A short contextual introduction by Michel Bauwens:
Two years in a row, I attended a conference event in Moscow, entitled Open Dialogue, organized by the National Centre of Russia. Think of it as similar to a governmental organization that is in charge of events like the national pavilion at the World Expo, and they manage a permanent national museum in the capital. Their goal is to present the host country in a positive light, but not necessarily unilaterally. In that sense, they are similar in nature to organizations like the United States Information Agency (I worked 9 years for them in the 80s), British Council, Goethe Institute, etc.. But the event was also associated with TRIM, the strategic and planning group associated with the Russian presidency, giving it added strategic importance.
The event is organized around a global essay competition, open to everyone, including ordinary working class people, around the general theme of the new multipolar development model that BRICS countries are striving to adopt. The concept of Global Majority is much used in these circles, and perhaps it is less known that this concept is an invention of Russia, since as a Northern and even 'Arctic' country, it does not fit the label of Global South. It is broadly part of a mentality that is spreading outside of the West, and that sees the world in the context of an aggressive but declining Western world, while the rest of the world sees itself as wishing for a peaceful international order that accepts the emerging newcomers. I definitely discovered that young people from non-Western countries do believe in the potential of the BRICS model.
I was a member of the jury and in that capacity, I could meet many different people, not just from different countries but from very different social milieus, for example a Canadian bricklayer who wrote an essay on the world of new plasma physics, as well as leading monetary reformers hoping to seed their ideas in non-western contexts. But I also met a whole network of network nation practitioners from Latin America, and, in that context, I befriended Franz Tuñez. Franz is a former geopolitical analyst for an Argentinian state institution, but now involved with constructing a Regenerative Special Economic Zone aiming to make it into a globally replicable model.
He's a passionate individual and he proposed to write a review of the two subsequent events in which we both participated. This is not the first time I have engaged with contested public authorities, though 85% of my activities are dedicated to grassroots communities, mostly for free. I worked with the Vatican State (2008-2012), the Presidency of Ecuador in 2014 (crafting a state-based commons transition plan), with the mayors of Ghent (2017) and Seoul (working on city-based commons transitions), was invited by sections of the Chinese State at the Huangwuang Forum in Chengdu before 2013 (chairing the distributed manufacturing panel). I recognize the legitimacy of governments without agreeing with their political choices or even the nature of their regimes. The condition for me is that the 'case of the commons' can be promoted, researched, or at the very least be part of the conversation, which is the goal of my advocacy. My current position is that in the current geopolitical context, the Eastern Eurasian state-integrative models have more room for common good concerns, than the Western rentier based political economy after the fatal weakening of the labor movement under neoliberalism. But my own preference goes out for a emerging commons-centric third model of geopolitics, described elsewhere in this Fourth Civilization newsletter.
This specific article is a report on a recent example of the soft-power policy of the Russian Federation, but also shows how this type of event can transcend the intent, by creating a multitude of new types of trans-local connections, outside of the usual Western framework. If you are interested in multi-polarity, and in reporting that is rarely available in Western media, you might find this of particular interest. For us, it's an example of the intersection of the older system of nation-state politics (being revived in many places outside of the West through more 'organic' forms such as the 'Civilization state') and the related reset in interstate competition, faced with the new realities created by translocal technologies and productive communities, including the emerging attempts at 'network-nation' building. Indeed, the world of Web3, Crypto and Blockchain, were well represented at the event.
The article below reflects the views and opinions of the guest author.
Here is Franz's text:
The Open Dialogue Experience in Moscow: Emerging Multipolarity
Guest author: Franz Tuñez
(https://substack.com/@franztunez ; linktree linktr.ee)
Some experiences change your mind. And others, in addition, win your heart.
The first edition of the Open Dialogue did the first thing for me. This second one, entitled "THE FUTURE OF THE WORLD: A NEW PLATFORM FOR REGENERATIVE GLOBAL GROWTH," held between April 27 and 29, 2026, in Moscow, continued that internal process. And I write this with full awareness, without naiveté or uncritical enthusiasm: I was first invited as an expert and then accepted as an essayist to an academic, economic, cultural, and above all, geopolitical forum organized by the Russian Federation's National Centre of Russia and TRIM, in the context of active war, surrounded by people from more than one hundred countries, to discuss the future of the global order. And I returned to my place in the world, South America, more convinced than ever that this future is being forged now, in conversations exactly like these.
