Monday, October 14, 2013

Part 5 of 9. Seldonian, Dialectical-Algebraic Derivation of the Successor System to Capitalism.


Full Title -- 

Part 5 of 9.  Seldonian, Dialectical-Algebraic Derivation of Fundamental Features for the 

Global  Successor System to [Self-]Global[ized] Capitalism

using the Dialectical Meta-Equationthat Models

the Meta-Evolution of the Human-Social Relations of Production. 


by [guest author] Hermes de Nemores.




Dear Readers,

Questions have recently been raised, in ‘www’ dialogues in which I have participated, as to what Karl Seldon derived, and also as to how he derived it, with regard to the global system of ‘Democratic Communism’, or of ‘Marxian Democracy’ -- of ‘Political-Economic Democracy -- as the possible global successor system to the global capitalist system, using the algebra of dialectics that he discovered in 1996.

Such questions deserve an answer.  

This blog-entry summarizes the fifth part of Seldon’s answer. 

It was extracted from writings of Hermes de Nemores, Secretary-General of Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica, and chairperson of its General Council, from his recent update to an introductory text, whose earlier version is available via the following links --





[see, in particular, pages B-24 to B-37 in the latter].

-- and which I have adapted to the locally-available typography.

Enjoy this fifth part of Hermes de Nemores’ re-telling of Seldon’s amazing saga of solution!


Regards,

Miguel







Example 5:  NQ Psychohistorical-Dialectical Meta-Model. TheMeta-Equation of Human-Social Relations of ProductionMeta-Evolution’ [Part 5 of 9].


Historically Specific Pre-Constructive [Predictive] Commentary, for Model Epoch t = 5.  The 'Intra-Duality' of the «Kapital»-Relation and the Emergence of the Content of the Social Relations of Production Socio-Ontological Category of Generalized Equity:  Some Conjectures Regarding 'Equitism'.  The operation that the «Kapitals»-system is, and that it applies externally, to its surrounding pre-capitalist hinterland [as it converts that hinterland into new socio-geographical increments to itself, to its own geographical domain], as it does also internally, to its own already-converted internal terrain, is, in part, one of expropriation.

This includes the expropriation of small-holder peasant producers on the land, and of self-employed urban artisans, etc., to form/expand the wage-worker class; expropriation of smaller capitals by larger, etc.

«Kapital» is also, in part, an operation of bursting-asunder all barriers to the quanto-qualitative advance of social productivity -- of the "social productive forces" [Marx].

As the «Kapital»-conversion of the ‘pre-capital’ hinterland nears completion, as the «Kapitals»-system comes to surround the last remnants of what once surrounded it, we move toward that moment in which the «Kapitals»-system will ‘‘‘surround’’’ and ‘‘‘confront’’’ only itself worldwide.

That approaching [extended] historical moment means that the operations which that system hitherto applied to the predecessor social formations that ‘environmented’ it in the past, the operations of expropriation and of barrier-dissolution, will be applied to the «Kapitals»-system itself, by the «Kapitals»-system itself, as its own only remaining human-social environment.



Regarding «Kapital»’s expropriation operation, this means expropriation of the expropriation [operation] itself:

What does the primitive accumulation of capital, i.e., its historical genesis, resolve itself into?”

“In so far as it is not immediate transformation of slaves and serfs into wage-labourers, and therefore a mere change of form, it only means the expropriation of the immediate producers, i.e., the dissolution of private property based on the labour of its owner.”

“... as soon as the capitalist mode of production stands on its own feet ... the further expropriation of private proprietors takes a new form.”

“That which is now to be expropriated is no longer the labourer working for himself, but the capitalist exploiting many labourers.”

“This expropriation is accomplished by the action of the immanent laws of capitalistic production itself, by the centralisation of capital.”

“One capitalist always kills many.”

“Hand in hand with this centralisation, or this expropriation of many capitalists by few, develop, on an ever-increasing scale, the cooperative form of the labour-process, the conscious technical application of science, the methodical cultivation of the soil, the transformation of the instruments of labour into instruments of labour only usable in common, the economising of all means of production by their use as the means of production of combined, socialised labour, the entanglement of all peoples in the net of the world-market, and, with this, the international character of the capitalist régime.”

