , Workers Councils , Syndicates , Free Federations , Free Communes etc. are mass organizations which encapsulate personal labor and the workplace itself whit its technology . And technological advancement even if it replaces labor its good in behalf of my anarchist perspective. If technology is made socially and individually liberatory then its all good . We can see the rise of a gift economy and humanity will reach the very controversial goal called " communism " a moneyless , stateless and classless society based upon a gift economy . But until then it's a long very long run . We as activists must face the realities of our time . We must show practical and palpable solutions so we can survive as a tradition and win the people on our side .

Hey what's wrong with futurists anyway?