My participation in Open Dialogue also held particular relevance for my doctoral research. The invitation came from Michel Bauwens - founder of the P2P Foundation and one of the most influential figures in peer-to-peer production and the digital commons - who asked me to participate as a specialist in global governance. This forum brought together perspectives from diverse geographical, institutional, and disciplinary traditions, allowing me to compare and expand upon some of the central assumptions of my research in dialogue with actors working on institutional futures, sovereignty, and systemic transformation.
This note embodies my effort to do justice to that experience: what I saw, what I heard, what I presented, and what I take away to continue radically collaborating in the co-creation of what I might call 'The Future of the World-System: Building a New Regenerative Platform for Global Evolution.
The Framework: A Forum for New Ideas in the midst of the reconfiguration of the New World Order
The Open Dialogue is an initiative co-organized by the National Centre of Russia -established by presidential decree of Vladimir Putin as an exhibition space for the country's achievements, innovations, and cultural heritage- and the TRIM Center of Expertise, a think tank created in 2024 within the Presidential Academy (RANEPA) to provide analytical support to Russian and global socio-economic policy.
The event brings together experts, academics, businesspeople, and representatives of institutions from all continents (including the United States, Canada, Australia, Germany, and the UK) to exchange ideas-in a five-to-seven-minute pitch competition format, with questions from a panel of experts-around four strategic areas of global investment: Human Capital, Technology, Environment and Connectivity. The proposals chosen by the entire audience then feed into the agenda of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum.
In this 2026 edition, more than 1,600 essays were submitted. These submissions, curated with the assistance of artificial intelligence and human review, were narrowed down to approximately 120 and divided into four areas. The previous year, in its inaugural edition, representatives from 102 countries participated, and the work of 700 researchers was reviewed. The scale and ambition of the project are, in themselves, a clear sign of progress.
Without implying a judgment of the geopolitical context, the organization as a whole was characterized by precision, clarity, and warmth, during a very delicate moment. That alone speaks volumes about the value placed on creating this space for Open Dialogue among diverse representatives from all over humanity.
The Geopolitical Soft Power of Russia's Open Dialogue Forum
< Let me be direct: this is deliberate, intelligent, and effective soft power. And I say this without diminishing what happens inside that space. >
President Vladimir Putin opened the event through a video address with brief but precise words, outlining the forum's geopolitical objective: to inaugurate a new era of collective thinking in a multipolar world order that is clearly emerging before our eyes. His diagnosis was unequivocal: "Traditional approaches, as well as established norms and rules that govern economic life and international relations, are gradually losing their relevance."
From my geopolitical perspective as an Argentine political scientist, it is difficult to disagree with the diagnosis, although the debate about solutions is another matter.
Putin stated that sovereignty is especially relevant in this new multipolar and complex world order - in its political, economic, cultural, and social dimensions. He asserts that those nation-states capable of defining their own development paths, guided by their own values, resources, priorities, national identity, and sovereign worldview, will gain a leading role in this new order.
Something that strongly caught my attention, and with which I couldn't agree more, is that it also gave a prominent place to individuals, to the human being standing tall, emphasizing that no matter where we are born, we should all have the opportunity to choose our own path and the means to follow it. This is especially relevant for someone like me who consciously seeks to apply the powerful tools that technologies like blockchain and AI already provide to empower individuals and communities across the globe, without borders or ideological, cultural, or economic limitations.
I am aware that Putin's message may sound like a contradiction in terms, coming from a political figure who has led the world's largest federation for 27 years and who now heads a state engaged in open warfare - or, as it is called in Russia for geopolitical reasons, a "Special Military Operation. The dominant Western narrative would immediately dismiss it, but I have found that this is also pure and crude ideology and textbook propaganda. Based on my own experience: I walked the streets of Moscow and St. Petersburg, rode their public transportation, visited their restaurants, museums, and supermarkets, was moved by their artistic, architectural, and musical expressions, and spent genuine time with ordinary citizens, beyond the event organizers. And I can say that there is some truth in Putin's words that goes beyond mere rhetoric.
