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-Equation’ that Models
using the Dialectical ‘Meta-Equation’ that Models
the ‘Meta-Evolution’ of the Human-Social
Relations of Production.
by [guest
author] Hermes de Nemores.
Dear Reader,
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.
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
Miguel
Example 5: NQ Psychohistorical-Dialectical ‘Meta-Model’. The ‘Meta-Equation’
of Human-Social Relations of
Production ‘Meta-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 call ‘the 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-dynamics’ of 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 x K = <K>2 = <K + D<K>> = <K + qKK> =
<K + E> ¬{<,=,>} K.
<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.
3. Citizen 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 committee’ and 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 units/«monads», 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.
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 + qMCGA > ~+~ 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 + qKMCGA > ~+~ E >;
6 >-|-<6 = <A>2^6 =
< < A + . . . + K + . . . + E + qEA + qEG + qEGA + qEC + qECA +
qECG + qECGA + qEM + qEMA + qEMG + qEMGA + qEMC + qEMCA + qEMCG +
< < 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 x K = <K>2 = <K + D<K>> = <K + qKK> =
<K + E> ¬{<,=,>} K.
<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 World”
servant-dictatorships -- threaten the overthrow of its
exclusive power to rule.
SOLUTION –
‘Equitist Political-ECONOMIC
DEMOCRACY’;
BOOK:
MARX’s MISSING BLUEPRINTS
Free of Charge Download
of Book PDF --
http://www.dialectics.info/dialectics/Applications.html
Hardcover Book Order --
No comments:
Post a Comment