Automationism: Collective Ownership of AI Production

Part 1: E Pluribus Unum

Reimagining Economic Systems for the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Money is not real.

It is the shared hallucination of human society—an abstraction for power.

Power to move people, as electricity moves machines.

We invented money to solve a problem: how do strangers trust each other enough to cooperate? If I help you today, how do I know you'll help me tomorrow? Money became the answer—a token of obligation, a promise made portable.

It worked. Perhaps too well, because somewhere along the way we confused the tool with the measure. Money stopped being merely how we allocate resources and became how we value people. If I have nothing to offer you—no labor, no resources, no currency—what purpose does it serve you to find me valuable? This is the broken metric of capitalism: a human life matters only so far as it generates capital.

For centuries, our economic systems have held together through a simple bargain: those without money could trade their time. Time became the great asset of the working class—the one thing everyone possessed, the one thing the system needed. Show up, work, receive compensation, survive. The keystone of the whole arrangement.

That keystone is now cracking.

With the arrival of intelligence powered by electricity, humanity's tools are becoming better at working than humanity itself. In this new world, people without money will have very little to offer those with money. Through the limited lens of capitalism, the masses are becoming obsolete—not valuable, not needed.

As artificial general intelligence approaches, we stand at a crossroads. The question is not whether intelligent automation will transform our economy—it is whether we will use this opportunity to transform with it. We invented money. We invented capitalism. We can invent what comes next. If intelligent machines can perform the labor of the working class, does this necessitate their displacement, or can we consider an alternative economic system where the masses are no longer required to trade time for money in order to survive?

Such is the vision of automationism: an economic framework explored in the novel We Can Be Perfect: The Paradox of Progress which places the ownership of AI-driven production directly into the hands of communities, fundamentally reimagining how we distribute prosperity in the age of intelligent machines. This post is part 1 of a series exploring the benefits such a system could offer to our species.

But how would this actually work? The answer lies not in complex economic theory, but in the elegant design we carry within ourselves—in the cells of the human body.

Automationist Cells

When you observe the cells of multi-cellular organisms, you discover one thing particularly curious about them: they are able to coordinate with one another without the need for money or markets. They recognize that they are all effectively part of a larger whole, and do not require a medium of exchange to collaborate. Arguably, human societies are far more complex in our interactions with one another, but there are some concepts we can gather from these microscopic, organic machines.

At its heart, automationism proposes organizing economic activity around "cells"—groups of individuals who collectively own and manage automated production systems. These cells combine several economic mechanics of publicly traded companies with the community-oriented governance of towns. The members of the cell are ‘shareholders’ that take in regular dividend payments based on the wealth generated by the intelligent automation. A cell leverages AI to provide goods or services, which is exchanged with external parties for currency. That currency is then distributed toward the members of the cell.

The key here is ownership. Rather than trading time for money, cell members co-own the machines and receive passive income from the production of automated labor. This ensures that people are not left destitute when AI works faster, cheaper, and without rest. We can rise together. Is there a reason not to?

Consider this: why do the cells of a human body work together so cohesively? Red blood cells, for example, don't hoard resources or compete for dominance. They simply cooperate and serve their functions. What drives such coordination if not money? What is their objective in working together?

The answer is so obvious it seems laughable to reflect over it—their objective is to live. A cell works to live as part of the larger organism. Yet it is in that simple answer that a path forward opens up for our species, a path that invites us to evolve beyond our evolution and question our current motives, particularly in why we network.

 Automationist Networks

The effectiveness of automationism multiplies when cells connect to form networks. Individual cells might specialize in different industries—one focused on renewable energy production, another on sustainable agriculture, a third on manufacturing consumer goods. By working together, these specialized cells can share resources, knowledge, and markets, creating resilient, decentralized yet interdependent ecosystems that serve broader communities while maintaining local autonomy. The networks need not compete against one another, but function more as organs within one encompassing organism, providing exactly what the body of humanity needs as it needs it.

Of course, coordinating the needs of such a society in real time remains beyond human capacity, which is why we see so much waste in our current systems. Groups rush to copy successful products, flooding markets with knock-offs, only to discover demand has already shifted. This lack of coordination, combined with fixation on profit rather than genuine need, creates an absurd cycle: endless advertising, wasteful production, meaningless labor—all so individuals can compete against one another rather than collaborate for collective abundance.

