Saturday, April 27, 2013

Part 5. of 8.: Political-ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY



Dear Readers,

This blog-entry contains the
fifth part of my serialization, within this blog, of the E.A.g.’s [Equitist Advocacy group's] “Way Forward” proposal, entitled Alternative to the Totalitarian, Humanocidal Self-Degeneration of Capitalism -- Political-Economic Democracy, with my own edits added to their text, for its improvement [improvement, at least, to my way of thinking!]. 

 

In my opinion, this text is too valuable to be treated as any kind of “sacred text”.

It needs to be “improved upon”, and circulated, «samizdat», worldwide, in such “improved” editions -- i.e., in as many versions as are seen as being needed, by every author who thinks that [s]he can “improve” upon it [including this one].

This text is under the Equitist Advocacy group’s omni-copyright umbrella [see item 6, Universal Property”, in text at:   http://www.equitist.org/Equitist/InternalAffairs/InternalAffairs.htm  ], so there are no “copyright violation” issues to hinder such circulation, whether such an edition, “improved” or not, is attributed anonymously, or under the name, or under a pseudonym, of the improving author, or under the name of the Equitist Advocacy group itself [although, in that case, the fact of the “improvement” of their original text by (an)other author(s) should be explicitly noted, obviously].

Here are the links to the original version --

http://equitism.org/Equitism/Equitism-entry.htm




Regards,

Miguel











Part 5. of 8. --

Alternative to the Totalitarian, Humanocidal Self-Degeneration of Capitalism -- Political-Economic Democracy




The Emergence of a Global

Association of Public Directors.

 

It is expected that Associations of Public Directors, coordinating ‘meta-enterprise’ level policies at the local level, the regional level, the national level, and, eventually, at the international level, will “naturally” tend to emerge over time, perhaps initially as a new kind of NGO [Non-Governmental Organization], and to eventually become institutionalized, constitutionalized, and electorialized.

This will create a situation of “dual power” between the political-economic Associations of Associations and the traditional, political branches of capitalist social governance.

But this should not be posed as one of unstable “dual power”, leading inevitably to the monolithic “total victory” of one of the two ‘duals’, and the total annihilation/abstract negation of the other.

Rather, it should be grasped as the basis for a new, fourth branch of government — of a partially democratized economic governance branch — and of an «aufheben» conservation/elevation/transformation of the earlier three branches of political government, leading to a government constituted by sustained quadruple power.

The new, democratic-economic governance branch would then exist in a higher, stabilized, ongoing — and partially conflicts-conserving, conflicts-appropriating, and conflicts-harnessing — dialecticaluni-thesis, or complex unity, with the three earlier branches, thereby supplying economic checks and balances that the political branches cannot supply, and that help to block the path, otherwise irresistible, toward the total prostitution and plutocratic totalitarian degeneration of those earlier three political branches of social governance.





Containment and ‘‘‘Real [Self-]Subsumption’’’ of the Capital-Relation by and within the New Social Relation of Production of Generalized Equity.

 

These Associations of Public Directors would supply a geography-based externalities container and constrainer for the many individual capitals operating within a given locality or region — capitals otherwise relatively ‘‘abstracted’’’ and geographically indifferent; indifferent to the deleterious impacts of the externalities they generate upon their local portions of humanity.

These Associations would thus constitute the «monads», or units, of a Meta-Capital entity, with each such «monad», or unit, of democratic-economic governance, ‘made up out of’ a heterogeneous multiplicity of “individual capitals” within their geographical locus-of-authority, in a democratic-jurisdictional sense.

These Associations would thus geo-demographically contain and ‘internalize / subsume the many capitals operating within their geographical jurisdictions, in terms of, and placing checks and balances upon, the otherwise unlimited production of externalities which the combination of gargantuan oligopolist agglomerations of capital, their monopolized/prostituted mass media of communication, and their prostitute, increasingly ‘‘‘plutocracy-owned’’’ political governments would otherwise unleash.

The “pure” private capital principle is a principle of private profit maximization at any human social/externality cost.

It is limited, within the epoch of the «Kapitals»-system, only by political checks, i.e., by economically-exteriorized, government legislature/bureaucracy regulation, and by litigation-triggered judicial intervention, in a context where all of these branches of political government are increasingly prostituted to a few, dominant agglomerations of internationalizing, plutocratic capital-ownership.






The Historical and Human-Social-Reproductive Terminality of the Un-Contained Capital-Principle.


Thus, the capital principle, when in its full development, at zenith, in the sub-epoch of its descendant phase — if not integrated within a higher socio-economic principle, i.e., as it moves to become the organizing principle of global society as a whole; of the human-social-reproductive totality — will become a principle of monopolistic, omni-ravenous, socially-cannibalistic rapacity and parasitic, vampiric malignancy; of unchecked, “absolute”, and therefore “absolutely corrupt” power, which will ravage and destroy the totality of human society, of the human species, and of the planetary biosphere as a whole.