“... The monopoly of capital becomes a fetter upon the mode of production, which has sprung up and flourished along with, and under it.”

Centralisation of the means of production and socialisation of labour at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist integument.”

“This integument is burst asunder.”

“The knell of capitalist private property sounds.”

The expropriators are expropriated."

 [Karl Marx, Capital, vol. I, Chapter XXXII, "Historical Tendency of Capitalist Accumulation", International Publishers, [NY:  1967], pp. 761-764, emphases added by HdeN]



Marx foresaw, in the Grundrisse, that, in this 'self-environment' and 'self-surroundment' of the «Kapitals»-system, it would find in its own nature a barrier to the further development of the social-productive forces, what we callthe social forces of expanding societal self-[re-]production’, and would, in effect, act upon itself accordingly, unstoppably, whatever to the contrary its partisans and beneficiaries might wish --

... capital has pushed beyond national boundaries and prejudices, beyond the deification of nature and the inherited, self-sufficient satisfaction of existing needs confined within well-defined bounds, and the reproduction of the traditional way of life.”

It is destructive of all this, and permanently revolutionary, tearing down all obstacles that impede the development of the productive forces, the expansion of needs, the diversity of production and the exploitation and exchange of natural and intellectual forces.”

“But because capital sets up any such boundary as a limitation and is thus ideally over and beyond it, it does not in any way follow that it has really surmounted it, and since any such limitation contradicts its vocation, capitalist production moves in contradictions, which are constantly overcome, only to be, again, constantly re-established [and, re-established on a larger scale -- HdeN].”

“Still more so.
 
The universality towards which it is perpetually driving finds limitations in its own nature, which, at a certain stage of its development will make it appear as itself the greatest barrier to this [,its own, inherent -- HdeN] tendency, leading thus to its own self-destruction."

[David McLellan, editor, The Grundrisse, Karl Marx, Harper & Row [NY:  1971], pp. 94-95, emphasis added by HdeN].



These above two extracts, from Marx’s writings on what we call ‘the dynamics and meta-dynamics of the capitalist system -- the former, published, by Marx, in his lifetime, the later, left unpublished by him as of the time of his death, represent summary statements of central parts of Marx’s deepest understandings of those dynamics and meta-dynamics. 

The first extract describes how, with the immanent self-development of the capitalist system, its inherent operator, e, of expropriation [including, centrally, of the daily expropriation of surplus-value from its wage-workers], moves, inexorably, from its ‘‘‘linear’’’, ‘flexive’ moment, e = e1, or e(o), applying only to other systems, outside of itself, to its ‘‘‘nonlinear’’’, second degree, self-reflexive moment’, e2 = e(e) = e of e = e x e = ee -- expropriation expropriation.

The second extract describes how, with the immanent self-development of the capitalist system, its inherent operator, b, of breaking down barriers to the growth of the human-social forces of production, moves, inexorably, from its ‘‘‘linear’’’, ‘flexive’ moment, b = b1, or b(o), applying only to other systems, outside of itself, to its ‘‘‘nonlinear’’’, second degree, self-reflexive moment’, b2 = b(b) = b of b = b x b = bb -- i.e., to self-braking [capital-value-relation-induced fall in/enfetterment of the rate of capital-value-relation accumulation], and, hence, to self-breaking -- i.e., “...to its own self-destruction.

However, as summaries -- and as powerfully metaphoric, almost poetic statements -- these two passages, prescient as they were, leave us still largely “high and dry” regarding the undergirding ‘‘‘lawful’’’ processes which caused -- which determined, which have enforced -- the historical patterns that they prophecied, ever since their lines were written, over a century ago, processes acting, indeed, from long before those lines were penned, though these processes remained unknown to so many run-of-the-mill, ruling-class-sycophant socio-politico-psycho-economic “scientists”, far less insightful, and with far less integrity, than Karl Marx.

Vastly more needs to be said about the historical dynamics and 'meta-dynamics' of the «Kapitals»-system, and about the mechanisms and 'organisms' of its approaching 'meta-finite self-conversion/self-bifurcation self-singularity' -- especially about the immanent tendency of accumulating capital-value to de-value itself, and, thereby, to decelerate the rate of ‘‘‘real’’’, industrial capital-accumulation, and, concomitantly, to accelerate the rate of ‘‘‘fictitious’’’ capital-[value-]accumulation, in ways which impose a catastrophic contraction of the global process of human-social reproduction, such that this de-value-ation’ and deceleration constitutes the -- paradoxical -- central capital-value expression of the growth of the human-society-re-productive forces within «Kapital».