While I don't blindly accept everything or allow myself to adopt up by any closed-minded position, the New World I envision is about having individual stances developed through critical thinking and based on lived experience, not about repeating slogans or ideologies imposed by education, the media, or social networks. In this particular case, I believe the Open Dialogue debate should take a closer look at the very concept of "development": if it's understood in classic Western terms -the famous infinite growth as a synonym for progress in a world of real biophysical limits- that supposed solution can still be part of the root cause of the polycrisis that all of humanity is experiencing, regardless of whether we are South American, European, or African. But that's a debate that deserves its own space.
What is evident is the underlying geopolitical process: the traditional Western powers - the US, EU, and their close allies - are losing their dominant role, in part due to the cumulative weight of their own foreign policy decisions over decades. Many non-Western nations point to interventions in Venezuela, confrontation with Iran, and unwavering support for Israeli policies toward the Palestinians as examples of a system that serves Western interests rather than a universal rule of law. Whether or not one fully agrees with that diagnosis, the perception itself is accelerating a global awakening. Citizens worldwide no longer recognize themselves in the institutions that govern them - a crisis of representation that, in my beloved Argentina, has gone unresolved for decades.
On the other hand, new centers of growth are gaining prominence in the Global South. New actors such as the BRICS are no longer a surprise to anyone. And Russia, with this forum, aims to be the intellectual and practical catalyst of that process.
The Megatrends That Are Reshaping the World
Maxim Oreshkin, Deputy Minister and Chief of Staff to the Presidential Executive of the Russian Federation, presented the global megatrends that frame the Open Dialogue. The message is clear: the foundations of the global order are undergoing irreversible change, whether viewed from the perspective of economics, finance, technology, or demographics.
These trends form the map against which all proposals are presented, evaluated, and discussed.
- Globalization 2.0: The global economy is in a new phase where technologies, standards, supply chains, and financial infrastructure play a decisive role. The rise of the Global Majority countries, combined with competition among technology ecosystems, is shaping a more fragmented yet also more interconnected system. The financial system is also transforming: the model based on bank intermediation and debt-driven growth is reaching its limits. The development of digital currencies, tokenization, and platform solutions is laying the foundations for "Finance 2.0," where payment and capital allocation functions are redistributed among states, platforms, and decentralized systems.
- Demography and global aging: The world is entering a phase of demographic slowdown followed by population decline. Aging populations and falling fertility rates are reshaping demand structures, labor markets, and the sustainability of social systems. Countries will need to balance automation, migration, and social policy reform in a context of labor shortages.
- Technology and the New Economic Infrastructure: Artificial intelligence is emerging as a general-purpose technology that is transforming education, production, and labor markets. Digital platforms are becoming the infrastructural backbone of the economy: data and algorithms are partially replacing traditional market coordination mechanisms, creating new centers of economic power. Robotics and autonomous systems are mitigating labor shortages; biotechnology is becoming a key instrument for healthcare management and extending working life.
These were the macro trends. But how do they translate into actionable investment strategy ? That was the question I faced when presenting my own proposal in the Connectivity area.
My Contribution: Decentralized Connectivity as a Strategic Investment
I participated to the area of Connectivity, which covers everything from the future of international trade to the decentralization of the global financial system, including digital and transport infrastructure, digital assets, and data mobility.
I presented work articulating my two current - and deeply interrelated - foci: research and practice.
The first one is my doctoral thesis. This work stems from the understanding that the centralized architecture of the World-System as we know it -its global governance institutions, its monetary regimes, its extractive flows of value- is both a cause and an accelerator of the polycrisis we are experiencing in geopolitical and planetary terms. I analyze the limitations of the current global governance system, which is a largely dependent on the institutions of that World-System, and propose studying the blockchain ecosystem from three dimensions: the technological, the functional, and the community-based.
Then I examine the main networks -Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Cardano- and some of the most relevant Digital Organizations (DAOs), to conclude that pure decentralization does not exist: it consists of overlapping and interdependent layers that require intentional design according to the needs of the community that creates them. I conclude by exploring the even more emerging concept of the network states: the possibility of creating experimental archipelagos in the ways of inhabiting the territory, governance and the economy -something that, stripped of its most extreme libertarian expressions, offers a very diverse and genuinely evolutionary institutional path.