When we think of economic systems, particularly capitalism, that word—compete—often comes to mind. Have you ever stopped to consider how odd it is that our systems are divided into these mythical entities called ‘companies’ that compete against one another for financial resources? Companies, like money, are not real. They are constructs of the human imagination, rather primitive ones, which create an 'us' versus 'them' mentality where none need exist. This competition isn't inevitable; it's simply behavior that has evolved organically throughout our history, subconscious inertia set into motion long before any of us were born. But we can just as easily imagine our societies patterned after the behavior of a unified, multi-cellular organism, consisting of many parts, yet operating as one.

For too long, we have been trapped by false dichotomies: capitalism or socialism, individual achievement or collective welfare, economic efficiency or social justice. Yet both of these seemingly opposing concepts suffer from the same limitations—hierarchies and centralization. Automationism offers a third path that looks beyond these worn binaries. As our technology advances, so can the way in which we organize, and these possibilities create unprecedented opportunities for us.

Consider socialism, which concentrates power in distant bureaucracies and attempts to coordinate entire national economies through planning committees. Automationist cells, by contrast, could make decisions locally—by the people who live with the consequences. This distinction is crucial. While well-intentioned, centralized planning inevitably creates rigid hierarchies, slow response times, and disconnection between decision-makers and communities. The result is often stagnation, inefficiency, and a loss of local autonomy that contradicts the very democratic ideals these systems claim to champion.

And unlike capitalist companies, automationist networks would trade not to extract maximum profit, but to achieve mutually assured resiliency. AI systems could coordinate pricing and resource flows across the network, prioritizing long-term sustainability over short-term gains. The energy cell provides power knowing manufactured goods will be available in return. The agricultural cell supplies food confident their needs will be met. This mutual assurance replaces market competition with coordinated abundance.

We must not forget that money and economic systems are human inventions. We created them, and we can improve upon them.

The AI Advantage: Why Intelligent Automation Changes Everything

What makes automationism particularly compelling is how artificial intelligence transforms the economics of collective ownership. Up until now, every society before us solely depended upon the exploitation of human or animal labor to meet its needs. Now, we are rapidly approaching the reality that society need not rest upon the backs of a working class, but upon a platform of intelligent tools, allowing human communities to focus on higher-level strategy and governance.

Imagine a cell of 100 people collectively owning a manufacturing facility. AI systems manage the entire production process—from supply chain optimization to quality control to customer service. The humans meet periodically to vote on major strategic decisions: Which products should they manufacture? How should they reinvest their profits? What partnerships should they pursue with other cells?

This division of labor—AI for execution, humans for direction—will make collective ownership far more practical than ever before. Community members don't need specialized technical expertise to participate meaningfully in governance. The AI systems provide transparent reporting on operations, market conditions, and financial performance, enabling informed democratic decision-making.

If we stick with the current status quo of capitalism, and continue to measure people by the worth of their financial assets, we are heading into a future where many people are going to be deemed worthless as their labor becomes obsolete. That's not a future anyone should accept without question. This is the existential threat that automationism directly confronts.

The Promise of Shared Prosperity

When intelligent machines handle the means of production, where will human value derive from? What will you be able to contribute to society that AI does not? This is a question posed in the opening chapter of my novel We Can Be Perfect: The Paradox of Progress to an individual whose job has been replaced by AI. His answer is one that captures the essence of our rapidly approaching obsolescence—and our opportunity.

“If human labor is truly becoming obsolete, then we must find new foundations for human dignity. Not in what we produce, but in how we connect. How we care for each other. How we love.”

This insight reveals what automationism is truly about: designing an economic system that reflects these humanist values rather than eroding them. It creates a fundamentally different relationship between humans, artificial intelligence, and economic reward. Instead of competing with machines for jobs and continuing to trade time for money, we the people can be liberated from such economic concerns by becoming collective owners of intelligent production systems.

These articles will raise more questions than they answer—and that's intentional. The goal is to start a conversation about alternatives that might preserve human dignity in an automated world. They will be living documents. New concepts and refinements will emerge as others join the discussion, challenge assumptions, and help imagine what collective ownership of AI-driven production could truly look like. In Part 2, we'll explore how automationist cells leverage AI to coordinate within decentralized networks rather than traditional human hierarchies.

The future isn't something that happens to us—it's something we build together. But the window for choosing our path is narrowing. We must ask ourselves what type of future we want to work towards. Start the conversation now, while we still have time to shape what comes next.

E Pluribus Unum - Out of Many, One