We will attempt to illuminate part of the deeper details of these death-dealing dynamics and meta-dynamicsof the «Kapitals»-system, here, in the next few paragraphs.

That is the most room that we can afford, on this occasion, for summary excerpts from that veritable tome that, even beyond the four massive volumes of Capital [the last three of them profoundly unfinished] that Marx left behind for us, still needs to be written down about what has been experienced, and about what has been discovered, since Marx wrote his last line for us, about the dialectical dynamics and meta-dynamics of the global capitalist system.

The explanation of these dynamics and meta-dynamics of the global capitalist system involves a process that we call ‘technodepreciation’.

That explanation also involves the “lawful” time-trajectory of the ratio of aggregate fixed-capital value to/over aggregate circulating-capital value, for ‘‘‘productive’’’ industrial capital.

Early in the history of capital accumulation, in what we call the ‘‘‘ascendance phase’’’ of the capitalist system, when this ratio is far less that 1, i.e., when circulating-capital value predominates, in magnitude, relative to fixed-capital value, the impact of productivity-increasing technological innovation, motivated, for a given, innovating capitalist, by the transient unit-cost lowering, and/or unit-profit-raising benefits it buys for that capitalist, while it does devalue competitors’ older fixed-capital plant-and-equipment value -- which value, when that obsolete plant-and-equipment is replaced, must be “written-off” against -- subtracted from -- their net profits, e.g., for the accounting period in which the replacement occurs -- still, in the net, that impact typically widens “net-net” profit margins, for a ‘net technodepreciation gain’, even for those competitors, and also brings to an end that innovating capitalist’s temporary price, and/or profit, competitive advantages, for that round of competitive innovation.

But later, in what we call the ‘’’descendance phase’’’ of the capitalist system, which begins when aggregate industrial fixed-capital value begins to preponderate relative to aggregate circulating-capital value, this situation reverses.  Further gains in fixed-capital-intensive productivity produce ‘technodepreciation’ write-offs, value-losses, due to “premature”, pre-amortization, obsolescence-depreciation-driven fixed-capital plant and equipment retirement, and replacement, begin to typically exceed the incremental profits achieved from the replacement capital plant and equipment, resulting in a ‘net technodepreciation loss’.

Thereafter, owners of concentrated, fixed-capital-intensive industrial capital, and the large, concentrated-ownership financier institutions which provide long term loans to such industrial capital owners, to purchase such industrial fixed-capital plant and equipment, and whose loans are thus at increasing risk of default due to increasing rates of technodepreciation, begin to turn against further technological innovation in production equipment, outside of government-guaranteed military and other such “economic waste” sectors, sectors which these interests seek to set up, and to expand, in part, to delay the further actualization of the chronic depressionary potential of the ‘net technodepreciation losses’, ‘descendance phase’ industrial regime.

Marx’s Capital, as he notes therein, excludes any systematic account of the empirical process of “the competition of capitals. Marx remarks upon the above-described ‘technodepreciation’ [“moral depreciation”] dynamic of capitalism frequently, throughout his writings [see http://www.adventures-in-dialectics.org/Adventures-In-Dialectics/TechnoDepreciation/TechnoDepreciation-partB.pdf ].

But he seldom does so in a context which suggests that ‘technodepreciation’ processes might form an outer, “surface-of-society” manifestation of the inner, immanent, ‘law-of-value lawful’ process of the tendency of the rate of profit -- as Marx calculates the rate of profit, analytically, per his critical version of the ‘law of value’ -- to fall.  Indeed, Marx’s remarks often emphasize the effect of ‘technodepreciation’ write-offs that reduces the denominator of the capitalist profit-rate ratio, rather than its effects of reducing, also, the numerator of that profit-rate ratio.



In Marx’s ‘‘‘value = labor-time-presently-socially-necessary-to-reproduce’’’ dialectical-analytical model of the capitalist system, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall arises due to a rising relative shortage of variable capital value, relative to constant capital value, since variable capital [wage-labor] varies its value in that it produces additional value, the surplus-value substance of profit, whereas constant capital remains constant -- does not expand itself with any surplus-value.