That capital-principle, as personified in the capitalist plutocracy, so becomes in a vain defense of its ultra-criminal power-“perks”, and power-prerogatives.

That plutocracy sees those prerogatives as mortally threatened by the further growth of the productive forces, as materialized in, and immanent in, the improvement of majority [proletarian] standards of living, including standards of [scientific and technological, etc.] education, world-wide, as required by the growing “technical composition” of capital, and, therefore, by the growing technical composition of labor as well.

That plutocracy therefore, in the descendant phase of capitalist development, begins to systematically attack those standards.

It attacks those standards via the various ‘socially-atavistic’, “back-to-nature” ideologies it concocts, aiming to dupe the producing majority into acquiescence in a catastrophic, genocidal contraction of human social reproduction, as if “the survival of the biosphere” required such a massacre of humanity that, in reality, only the plutocracy requires, in its vain attempt to hold onto its rapacious oppressive power over the rest of humanity.





The «Aufheben» Historical [Self-]Negation

of the Capital-Relation

as Predominant Human-Social Relation of Production.

.  .  .

Monday, April 22, 2013

Part 4. of 8: Political-ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY



Dear Readers,

This blog-entry contains the
fourth part of my serialization, within this blog, of the E.A.g.’s [Equitist Advocacy group's] “Way Forward” proposal, entitled Alternative to the Totalitarian, Humanocidal Self-Degeneration of Capitalism -- Political-Economic Democracy, with my own edits added to their text, for its improvement [improvement, at least, to my way of thinking!]. 

 

In my opinion, this text is too valuable to be treated as any kind of “sacred text”.


It needs to be “improved upon”, and circulated, «samizdat», worldwide, in such “improved” editions -- i.e., in as many versions as are seen as being needed, by every author who thinks that [s]he can “improve” upon it [including this one].

This text is under the Equitist Advocacy group’s omni-copyright umbrella [see item 6, Universal Property”, in text at:   http://www.equitist.org/Equitist/InternalAffairs/InternalAffairs.htm  ], so there are no “copyright violation” issues to hinder such circulation, whether such an edition, “improved” or not, is attributed anonymously, or under the name, or under a pseudonym, of the improving author, or under the name of the Equitist Advocacy group itself [although, in that case, the fact of the “improvement” of their original text by (an)other author(s) should be explicitly noted, obviously].


Here are the links to the original version --



http://equitism.org/Equitism/Equitism-entry.htm




Regards,

Miguel
















Part 4. of 8. --

Alternative to the Totalitarian, Humanocidal Self-Degeneration of Capitalism -- Political-Economic Democracy.




Envisioning the Transition from Capital-Only-Equitarian to Generalized-Equitarian Social Relations of Social Self-Reproduction.

 

We expect to observe, as well as to participate in — given a protracted and appropriate, including «samizdat», preparation of the majority social conscience — in the upcoming years, the emergence of a majoritarian, popular movement for the 'Equitarian Reform' and 'economic-democratic extension' of the "representative-democratic", '''political-democratic''' constitutions of the nations of the capital-system's global market core.

We expect this movement to develop in response to the accelerating '''political-economic immiseration''' and degradation of those societies in the accelerating on-rush, by their ruling classes, into the multi-genocidal, state-capitalist totalitarian destiny engendered by the unresisted descendant-phase depredations of the capitals-system.

The envisioned 'Equitarian Reforms' are a 'constitutionalization' and 'juridicalization', into social law, of an immanent critique, or self-critique, of the "capital-relation" — of capital – a critique both theoretical and practical.

The institutional infrastructure of the Externality Equity«species» of generalized equity is a scaled self-similarity structure, a 'synchronic meta-fractal', of economic governance bodies, based in publicly-elected, base-elected public directors, serving in the new, constitutionally-mandated, '''second houses''' of newly bi-cameral boards of directors, or of local operating unit “management committees”:  the public stakeholders «camera», or externality-equities «camera», of that newly bi-cameral governance.

Per this programme, these ‘‘‘second house’’’, public boards of directors, or boards of popularly-elected, public directors, are to be constitutionally required in all local enterprises with sufficient externalities impact, in accordance with a constitutionally-stipulated externalities-impact metric, and a threshold stipulated in terms of that metric.

These new, public boards, would co-manage, in continuous negotiation with the traditional, internality-equities board, and/or its local operating units’ “management committees”, or "executive committees" delegates, the annual externalities budgets/operating plans of each such enterprise, or local operating unit, with constitutionally and legislatively ceded co-authority to do so, ‘adjudicate-able’ via the judiciary branch of social governance in cases of deadlock.

