You know how most anarchist collectives decide what they are going to do and their ethical choices in a decentralized and democratic way? It’s like that except you make explicit that this includes decisions classified as economics.

For example: Extinction Rebellion has an arts circle, which makes banners and other action activity. This production is limited in capacity and people decide what they work on. So prospective actions pitch concepts for art pieces and artists may choose to produce them, and there is a commonly understood rate of production that everybody consents to. If specific actions were left without art and XR in general saw this as a problem they could discuss it. If specific actions treat the arts circle like a factory that will put a certain amount out, the art circle can raise that issue and people can discuss it.

The economy is planned: there are soft projections of the artistic production. Consumption is planned in accordance to projected production and production is planned in accordance to projected consumption.

The economy is decentralized: each artist can decide their own work and each action can pitch its own concepts, and they can communicate freely to coordinate without needing to go through any centralized intermediary.

The economy is democratic: every member is part of nested circles where they can express concerns or objections about any topic they have a stake in, and if they have an objection in something they have a stake in then that part of the process halts as safely as possible.

But this is just one example. Most glaringly, this example preserves producer-consumer relationships that many anarchists want to dissolve. Artists feel somewhat alienated from the products of their labor when it is used in actions they don’t attend, a gap partially filled by sending back pictures, but only partially. And as I said before, people in actions can start seeing it as a factory, or even as a magically appearing baseline.