The ‘technodepreciation’ driver of secular, empirical declines in the industrial capitalist profit-ratio -- in the “return on fixed-capital” ratio -- arises when the magnitude of write-offs of obsolescent fixed-capital plant-and-equipment value, and the costs of acquisition and operation of new, currently-competitive, exceed the incremental profits delivered by the production-use of that new, non-obsolescent fixed-capital plant-and-equipment.

In particular, in U.K./U.S. capitalist core history, our data indicates that the turning point from the ‘‘‘ascendance phase’’’ to the ‘‘‘descendance phase’’’ of the capitalist system occurred in the post-Civil-War late 1800s, circa 1887.

Thorstein Veblen discovered this dynamic, and published about its portent of “chronic depression”, in his 1904 book The Theory of Business Enterprise [see, for example -- http://capitalismsfundamentalflaw-wayforward.blogspot.com/2013/08/thorstein-veblens-version-of-marxs-law.html ]. 

Hypothesis:  Thereafter, it was seen to that Veblen left his academic post at Stanford University, shortly after he, in 1906, took up that post.

We believe that the core plutocracy in the U.K. and the U.S. became aware of this ‘technodepreciation dynamic’ -- so potentially deadly to the fixed-capital-value base, and to the profitability base, of their economic, political, and social power -- somewhat earlier, and began to formulate their deadly strategy for countering this threat already, before Veblen published his theory.

Hypothesis:  This led to their imposition of the Federal Reserve System, of the Federal Income Tax, and of World War I, all circa 1913.

The Federal Reserve System enabled the ‘‘‘descendance phase’’’ plutocracy to impose a regime of permanent inflation -- i.e., of a continuous reduction in real wages -- to mask ‘technodepreciation’-driven losses.

The Federal Income Tax enabled the ‘‘‘descendance phase’’’ plutocracy to impose , in effect, a new form of surplus-value extraction on the working class, and to use the proceeds of that tax to pay for the suppression of industrialization in the capitalist “hinterland” / “[semi-]periphery”, via [military] servant-dictatorships there -- “servant” to the plutocracy, “dictatorship” to their people, thereby creating what came later to be known as the “Third World” -- this as a strategy to prevent ‘technodepreciation’ resulting from new, competing industries rising there, coupling the latest, most advanced fixed-capital plant-and-equipment with low wage-levels.

World War I enabled the plutocracy to reap super-profits from selling “rapidly-consumed” armament “goods” to all sides, together with a “Eugenics” population reduction toll on an entire generation of European males, among its many other “benefits” to their power-strategy.

The lower plutocracy in the U.S. discovered this dynamic perhaps only as late as 1974 [see, for example -- http://capitalismsfundamentalflaw-wayforward.blogspot.com/2013/09/normal-0-0-1-2344-13363-111-26-16410-11.html ], on the very eve of the becoming-glaring of the “de-industrialization” of the U.S. Midwest and Northeast, due, at least in part, to technodepreciation-wounded U.S. industries seeking lower wages in other nations in order to help defray their ‘technodepreciation net-losses’.




The Fight for Human Liberty, and for Human Liberation, is Now a Life-and-Death Struggle Against the Unchecked Power of the Pro-Totalitarian Capitalist Plutocracy of the Advanced Capitalist Core of the World-Market System. The «Kapitals»-system of political economy has engendered liberal political constitutions, with internal checks and balances limiting the abuse of political power, which have, as a result, proven so successful at growing social productivity/'''the human-social forces of production''', that the economy has, at length, outgrown, in power, the power of that system's political constitutions, and of their exclusively political checks and balances, to avert the accumulation of unchecked power, and of the human-species-lethal, totalitarian-humanocidal [eugenicist] abuse of that unchecked power, portended by ‘‘‘the law of the tendency of the rate of profit on capital to fall’’’, during the ‘‘‘descendance-phase’’’ of the «Kapitals»-system, in the [trans]formation of [the ‘ascendance-phase, pro-capitalist plutocracy, into] the [capitalist anti-capitalist,] ‘‘‘descendance-phase’’’ plutocracy. 

