Elise Van Mourik
Convinced of the idea that the best way to rob a bank, to reconsider the existing economical system we are in, is to rob the system of the bank itself, I propose an economy based on material scarcity rather than one based on exchange. The difference between the two terms lies in the notion that an economy based on material scarcity employs a system of exchange to create an economical potential by splittling the whole or raw in to parts or products, per capita of consumer (hence capitalism)
The interchange economy surpaces the one-way monopoly of production and distribution by suggesting that a materiel resource can function as a omniflux : in this matter as flow scenario production becomes repair, the whole and parts are equal, as are the producer and consumer, both are amateur sculptors and produce/repair to meet their material needs.
I imagine the interchange economy is based a supermaterial : a supereasy, superabundant, superstrongbond, substance; as much a glue as a material.
However, as a proposal for a global economy, is the supermaterial is another totalitarian act or not? A facist attempt to monopolize the world, perhaps. Or can the supermaterial by virtue of its spectacular possibilities free the global economy from its powerstruggle as no-one ownes it?