Craziest letter to the editor ever

The new issue of The Atlantic features a remarkable letter from one J. Russell Tyldesley, which ends as follows:

There is a great intellectual divide in America, and people inclined to think deeply about contemporary issues are increasingly turned off by both major parties. In fact, many see little hope in electoral solutions so long as the two establishment parties maintain an iron grip on the levers of power. Ralph Nader is hardly exaggerating when he calls the two major parties a duopoly or a two-party dictatorship. The "third parties" of politics and culture are effectively shut out, and their ideas and solutions will not reach the masses. Some of these ideas could save humanity from itself. It is not the confused independents in the middle who hold the key to salvation; it is the marginalized few. After all, how many followers did Jesus have? The magnitude of the major parties' tragic effort to silence these voices may become clear only when it is too late.

There are ways out of the gloom, but not through the political process. A parallel system based on barter and the Internet may be the answer.

"A parallel system based on barter and the Internet?" This has been driving me crazy -- what the hell does that mean? It's like the Lewis Black routine about how he's tortured by the girl who says "If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college."

First of all, how do you even get your Internet service if you only use barter? Maybe mow your ISP's lawn or something? And second, why barter? What does that have to do with anything? The reason why even the least developed societies have some form of quasi-currency is because barter is insanely inefficient. It's much easier to make trades using money than to find someone who wants what you have and vice versa. I suppose we could create elaborate barter exchanges via the Internet, but why? Who has time to try to search out and negotiate an exact match?

I just don't understand. But maybe that's the point...

Comments

[Beau]

Paypal, perhaps? Maybe the whole notion of bloggers as professional journalists (more accurately, professional pundits) supported by tip jars?

I don't know if that's really "barter," though it does strike me as a Deadhead economy for the 21st century. Everyone hop in the big van and share the wealth?

[Paul]

Perhaps he is suggesting that the only way for 3rd parties that do NOT have the limitless funds of the two major parties to compete or "get their message out" in the mainstream media is to allow them to barter for time on television, print media, and internet ad space.

[Jason]

I don't know about the bartering thing, but maybe the girl with the horse won an equestrian scholarship.

[C.M. Burns]

She was on a polo pony scholarship!

What would the 3rd parties barter with? They have to have something to give the networks/papers/etc. Obviously the internet is a good way to organize, but I am as mystified as Brendan as to what they guy meant by "barter".