System D is characterized by massive decentralization and its use of a digital abundance economy, which enables the free and open use of digital goods by everyone. Open access to scientific and other data, as well as open science helped to overcome the rigid centralized industrial interests distorting scientific results in key industries. Basic incomes and reputation incomes enabled a large degree of positive freedom, and effective decentralized self-organization of people and their efforts towards solving the world’s problems.
Thus, the new dynamic economy accelerated technological developments and efficiency increases. Artificial intelligence, atomically precise manufacturing, solar power, and asteroid mining were quickly developed and utilized to achieve economic growth rates (measured in conventional terms) than significantly exceeded 10% per year.
The consistent application of integrated systems thinking enabled a much better regulation of society and ecosystems, as compared to the illusion of centralized control prevailing in system C.
New governance systems that integrated direct democratic and meritocratic elements that were supported with artificial intelligence enabled politics to adapt at a sufficient rate to keep up with novel technologies and other societal transformations. This development decreased the importance of the old nation states, while voluntary decentralized and distributed communities connected via the global information networks rose in influence and power.
Industrial processes became increasingly automated through AI and robotics, and increasingly decentralized though 3d-printing and nanotechnology, so that a high level of material abundance for all human members of the system D civilization.
The upgrading of humans through cybernetic enhancements, longevity therapies, and integration with artificial intelligence makes system D the first transhuman societal system in history. Nevertheless, the (trans)human-centric philosophies of system D are its main remaining limiting factor, which prevented the full flourishing of the world which was in principle enabled by the technology that was already available under system D. This is changed with the transition to a more holistic cosmic life-centric view in system V.
Well as far as the past and present is concerned, your sequence is consistent. Of course it is
As preferable as a transition into system d actually is as fictional it appears if we consider our current state of affairs:
The fact that today‘s technological development is correlated with ‘corporated capitalism‘ has an impact on our technological design, and that will be until digital abundance is realized. Simultaniously digitalization unprecedently improves the instruments of central control. The latter is ambivalent. Instead of decentralization this could, on one side, end up in some sort of Elysium-scenario (I‘m referring to the 2013 film by N. Blomcamp http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108/ ). On the other side, as long as we are confronted with today‘s real world political problems such means of control are meaningful, and even potentially useful to guarantee the socio-economic conditions we need to actually develop digital abundance and eventually initiate transition into neo-humanity.
Yes, that’s true, and our current system of “corporated capitalism” leveraging means of control of information like patents, intellectual property, digital rights management, copyrights, trade secrets, and so on, is an obvious sign that we haven’t reached system D, yet.
It does, but that’s not relevant, since all things being equal, decentralized organization methods are often more efficient than centralized control structures. That’s why the natural development is towards decentralized structures becoming more important. That we don’t see much of that happening, yet, is merely due to the fact that the transition towards system D is still in a relatively early stage. Things should look much different in the 2030s.
Instead of capitalist social democratic states, we are already ending up with failed states in many regions. The degenerate centralized states of the future will be the failed state scenarios. In the long run, they won’t be able to compete with the rest of the world.
Theoretically, that could happen. Where centralization spreads the dissemination of knowledge, it can be put into use for a positive transformation.
