Have you ever felt like power just circulates among elites?
That anger rises, systems shift, people change … but nothing really changes?
I see people fighting. Arguing. Upset over politics… over power, wealth, inequality... my entire life. It seems like an inescapable loop.
There are many offering answers for how to come into agreement .. visionary approaches: the Three Horizons, Holacracy, Sociocracy, Communism, Democracy... and so on. So many frameworks. All of them holding some truth - yet like blind folks all trying to describe an elephant …. they grasp at coherent integration of the commons. Not metaphorical commons. Living, breathing, grassroots economics.
It’s like a gaping hole in our map. No matter how you transfer or divide up governance - without a working mechanism for the commons … you end up back in a power-over structure... instead of a power-with one.
This is why I believe in the work of Elinor Ostrom … and weaving the deeper patterns of commons stewardship into protocol. Not as abstraction, but as function.
Here’s the shift: you, as a person .. or together as a group .. begin by curating and tracking clear commitments. We value those commitments. We set limits—on how much any of us can pull from the pool. And we create transparent pathways for exchange.
The pattern is simple enough to fit in any worldview and simple enough to implement.
This process - has many names across all cultures and in general is called commitment pooling …. it mirrors how living systems cooperate. It’s how we enter symbiosis.
From this place, we can reframe the entire question of inequality and power imbalance... Not as a struggle for redistribution, but as a call into relationship.
Again... we see power changing hands … over and over.
And still.. “It’s our turn to eat,” is the moto for the next upset group?
We must all be tired of this cycle of people trying to ‘eat at the top’?
What if it's about composting the entire table?
It’s easy to be angry when power feels distant, concentrated, or misused.
The instinct to demand redistribution is strong … especially when those in power and wealth fails to deliver fairness.
But maybe the answer isn’t taking power away from those who hold it.
Maybe it’s building a new foundation … where power flows differently.
We are entering a time when it is more and more clear that our recently inherited models of governance no longer serve the scale or intimacy of the challenges we face.
Rather than replicate old patterns of control and resentment … there is another much much older path: Commitment pooling.
It begins with a shift in how we see leadership.
Those with influence aren’t the problem … they can become stewards.
But stewardship only becomes real when it is shared.
No one leads alone. No one leads unseen.
Imagine a community project where decisions aren’t made by the loudest voice or the biggest stake - but by visible, collective commitments. Many governance models speak to this but lack the integration by protocol and a transparent and trust worthy mechanism to keep commitments accountable.
A commitment might be denominated in USD. Or in chairs. Hours of childcare. Kilowatt-hours of community energy.
One group brings infrastructure.
Another offers time.
A third pledges local adoption.
A fourth contributes money.
Each stake is different - but each is essential.
Influence flows not from dominance - but from what you're willing to show up for.
This is not redistribution. It is reweaving.
A practice of aligning contributions with care … where power emerges from pooled trust, not delegated authority.
It invites those with more to lead … by risking more.
And invites those without monetary capital to lead … by offering what matters: time, skill, insight, roots.
Outrage may wake us up...
But coordination is what moves us forward.
If we stay trapped in resentment, we mirror the very systems we seek to transform.
But if we turn toward each other, acknowledge our differences, and pool what we carry...
We begin something new:
Leadership as stewardship. Power as promise. Community as co-authorship.
This is not easy work.
It requires slowing down. Becoming visible. Choosing trust.
This is how living systems thrive - not through extraction or force, but through symbiosis.
So if you feel frustration with how things are led … know that it's valid.
Now ask yourself:
What am I ready to commit to?
And... who am I ready to trust?
Let us move from power struggles to shared stewardship.
Let us pool our commitments.
And lead, together!
——-
And if you're wondering how to begin … know this: the tools already exist. The Celo decentralized ledger, in connection with the open-source Sarafu.Network, offers a living interface for commitment pooling. Here, individuals, businesses, groups and communities can make promises of time, goods, care, and skill — digitally visible, yet rooted in lived relationships. Each contribution can be curated, valued, and limited, forming trust-backed pools that link together across geographies. This isn't just infrastructure. It's a mycelial grid of coordination —- transparent, copy-able, and open to all who are ready to show up.
Tx Will for your persistent offering of guidance. Presenting the framework over and over again from different angles and approaches. Much appreciated.
I love this. I keep thinking of “minimum viable persons” like how in my city I want to weave relationships to eat, educate, have safety and shelter, thrive. with whatever overlapping and interweaving relationships as possible.
to lead by example a sane, regenerative existence.
and that that sanity is so in demand, that it will attract others to it.
to that end I’d love to pursue the conversation I had with Aude a couple months ago. To throw my video making / writing etc schools into a pool, and see if there’s a project to bring your work to more people
I’ve been watching your videos which are great and am wondering if showcasing one or several pools in action might help bring it alive? or perhaps the process of seeing if forming a pool with a video maker in Montreal, and a foundation in Kenya and who knows who else, might demonstrate the potential of these protocols?
John