Observing what is currently happening in the US has led me down the Network State rabbit hole. The linked video is a great place to start if you’re not already aware of these ideas.
Unfortunately these concepts seem to be cosied up to modern fascism/monarchism, but I do wonder if this is genuinely the likeliest alternative to modern day capitalism. Yanis Varoufakis’ idea of technofeudalism seems like another way of viewing this.
Could greener, more altruistic network states co-exist with money and power hungry billionaire-led communities? Or would their greed and ambition be detrimental to the efforts of those trying to save the natural earth?
Not really. Varoufakis idea is more of a novel way of framing what already exists right now, but I think he is doing to some extend the classic mistake of thinking capitalism is/was about competition, when that was always at most an inconvenience on the way to reach a monopoly.
Network states are basically the doomer vision for billionaires (which describes Peter Thiel quite well). They might try to sell it as the great vision of trading/charter cities like Venice during the Renaissance, but in reality they are fully aware that this is just a scaled up and more realistic version of the bunker with guns and cans.
Thank you for the explanation, I need to look at the ideas more closely and understand the differences between them.
I do find it strange that these network states don’t explain how classic issues like climate change or equality would come into play. In fact, it’s funny that the Network State book doesn’t acknowledge what happens to differently abled or disadvantaged individuals. I guess the easy answer is that they simply don’t care!