Arising therefrom — possibly, at first, as extra-constitutional “NGOs”, prior to their full constitutional institutionalization, as ‘endo-constitutional’ “GOs” — we anticipate the accelerating emergence of local/municipal, state/provincial, regional, national, continental, and, eventually, global, associations of public directors.

All levels of these associations of public directors must be constitutionally-required to be base-elected, so that it is not the members of a more local-scale association that elect the members of the next-less-local-scale association, but, instead, the entire citizen base of next-less-local-scale association. 

That is, any hierarchy of electors is to be avoided.

It must be the combined base of all of the more local associations addressed by a given next-scale association that elect the members of that next-scale association.

The function of these associations is to coordinate externalities social management policy at ‘meta-enterprise’ -- or ‘meta-local-operating-unit -- levels.

We expect that these would increasingly constitute – at first, «de facto», and, later, by sovereign, popular institution and constitutional amendment, «de jure» — a fourth, econo-political, branch of government, in sustained quadruple-power with «aufheben»-conserved/-transformed executive, legislative, and judicial branches, with checks-and-balances between every pair of these -- now four -- branches.

A key effect of the actions of these associations would be a human-geographical ‘de-abstractification’ / ‘re-determination / -containmentof abstract capital; an «aufheben»-conserving / -negating ‘‘real subsumption’’’ of the capital-equity, or internality-equity, relation, its markets, and its ‘‘‘market failures’’’, within the democratized relations of production of the generalized-equity-relation, including all of the new socio-ontological classes of non-internality-equity’ emergent from their externality-equity «arché».





The Intra-Duality of the Capital-Relation and the Emergence therefrom of the Social-Relations-of-Production Socio-Ontology of Generalized Equity:  Some Conjectures Regarding Equitism.

 

An 'essence-ial' operation of the «Kapitals»-system, 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 one of expropriationexpropriation of small-holder peasant producers on the land and of self-employed urban artisans, etc., to form/expand the wage-labour class; expropriation of smaller capitals by larger, expropriation of surplus-labor and of surplus-value, etc.

«Kapital» is also, 'essence-ially', an operation of bursting-asunder all barriers to the quanto-qualitative advance of  human societal self-productivity [of the social productive forces, cf. Marx].

As the «Kapital»-conversion of the pre-capital hinterland nears completion, as the «Kapitals»-system comes to surround the last remnants of the social-systemic ‘‘‘other’’’ that once surrounded and confronted it, we move toward that moment in the history of the «Kapitals»-system in which that 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 – namely, the operations of expropriation and of social-productivity-barrier-dissolution — will be applied to the «Kapitals»-system itself, by the «Kapitals»-system itself, as its own only remaining human-social environment, in its final confrontation:  in its confrontation with itself.


With regard to the expropriation operator, this would mean an expropriation of the expropriation [operation] itself, which operation is «Kapital», regarding which Marx wrote as follows --

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 objective socialization of the means of production’ – Ed.], 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; bold, italic, and underlined emphasis added].



Marx foresaw, in the Grundrisse manuscripts, that, in this self-environment or self-surroundment and self-envelopment of the «Kapitals»-system, it would find in its own nature a barrier to the further development of the social '''self-forces''' of self-expanding societal self-[re-]production, and 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, on an ever-larger ‘qualo-fractal’ scale – Ed.].”

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 tendency, leading thus to its own self-destruction.

[David McLellan; The Grundrisse, Karl Marx; Harper & Row [NY: 1971], pp. 94-95].



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 meta-finite self-conversion / self-bifurcation self-singularity, as especially about the immanent tendency of accumulating capital-value to de-value itself, and of the rate of capital value-accumulation to decelerate itself, both as expressions of the growth of the society-re-productive forces within capital.


However, the above-excerpted intimations must suffice for the present purpose.






Averting, via Social[-Relations] Revolution, the Otherwise Pre-Destined ‘‘‘New Dark Age’’’ Denouement of ‘‘‘Descendant-Phase’’’ Capitalism:  Towards a Strategy for Humanity.


The Fight for Human Liberty is Now a Life-and-Death Struggle Against Descendant-Phase [State-]Capitalism – Against the Unchecked Power of the Totalitarian, ‘‘‘Humanocidal’’’ [State-]Capitalist Plutocracy of the Advanced-Decadent [State-]Capitalist Core of the World-Market System:  the Core Plutocracy of the U.S., the U.K., and the E.U. .




The «Kapitals»-systems of national and global political economy have engendered liberal political constitutions, with internal checks and balances limiting the abuse of political power, which have, as a result, proven relatively so successful at growing social productivity / ‘‘the social forces of production’’’, that their economic and social success is now rapidly turning into its opposite — catastrophic economic, political, social failure.