«Kapitals»-system ‘s market competition, which provides economic checks and balances limiting abuses in the pricing and quality of the output goods and services, and limiting the monopoly-induced degeneration of customer service quality in general, becomes successful competition.

Successful competition becomes the [partial] negation of competition, namely, monopoly [or oligopolistic, etc., near-monopoly].

This leads to the formation of agglomerations of capital so gargantuan that they can take over the mass media of public communication, and ‘‘‘buy out’’’ the political system -- legislative, executive, and judicial -- lock, stock, and barrel.

Thereby, the political checks and balances among those branches of the public, political government are obviated and subverted, and cease to function effectively.

The houses of legislature become houses of prostitution, as do the executive mansions, and the court houses.

Increasingly, only those candidates for public, political, elected office who sell themselves to the plutocracy can acquire, from that plutocracy, the vast funding necessary to buy access to the plutocracy-owned/-dominated mass media, sufficient to achieve electoral victory.

Thus, the successful, advanced capitalist democracies of the ascendance-phase are characterized, during the descendance-phase, by a seemingly irresistible tendency to plutocratic totalitarian degeneration.

The horrific dictatorships of Hitler and Stalin, precisely because they arose in nations whose capitalist development was in some ways retarded, have provided a prevenient, disfigured prefigurement of the hellish future of demise that humanity faces in the further, advanced development of this plutocratic totalitarian degeneration, in the “advanced capitalist” -- i.e., in the ‘advanced-decadence’ -- core of the system.

Only the addition of economic checks and balances can overcome this economic subversion of once-partially-effective but exclusively political checks and balances.

Only the emergence of political-economic democracy, that is, of a democratically 'politicized' political economy, can check this tendency to plutocratic totalitarian political degeneration, arising from the economy; from the 'economic side' of the political-economy; from the economy's production of a prostitute-government, prostituted most-abjectly to the economic plutocracy.

The shorthand of Seldon’s solution to this world-historical crisis of the global «Kapital»-ist system is as follows --

K --->  ~<K> = K K = <K>2 = <K + D<K>> =  <K + qKK>

<K + E>   ¬{<,=,>}   K.

-- wherein the ‘socio-ontologically’ new-kind category-term, E is defined, in abbreviated form, as follows --



Equitarian Constitutional Reform / Equitarian Non-Violent Social Revolution: Constitutional establishment, via global ‘‘‘populist’’’ up-rising, of new, Universal Citizen Equity Human Rights, creating ECONOMIC checks-&-balances, and thereby resuscitating existing, political-only checks-&-balances, vitiated by concentrated economic power, i.e., by centralized / consolidated / concentrated  «Kapital»-ownership --

1.  Citizen Externality Equity Human Rights – Popularly-elected Public Directors, for Boards of Public Directors in all localities, in each “polluting” firm’s local operating unit(s), constraining the production of pollution, etc., “externalities” by those local operating units’ private boards of directors / management committees.  Popularly-elected, base-elected Associations of Public Directors at the local, regional, national, &, eventually, continental & global levels reshape the geography of human society.

2.  Citizen Birthright Equity Human Rights – A Social Trust Fund for each newborn Citizen, by right of birth, to help defray lifetime costs of education, re-training, health care, housing, etc., with legislated, moral hazard mitigating expenditure rules.

3Citizen Stewardship Equity Human Rights – Competing, Citizen self-organized producers’ cooperatives that have qualifying business plans, & that are democratically self-managed internally, on a one producer-member, one vote basis, are granted stewardship of the social property needed to launch their cooperative enterprises, & to conduct their qualified business plans, in return to a ‘‘‘social rent’’’ on that “means-of-production” property, helping to financer the Citizen Birthright Equity Trust Funds, and also ‘incenting’ efficiency in the use of means-of-production, and with two income streams for each stewardship cooperative member/associated-producer:  an equal share in net profits of each stewardship cooperative for each of its producer-members, & a job-based, skills-based, skills-market-competitive, work-time-compensation for each of its members.” [reproduced, with some clarifying modifications, from source -- HdeN].