My doctoral research does not approach Network States as mere technological projects or as digital versions of the nation-state. Rather, it seeks to analyze them as emerging socio-technical experiments within the blockchain ecosystem, exploring the extent to which they can constitute new architectures of coordination, legitimacy, and polycentric governance in a global context marked by polycrisis. Instead of assuming a linear replacement of existing institutions, the research examines under what conditions these forms of organization can complement, challenge, or reconfigure traditional mechanisms of global governance.
Here I incorporate key elements of Michel Bauwens's thinking and the P2P tradition, particularly the idea that global productive commons -including digital commons- can form the basis of a more generative and less extractive economic logic, oriented toward use value and capable of operating within planetary boundaries. From this perspective, the contemporary problem lies not only in expanding global connectivity, but also in how that connectivity is organized and who captures the value it generates.
Bauwens's contributions on peer-to-peer production and cosmo-local organization -globally shared knowledge and coordination coupled with localized contextual implementation- reinforced a central hypothesis of my work: blockchain and distributed technologies should not be understood as automatic substitutes for existing institutions, but rather as emergent layers capable of enabling new forms of trust, cooperation, and governance. From this perspective, the relevance of Network States depends not only on sovereign aspirations or promises of "exit" from the traditional state, but also on their effective capacity to produce common goods, coordinate collective action, and experiment with new institutional architectures.
The second focus is my startup, where we connect blockchain ecosystem tools with the concept of a regenerative market, articulated in three layers:
- one digital layer -forging strategic alliances with organizations such as Tools for the Commons, also present at the event- a legal layer -working with officials to innovate in digital special economic zones-; and
- a physical layer -with a selected territory in Patagonia and alliances with developers, currently building the investment deck for the infrastructure.
The abstract I submitted was the following:
"The global economy is undergoing a profound transformation driven by the intensification of connectivity across trade, finance, communication, and digital infrastructures. Yet, this expansion of connectivity has paradoxically reinforced centralized architectures of power, particularly within the global financial system and international governance institutions. This essay argues that the current model of global connectivity-rooted in centralized monetary regimes, hierarchical institutions, and extractive value flows-has become structurally incompatible with the conditions of planetary interdependence characterizing the contemporary polycrisis. Drawing on insights from global political economy, Earth System Governance, blockchain studies, and emerging experiments in decentralized coordination, the paper proposes a shift toward decentralized connectivity as a strategic investment priority. It explores how blockchain-based infrastructures, decentralized finance, and network states can function as experimental platforms for reforming global financial institutions, enabling distributed cooperation, and fostering regenerative economic growth. Rather than advocating fragmentation, the essay conceptualizes decentralization as a pathway toward distributed intelligence, cosmo-local coordination, and post-centralized global governance capable of operating within planetary limits."
Access to the Essay, via : Open Dialogue - a project of the National Center "Russia"
The Connectivity Area: An Ecosystem of Ideas for a New World
The first day was intense: 30 ideas presented by people from 24 countries, moderated by the TRIM team, with six hours of presentations and well-deserved coffee breaks. The format is simple yet comprehensive: each participant has five minutes for their pitch-who they are, their diagnosis, their proposal, how it will be implemented, the expected global impact, and how it aligns with megatrends-plus two minutes for questions from the panel of experts. Time was strictly managed, requiring participants to be very well prepared. Presentations had been requested a week in advance.
All participants evaluated their peers following a detailed criteria provided before the event, and then selected -among participants and experts- the four semifinalists for the following day.
Just to give a sample of the richness of what was presented, I'm sharing some highlights based on the notes I took from each one:
- Ramziya F. (Russia/Oman) presented a model of smart trade corridors designed from an integrated economic systems approach.
- Polina Anufrieva (Russia) proposed a digital verification platform with a "green code" that promotes collaboration and voluntary energy sharing among BRICS actors.
- Ekaterina Karpouzova (Bulgaria) presented a real-time marketplace that, by integrating innovation and entrepreneurship, redefines economic value beyond monetary measurement, offering rewards for future value based on SDG indicators.
