# Thought Experiment: Postcapitalist Mutualism

In Capitalism, ownership and use are divided, while in Communism, they are undivided. Now, Proudhon's idea of Mutualism is not Communism or Capitalism, but more like a middle path between the two. A synthesis of the two meant that ownership had to be undivided while use was divided. A recipe where everyone shares ownership, but usage is divided up protected by a “free contract.” It's a partial common ownership system (mutual usufruct) that wraps its arms around the entire society, but still lets each person keep their rights and the freedom to do their own thing, as with Capitalism.

_**Heres the thought experiment:**_ envision an island — like Sri Lanka — where the entire geographical terrain is in a perpetual state of auction. Picture each parcel of land with a bidding price and anyone placing a higher bid than the existing rate gains ownership. A significant portion of 0ASIS is dedicated to the exploration of such a Post-Capitalist Mutual Usufruct system.

Considering that every individual globally has equal rights to land and natural resources — under the _witness_ of geoautonomy — these rights are not perpetual ownership rights but rather a right to use or possess, or "Mutualism Usufruct." There are multiple forms these equal rights can take, with the main one being the generation of a competitive usage market through partial common ownership. Partial Common Ownership, also known as Self-Assessed Licenses Sold Via Auction (SALSA), presents a novel, fairer and efficient method of land management compared to capitalism or communism.

In SALSA systems, land belong to no one and everyone. The current possessor of the plot of land, must self-assess and declare its value. Based on the self-assessed value, they pay a fee, which can be used to fund public goods, or distributed as a social dividend as basic income. If somebody bids more for that plot of land, current possessors sell it for their self-assessed value, resulting in more benefits for the public.

<figure><img src="https://3594951336-files.gitbook.io/~/files/v0/b/gitbook-x-prod.appspot.com/o/spaces%2FYjxibeWPQx30gUuuUmrd%2Fuploads%2FBr3odJAZSHdP3byQgPJk%2F1.webp?alt=media&#x26;token=1c0dd12c-11ff-4a82-bd03-ffb5466e8189" alt=""><figcaption><p>SALSA Model</p></figcaption></figure>

**Step 1**. Sell a set number of licenses. We recommend using a Dutch auction (i.e., descending price) or a Channel auction. (In a Channel auction, there is a lower bound price, which gradually rises, and an upper bound price, which gradually descends. Buyers are committed to buy, for at least the lower bound price, but may purchase directly at the upper bound price at any time.)

**Step 2.** Holders post their self-assessed valuations in an online platform and pay annual fees on them (e.g., a 20% fee). As mentioned above, the right annual fee rate will be somewhere between zero and the turnover rate (i.e., the probability that a higher-value pur- chaser comes along within a year).

**Step 3.** Purchasers who value the asset higher may buy it at any time in the online marketplace.

As part of this thought experiment, let's assume that the SALSA auctions are facilitated through smartphone apps that automatically place bids based on preset settings, negating the need for constant bid calculation. Regulations are in place to prevent potential disruptions (like unexpectedly losing ownership of your residence). Incentives are provided to foster land care and development, and to maintain privacy or other values. All auction revenue would be distributed evenly among citizens as a "Basic Income Grant" or used for public initiatives.

This SALSA auctioning would revolutionise Sri Lanka’s societal and political landscape. Firstly, people's perception of their land would shift. The clear demarcation between owning a house and occupying a beach spot would fade. Private land would become public to a significant extent and the possessions of those around you would, in a sense, become partly yours.

Secondly, the constant auctioning typical of a SALSA market would rectify the extensive misuse of lands and other resources. The highest bidder for picturesque hillsides would never be someone planning to erect shaky, rundown slums. Central city land's highest bidders would be the constructors of upscale condos or skyscraper builders for the emerging, middle class generated by the auction.

A third consequence would be the eradication of the main cause of wealth disparity. While one may initially presume that the auction would enable the wealthy to monopolize all valuable assets, reconsider — what defines wealth?People who own lots of land, and so forth. But if all plots of land were up for auction all the time, no person would own such land, their benefits would flow equally to all.

Fourthly, the Sri Lankan SALSA would curtail corruption by shifting key political decisions from politicians to the citizens. Instead of the conventional image of "free" markets catering to and eroding the public sphere, such Wild Markets (SALSA) would enhance trust in public affairs.

Fifth, if all land in Sri Lanka were collectively funded and liberated, it could produce a “Basic Income” of over $10,000+ annually for each person under the _witness_ of Geoautonomy. GDP would become irrelevant; grassroots, localised spending would significantly enhance purchasing power, proving far more effective than top-down “GDP” economics.
