The idea behind a diversity-based cooperative society is that wealth is redistributed in order to let every identity have the possibility to fulfill its potentials, every personality should be respected. This idea has been the base of democracies, communist and socialist systems, and capitalist-liberal ones. Capitalism accuses communism and socialism to be fake and to destroy individual dignity. Socialism and communism instead point out that capitalism is greedy and the system brings to inequivalence.


Riane Eisler used to say we should leave behind all the -isms. Communism didn’t work, as its homologation power negated the single identities. Socialism was too centralized to give reliability and transparency. Capitalism, instead, automatically triggers an accumulation of the resources -or financial power. Even Scandinavian countries, an example of very good “Sociocapitalism”, have difficulties in reaching a good wealth distribution. The welcomed Sharing Economy phenomenon became a form of Sharing Business in some cases, in some other a form of shared exploitation. The astounding work of Nobel Prize Elinor Ostrom about “the Commons” demonstrated decentralized power is better than centralized one. Nevertheless, having a society based on the commons still strives to be.. “common” and distributed all over the world.


Cooperation and cooperative economy have always been practiced: the US countryside power distribution system wouldn’t have ever existed without the electric cooperatives, Canadian cooperative movement was at the base of the New Democratic Party, the Gung-ho in China and the JCCU in Japan managed to survive through wars and politically adverse times, and theorists of cooperation were part of the economic-political European culture since the worker-cooperative movement started in England. Besides this, cooperative economy and the commons are rooted in African traditional culture. So.. what’s new?

The new is that the study of collective intelligence, neuroeconomics and ancient African social technologies like the Open Space Technology and the Indaba, together with Ostrom’s insights on the commons, can be integrate in a more pleasant social system. Cooperative economy may avoid centralization, give power to different views and allow two twin systems, one based on hazardous competition and the other one supported by redistribution and cooperative production.


Current economy is based on hazardous dynamics. Like in poker, you bet your work and money on the cards you have: they could be your current job, your skills, a new startup idea or a capital you want to invest. Will you get the outcomes of what you bet? Apparently, everything seems unpredictable, and nobody is sure about what will be happening next with his personal bet. We have a system that is risky and that keeps everybody, rich and poor ones, under the threat of losing what they have. A cooperative economy would avoid this, and better social technologies can enable a change in the medium-long term. Should we therefore base our economies only on a safe and mutual system?

As long as we respect and desire diversity, we shouldn’t change the current system. Having two twin systems can allow people to keep things safe and well-distributed, generate a stable and base income for everybody's wellbeing, and provide a common and mutual growth. On the other side it would allow us to participate in the game of competition on a side market, in order to have the opportunity to play in a more risk-based economy.
The current international economy is based only on the latter. Join us and let’s create together a space for a parallel market based on mutual enjoyment and people's delight.