This is a brilliant piece, thank you. It is very reminiscent of David Fleming’s equally brilliant “Surviving the Future” — http://www.flemingpolicycentre.org.uk/david-flemings-posthumous-books/ — which I read recently and was blown away by.
Are you familiar with his work? It’s the most powerful “prefiguring” of the kind of future you outline, and I see now that two of your books are referenced in the late Dr. Fleming’s remarkable bibliography. In his words “localisation stands, at best, at the limits of practical possibility, but it has the decisive argument in its favour that there will be no alternative.” I’m convinced.
I am now beginning to explore his lifework “Lean Logic: A Dictionary for the Future and how to Survive It” and, while I hope that the two of you were firm allies, I wonder if there is some difference from your view of the second stage of the revolution, which left me a little confused.
You write that towns will need some supplies that they can’t produce themselves (certainly), and that this need will drive “transition to a very different kind of national economy”. But if so, why isn’t it already doing so? Surely because this need is already being met by the globalised system, no? So I don’t understand why you foresee that need coming to drive such a (desirable and necessary) change towards more localised decision-making?
A quick and pithy answer especially welcome. Or if you would rather recommend a lengthier work of yours where I can read more about this, I should be glad of it.