- Marietta Miemietz (Germany/UK) proposed a global investment infrastructure for citizen Type C investors that connects capital with development opportunities in infrastructure, education and the knowledge economy.
- Patrick C. (UK/Japan) presented an original reformulation of Leo Grondona's "Commodity Reserve Currency" as the basis for a new financial system.
- Mughees Khan (Pakistan) explored decentralized finance tools for new multilateral clearing models.
- Chuanchang Z. (China) presented a high-quality development system based on original indicators: the New Quality Consumption Power (NQ) for demand and the New Qualitative Productive Forces (NQPF) for supply.
- Ivan Shumilov (Russia) presented a masterful idea on how to apply blockchain technology to generate genuinely decentralized networks between nations - a proposal that speaks directly to my own proposal, and about which we continue to be in active dialogue.
Proposals were also presented on multi-level collaborative decision-making, data sovereignty, international information observatories, Arctic transport routes, as well as on Global South convergence algorithms. But also on Eurasian logistics corridors as a tool for regional cooperation, and the definitions of cultural units oriented towards a common language for intercultural communication.
One observation that I find fundamental: taken together, these ideas form the skeleton of a powerful, relevant, useful, and inclusive multi-platform governance system. Not as a utopia, but as a possible architecture.
After the collective vote, to my surprise and gratitude, I advanced as one of the four semifinalists in the area.
The second day was the Semifinal for all areas. I started very early, adapting my presentation to the event's narrative and the expanded audience. This time, the pitch was on the main stage of the National Centre of Russia, before an audience that included-in addition to participants from other areas - university students, professors, academics, journalists, diplomats, and Russian and international businesspeople. The pitch was allotted seven minutes, followed by seven minutes for questions. After the four semifinalists had finished, the audience voted via a QR code projected on the screen.
I didn't win this time. And that's okay, I had already won by being an active part of this process.
On the third day, a roundtable discussion was held with an expert from each area and the winning essayist from each category, moderated by Maxim Oreshkin. This space for synthesis and in-depth analysis brought the intellectual cycle of the event to a close.
(Access to all the essays submitted in connectivity.)
What Remains: Connections, Ideas, and a World to Build
The "magic" of Open Dialogue isn't just in the pitches. It's in what happens between sessions, in the hallways, in the moments of shared concentration before going on stage.
I met two of the other finalists in Hall 3 of the National Centre, reviewing notes minutes before the final. From there a bond was formed - confirmed when I heard them present their work:
- Aya Arfaoui from Morocco (Technology area), whose ideas on integral human development I am already integrating into my work;
- Soumya Bhowmick (Sustainable Development area), whose thesis on evolving economic metrics toward something more comprehensive is exactly the kind of thinking this historical moment requires; and
- Ivan Shumilov, with whom I "competed" in the semi-final and final, and with whom I formed a friendship that feels destined - as if it had always existed.
Today we are all connected, seeking ways to collaborate in long-term synergies, aimed at building something new. It was thanks to the Open Dialogue-with all its geopolitical weight, all its complexity, and with eyes wide open-that we came together.
In Closing: An Opportunity We Cannot Afford To Miss
The Open Dialogue is, in form, an exercise in Russian soft power. In content, it is a genuine space for collective thought on humanity's most pressing problems. Both can be true at the same time.
What I take away from Moscow is not a geopolitical position, but something more valuable: the certainty that there are hundreds of people all over the world - in Morocco, in Russia, in Colombia, in China, in Argentina, in Kenya - thinking seriously and urgently about how to reconfigure the institutions, the flows of value, and the governance models of this world. This world can clearly no longer continue as it is.
That network exists. That dialogue is possible. And it's up to us to seize the opportunity that has arisen.
Franz is a PhD candidate in Global Governance and co-founder of a regenerative markets startup based on blockchain technology. He participated in the 2025 and 2026 editions of the Open Dialogue Forum in Moscow as an essayist in the area of Connectivity.
This article is the first in a series in collaboration with Michel Bauwens on decentralization, digital commons and post-centralized governance.
For more about our guest author, see also substack.com / https://linktr.ee/Franz2030.
Access to the Essay, via : Open Dialogue - a project of the National Center "Russia"