-- and, with greater detail, as follows --



Expected Emergent «Species» of 'Generalized Equity' in the Epochal Transition from ‘«Kapitals»-ism to 'Equitism'.  We can presently discern the following 'socio-ontological' «species» of social relations [of production] as inhering within the «genos» of 'generalized Equity', and as expected to be manifested by, and ingredient in, the emergence of E from K

·                Capital-Owners Internality Equity of private stock-owners, which, of course, continues to emerge, and to develop further, under the general rule of the «Kapital»-relation today [‘pre-«arché» onto' of generalized Equity, seeded in K, partially «aufheben»-conserved but also elevated and constrained / negated — i.e., via Externality-Equity-holding Publics' Boards' constraints,  and by other new constraints — upon K, as subsumed within E].  A progressive "withering away" of 'internality equity', via its progressive net conversion into 'stewardship Equity', i.e., into democratically-managed '''social property''', is both intended and expected as part of the transition from the '''formal subsumption''' to the '''real subsumption''' of the "«Kapital»-relation", K, by the [rest of the] "generalized-Equity-relation", E;  
·                Citizen Externality Equity of public stakeholders [the intra-dual 'contra-thesis' to 'Internality-Equity'; the «arché» social-relations-of-production 'socio-ontological category' of 'Meta-Capitalist Society', or of 'Equitarian Society'];  Publicly-/locally-elected, publicly-recallable, “grass-roots” Public Directors, for Boards of Public Directors in all localities, in each “polluting” firm’s local operating unit(s), constrain the production of pollution, etc., “externalities” under the authority of those local operating units’ private boards of directors / management committees.  If a given local operating unit’s internality board of directors / management committeeand that local operating unit’s publicly-elected board of public directors cannot agree on an annual ‘‘‘externalities budget’’’ / ‘‘‘pollution budget’’’ for that local operating unit, then this dispute goes to a special Externality Equities Court, with the losing board paying the costs of the litigation.  Popularly-elected, base-elected Associations of Public Directors at local, regional, national, &, eventually, continental & global levels deliberatively reshape the geography of human society, previously shaped per the immanent ‘human-geography socio-morphological’ “laws” of the «Kapital»-relation.
·                Citizen Birthright Equity of every child born; equal social resource grants to each new citizen, at birth; Egalitarian social self-investment / social self-endowment trust-funds, with "moral hazard" mitigators;
·                Citizen Stewardship Equity, superseding the "wage-labor", '''sold labor-power''', or '''alienated labor''' relation of «Kapital».  Encompasses the constitutional rights of each working adult, to membership in, and 1-person/1-vote 'economic suffrage' within, the 'producers' councils,' or 'stewards' councils', that democratically manage the socially-/legally-/constitutionally-favored, mutually-competing socialized producer's cooperative enterprises
This includes the right to share in the profits-of-enterprise of any such socialized producers' cooperative in which that citizen works, with partial rights of use/disposition over the socially-owned means of social reproduction ceded, in stewardship, but not in local ownership, to these producers' cooperatives/local producers' associations, under the collective/democratic control of their base-elected 'stewards' councils', in continuous negotiation with these enterprises' own 'externality-Equity'-holding 'publics' boards', as part of Equitarian Society's «aufheben»-negation /-conservation /-elevation of economic-competition-enforced, market-based checks-and-balances regarding the pricing and quality of the goods/services supplied to the citizen-consumers by these enterprises, using equitably-allocated, socially-owned means of social reproduction.  This newly-emergent 'Stewardship-Equity-relation' is expected and intended to increasingly supplant the likewise «aufheben»-conserved/-constrained '''wage-labor'''/private-«Kapital» social-relationship-of-production [cf. the model of "Economic Democracy" comprehensively constructed and defended by David Schweickart in his book Against Capitalism [Cambridge University Press, [NY:  1993]], as well as in his book After Capitalism [Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., [NY:  2002]], to which we are indebted, in part, for key aspects of the conceptual derivation of this crucial sub-principle, and 'socio-ontological «species»', or 'social relations of production «species»', of 'Generalized Equity'];
·                Citizen Allocational Equity as the social principle, and the social policy, of Equitable regional-geographical allocation of social property — of socially/publicly-owned means of social reproduction resources/funding — on a «per capita», or per human person, basis
                        
[reproduced, with some clarifying modifications, from source -- HdeN].

