I like to read articles about economic democracy. I am interested in economic democracy concerning my work with decentralization and cryptocurrencies. Because I think more people can engage in economic democracy in the future. Thanks to decentralized technology like crypto and blockchain, I already have some experience with how people are, for example, using what is labeled as green cryptocurrencies for what's name projects, agriculture, markets, and some carbon capture.

It is very strange that Sweden, despite the history of political and social ideas, most Swedes are not engaged in economic democracy. I would say that most left-wing Swedes are not really engaged in economic democracy.

As I understand from the history of ideas, economic democracy here in Northern Europe, the term is usually more commonly associated with the political left, especially with social democracy. Still, the thing is that even many people on the right were actually in favor of economic democracy, or they were arguing from, let's say, different ideas with different arguments. For example, members of the Moderate party or Right party as they were called in the past, were saying things like, yes, we want economic democracy because then people can decide if they want to have companies, small businesses, big businesses, cooperatives, and do things without the government.

I grew up with a father who was more into left-wing anarchism and disliked the system in Yugoslavia. One of his opinions was that the worker's self-management in Yugoslavia was more of a theater than reality because you can't have self-management and be governed by only one political party deciding your final decision and outcome.

I'm usually very negative and critical towards what I see as left-wing and right-wing centralism. I support ideas as civic assemblies. But at the same time, I see the problem regarding top-down and bottom-up actions. Much of the modern left-wing oriented communication about economic democracy is like, we want to use a top-down initiative to make it easier for people to do bottom-up initiative but … as long as these bottom-up initiatives are good for our left-wing and progressive agenda.

I have met several very smart people, usually progressive, saying things like - look what happened in Ireland - abortion was legalized after a civic lobby or assembly proposed it. Well, I mean, I'm happy about that since I am in favor of rights and I dislike anti-abortion politics for different reasons.

At the same time, I also think about what would happen or imagine a situation where a civic assembly, saying that proposing that there should be a ban on minarets because minarets are not part of our culture. Or maybe we should even ban Muslim prayer in public spaces or something like that.

The thing is also that when it comes to economic democracy, in this case, when I'm reading about the Green New Deal GND so to say, is that as I understand, and I will have to read more of the mentioned books, the idea is that politicians like AOC and different progressive lobbies propose the Green New Deal from the top down, people will be involved in cooperating around it at the local level. But what is the point of economic democracy and more involving democracy if the plan is already from the government?

Isn't it the point of economic democracy and democratic decentralization that things like GND should be initiated from the bottom up? So, why not create an initiative that is about what we can do very locally about climate and environment and then what we can do on the national level based on experiences, what we have done locally, and humans can co-create local circles and ecosystems for economic rewards cooperation projects and some.

I see the same problem with the Left Party in Sweden. They say we want more democracy, we want more economic democracy. But then they also say that the only way to achieve that between the rows is to need more democracy. Still, for that, everybody needs to be a democratic socialist. And imagine somebody very conservative saying that we need more democracy, but… everybody needs to be a democratic conservative?

The thing is that if you believe in democracy, you need to accept pluralism. Not everything said in the public debate or initiated in politics is democratic or pro-democratic. But still, democracy should be, in my opinion, that it doesn't matter if you are left, right center, liberal, conservative socialist. Democracy should be transcending that is something more universal for more or less for everyone.

And I think in your case, if you want to create this new party or community or network is that that you should try to explain to people that if they want to achieve a, let's say, more sustainable and fair society, the need is to focus more on bottom-up initiatives on local level relations and cooperation.

I am sympathetic to the movement in many ways because I think young people have understood certain things that many adults don't want to understand or ignore. Many older people don't believe in climate change, partly because of psychological reasons. The older you get, the more your brain is not interested in new things and new information. Then the older you get, you may want to protect more of your privileges, income, and money. Otherwise, you end up in a problem, as in the case of Greta’s movement.

There are different reasons why climate change denial is more on the political right, especially nativist or nationalist authoritarian right. So, the problem with Greta’s movement is when they tell people things such as that the Earth is dying, we will all be destroyed. That “we” need to abolish capitalism regardless of research showing that negative and pessimistic communication leads to more people—feeling disengaged, uninspired, and inactive.

Even Naomi Klein, whom I often disagree with, says that big left movements need to be more focused on saying yes to something and saying more about what one is in favor of, and not mainly what they're against or just saying no. Because if “Earth is going to die,” and it's too late, what's the point of doing something about it?

I personally think that a post-capitalist society is possible. It's possible to have a post-capitalist society with green cryptocurrencies. And the post-capitalist society can be achieved without centralism and collectivism.

So there is a center for anarchism and democracy like in Freiburg, in Germany. There are many nice ideas, and there is technological development. But it's never going to work on a bigger scale until more people are not trained and enlightened. In order for more people to believe in that, you need more relations between people.

One of the reasons why Social Democrats were able to create, for example, “folkhem” and a large welfare state in Sweden, similar to West Germany or France. It was because these were mass movements that included so many people. And even if people did not always like certain proposals or decisions, they could still accept that because they were part of the team. The situation in Sweden is that political parties are smaller today than before. If you take social democrats, how many members do they have today? Compared to 30-40 years ago?

And this is why the future should be about decentralized communities, networks, circles, and cooperation. Because when people do things together, they learn, accept, and believe in things. It's not always suitable to see people do horrible and inhuman things. But at the same time, the same behaviors, moral psychology, and technology can be used for good for the sake of democracy.

Thanks for reading. You can support and reward my writing via: 

Pay Pal – [email protected]

Algo - NCG6LBALQHENQUSR77KOR6SS42FGK54BZ5L2HFDSBGQVLGYIOVWYDXFDI4

ADA – addr1q9vfs6nqz4xmtnpljwhv4tukyskd2g7enxd87rpugkwwvfun5pnla5d5tes2mvurrc77e7837yd0scrfk063qlha8wgs8d4ynz

Bitcoin 3HbxyDXE9MhNQ8RqsirqgYvFupQzh5Xby2

ETH - 0x8982cdb97bd23f092f78a16a4fc93c5c4607a285

Seeds – vladlausevic

Skycoin – ZxjhWMJRbTNCRQzy5MekZzH4fhdWFCqBP8

Tezos — tz1QrRzkTAKuPKF8dmGW6c1ScEHBUGvoiJBM