-- such that, thus --

E denotes the onto/«arithmos» of 'Generalized Equities' as social-relations-of-production unitsmonads», with 'Externality Equities' as their «arché», forming the basis of 'Equitarian' Society, the foundation-relations of 'Political-Economic Democracy', based upon 'meta-«Kapitals»', e.g., upon Citizen Externality Equity Associations of Public Directors-regulated Territorial Units [made up out] of [or 'symbolically [‘‘‘psychologically’’’, ‘‘‘juridically’’’, and ‘‘politically’’’] containing' and 'constraining' [geographical-regional heterogeneous multiplicities of individual] «Kapitals», as social-relations-of-production [meta4-]«monads», and as constituting the 'self-«aufheben» self-negation', as 'self-internalization' / 'self-subsumption' / 'self-containment', of '''«Kapital»-relations''', thereby forming the meta-relation  

E  =  qE  =  qKK [---> q32.

The two, consecutive specific equations/models, within our generic dialectical meta-model meta-equation for the pre-historical-and-historical meta-evolutions’/revolutions of the human-social relations of human-social reproduction, >-|-<t = <A>2^t, the two specific equations which categorially describe, respectively, the ‘‘‘formal subsumption’’’ of the «Kapital»-Equity[-only-]-social-relation-of-production by the Generalized-Equity-social-relation-of-production, followed by the ‘‘‘real subsumption’’’ of the «Kapital»-social-relation-of-production by the Generalized-Equity-social-relation-of-production, for the generic ‘meta-equation’s’ epochs t = 5 and t = 6, respectively, are the following [the second of which has been abbreviated where so indicated by ellipsis dots, ‘. . .’] --



t >-|-<t   Interpreted Arithmetic [‘Socio-Ontological’, Intensional-Intuitional, Connotational Symbols]  


5 >-|-<5 = <A>2^5 = 



< A + G + qGA + C + qCA + qCG + qCGA + M +

qMA  + qMG + qMGA + qMC +  qMCA + qMCG + qMCG> ~+~ K >2 =



< < A + G + qGA + C  +  qCA + qCG + qCGA + M  +

qMA + qMG  + qMGA + qMC + qMCA + qMCG + qMCGA + K +  

qKA + qKG + qKGA + qKC + qKCA + qKCG + qKCGA +  qKM +  

qKMA + qKMG + qKMGA + qKMC + qKMCA + qKMCG + qKMCG> ~+~ E >;



6 >-|-<6 = <A>2^6 =

< A + . . .  + K + . . . + E + qEA + qEG + qEGA + qEC + qECA +

qECG +  qECGA + qEM + qEMA + qEMG + qEMGA + qEMC +  qEMCA + qEMCG  +

qEMCGA + qEK + qEKA + qEKG + qEKGA + qEKC + qEKCA + qEKCG +

qEKCGA + qEKM + qEKMA + qEKMG + qEKMGA + qEKMC + qEKMCA +

qEKMCG +  qEKMCGA>  ~+~  D<E>  >;  ....



The Capital Equity Stock Shares-Principle of 'Internality Equity' and the Capital-Governance Norm of Stockholder Democracy. The share-principle, the “joint-stock company” «Kapital»-equity-stock principle, the one-share-unit-of-capital-owned = one-vote-for-the-election-of-directors-to-the-board-of-directors governance principle of stockholder democracy immanent within the socio-ontological category of capital, is a principle of enfranchisement for the owners of capital, but also a principle of total dis-enfranchisement for the non-owners of capital. 

The principle of 'Equitism' outers the latent, immanent dual of that «Kapital»-principle, a principle of enfranchisement also for the non-owners of capital.

It does so in the form of the moral recognition and juridical formation, initially, of a new class of fundamental human-rights Equities, that of 'externality-Equities', in part via the "equity" tradition of Anglo-American, 'precedentary', case-law jurisprudence, as well as from the generalized-Equity-enabling 'Equitarian' national-constitutional amendments [already in the drafting stages].

Prediction:  In the human-social and human-historical extremity, «in extremis», of the «Kapitals»-system, the social relations of production, 'socio-ontological' category of «Kapital» will 'self-bifurcate' into the antagonistic sum --

«Kapital»-Equitism ~+~ Generalized-Equitism:

K --->  ~<K> = K K = <K>2 = <K + D<K>> =  <K + qKK>

<K + E>   ¬{<,=,>}   K.


The Juridical 'Meta-Genealogy' of the Concept of 'Externality-Equity' and the Generalization to 'Stakeholder Democracy'.  The term 'Externality Equity' herein denotes a form of non-stockholder stakeholder Equity which arises from principles extending those already extant and precedented in the "equity" tradition of Anglo-American jurisprudence. 

It arises, in particular, from the principle that the ownership of capital, however legitimately acquired, does not convey to the owner any unlimited right to inflict harm and damage upon other citizens and upon society as a whole.

It arises also from the further principle that the best locus in which to adjudicate and mitigate the externalities generated by the operation of capitalist enterprises -- e.g., the “external costs, or costs imposed upon third-parties whose interests are not represented in the traditional institutions of private capital governance -- is the locus of their origination:  the very heart of capital governance itself.

It arises via the ethical and equity, 'justicial' principle that a citizen -- a "third party" who, say, lives in the vicinity of a "first party's" production facility -- and who suffers cost-impacts [called "external costs", or "externalities" by capitalist economists], e.g., pollution-damage to that third-party's person, as a result of the production and sale, by that "first party" supplier, of products/services to a "second party" customer, thereby derives a special kind of "property right", "paid for" by suffering that "external cost", a "property right" to mitigate those "external cost" sufferings in the future, a property right which Seldon names an "externality equity", and a kind of "property right" that can only be effectively exercised collectively, publicly, socially, and 'economic-democratically'.

External, governmental regulatory bureaucracies, legislatively chartered and overseen, are defenselessly vulnerable to the plutocracy's bribery of the legislatures, and to the "revolving door" bribes of later industry-employment offered to the regulating bureaucrats by the regulated industries. 

Lawsuits, brought against those capitalist industries to the judiciary, are too delayed, too costly for the citizen litigants who face the ultra-deep-pockets of their plutocratic, mega-corporate adversaries, and exposed to the gradual corruption of the judiciary by the plutocracy's bribery, a bribery [“lobbying”] operation that increasingly controls the legislature and the executive branches, which appoint/confirm the central judiciary. 

On the other hand, Nationalization of industry, state-monopoly of all capital, threatens to resurrect the unchecked, absolute, absolutely-corrupt, and soon-totalitarian dictatorship of Stalinist or Fascist state-capitalist bureaucracies, and must therefore count as another non-solution; as, in reality, either an acceleration of, or a prevenient attainment of, the very «telos» of the totalitarian taxis of advanced «Kapital».

The dictatorship of a state-bureaucratic ruling class, whose grip on power and whose tenuous ruling-class-collectivist economic de facto ‘‘‘ownership’’’ claim on the means of production is political-only, and totally vulnerable to political assault [unlike the case with a ruling class of private owners of capital] tends to police-state totalitarianism as the only effective defense of its ruling power.

It does so because any successful political challenge to such a ruling class would mean its political replacement, and thus its total loss of ruling power -- its loss of access to any further de facto ‘‘‘ownership’’’ of the “state-owned” means of production as well.

If deposed politically, it is deposed totally.

Police-state, political totalitarianism is thus the "natural" form of political and economic class self-defense for this kind of [state-] capitalist ruling class.

The motive to multi-genocidal global totalitarianism of the descendance-phase capitalist plutocracy, formed in the core regions of advanced private-capital, is quite other than the motive described above.

That motive arises with the decision of that plutocracy to reverse the historical growth of the human-social forces of production, as its only defense against its overthrow by the 'obsolescence depreciation' of its principal capital assets, which much-further growth of the productive forces would bring.

This de facto overthrow of the ruling power of the descendance-phase core capitalist plutocracy by the growth of the social forces of production is epitomized, specifically, in the prospect, for the petroleum plutocracy, of the advent of controlled nuclear fusion [sub-]atomic power as a superior and, thus, oil-obsolescing alternative to that plutocracy’s core power-asset in fossil-fuel-based molecular power, and, in general, by the way that rising, global, middle-class levels of living standards -- of health, education, ‘‘‘technical composition of labor’’’, and of new, entrepreneurial wealth, especially in the nation-states of that plutocracy’s former Third Worldservant-dictatorships -- threaten the overthrow of its exclusive power to rule.




No comments:

Post a Comment