Their economies have, at length, outgrown the power of their political constitutions, and of their exclusively political checks and balances, to avert the accumulation of unchecked power, and the human-species-lethal abuse of that unchecked power, in the formation of a pro-totalitarian capitalist plutocracy.

Their market competition, which initially provides economic checks and balances limiting abuses in the pricing and quality of goods and services -- and in customer service quality in general -- becomes, and must become, successful competition.

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

Thus, competition leads to and becomes its opposite, monopoly and oligopoly.

The process of the competition of capitals thus 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-only checks and balances among those branches of the public, political government are obviated and subverted.


The houses of legislature become houses of prostitution.


The executive and judicial branches of political governance are, over time, likewise bought-out and prostituted.

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

Thus, successful advanced capitalist democracies are characterized by a seemingly irresistible tendency to plutocratic, totalitarian self-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-decadence development of this plutocratic, totalitarian, ‘‘‘humanocidal’’’ self-degeneration of capitalism.

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

Only the emergence of political-economic democracy, of a democratically politicized political economy, can check this tendency to plutocratic, totalitarian, ‘‘‘humanocidal’’’ political degeneration, a degeneration which has arisen from the economy; from the 'economic side' of the political-economy; from the economy's production of a hyper-concentrated-wealth plutocracy, hence of a prostitute-government, prostituted most-abjectly to the economic plutocracy.





The Capital Equity Stock Shares-Principles of Internality Equity and the Capital-Governance Norm of Stockholder Democracy.


The share-principle, the capital-equity-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 economic-democratic enfranchisement for the owners of capital, but also a principle of total economic dis-enfranchisement for the non-owners of capital.

The ‘social equity’ principle of Equitism outers the latent, immanent dual of that capital-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 property-equities, that of externality-equities, in part via the equity tradition of ‘precedentary’, case-law jurisprudence, as well as from the generalized-equity-enabling Equitarian constitutional amendments — amendments to be proposed in detail under separate cover.

Thus, we hold, the onto -- the ‘socio-ontological category’, or kind of social thing category -- of Capital, will, in the future, if humanity is to have a future, self-bifurcate into the '~+~'-signified, antagonistic non-amalgamative sum of extant social ontology —

Capital-Equity  ~+~ The Rest of [Generalized] Equity: 

. . .





Juridical Meta-Genealogy of the Concept of Externality-Equity and the Generalization to Stakeholder Democracy.


The term Externality Equity as deployed herein denotes a form of non-stockholder stakeholder equity which arises from principles extending those already extant and precedented in the equitytradition of Anglo-American case law.

It arises, in particular, from the principle that the ownership of capital, however legitimately acquired, does not convey to the owner the 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 — 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 governance of the entities which conduct their origination:  the very heart of capital governance itself.

External, governmental regulatory bureaucracies, legislatively chartered and overseen, are subject to the plutocracy's bribery of the legislatures, and to the “revolving door” bribes of later, lucrative industry-employment offered to the regulating bureaucrats by the very industries that those bureaucrats are supposed to “regulate”. 

Lawsuits, brought before the judiciary, against the personal and social damages inflicted by those industries, are generally too delayed, and too costly, for the citizen litigants, typically members of the absolutely-impoverished, or at least relatively-impoverished, producers class, who face the ultra-deep-pockets of their plutocratic, mega-corporate, absolutely and relatively hyper-well-funded adversaries.

Such exclusively litigious actions for redress are also exposed to the gradual corruption of the judiciary, by the plutocracy's bribery -- bribery that already increasingly controls the legislature and the executive branches, which share the power to appoint the central judiciary.


On the other hand, nationalization of industry, and 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, and as, in reality, either an acceleration of, or a prevenient attainment of, the very «telos» of the totalitarian, ‘‘‘humanocidal’’’ «taxis» of advanced-decadent capital.

  • 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, and on the fruits of the surplus labor of the producers, is political-only, and totally vulnerable to political assault [unlike the case with a ruling class of private owners of capital], therefore tends to 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.  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 ruling class

  • The motive to multi-genocidal global totalitarianism of the capitalist plutocracy, formed in the core regions of advanced-decadent private-capital, is quite other than the motive described above.  The latter 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, and by the formation of an educated, tendentially prosperous, and therefore “ungovernable”, “middle class” of producers, of workers, which much-further growth of the productive forces would bring.  This power-jeopardy of the advanced-decadent capitalist ruling class is epitomized, in particular, by the prospect, for this petroleum/banking plutocracy, of the advent of controlled nuclear fusion atomic power as a superior and, thus, oil-obsolescing alternative to its core power-asset in fossil-fuel-based molecular power.  It is epitomized, in general, by the way that rising, global, “middle-class” levels of workers’ living standards, health, education, and new, entrepreneurial wealth threaten the overthrow of this plutocracy’s power to rule.





The Econo-Political Institutional Infrastructure of the Initial Phase of Externality-Equities Equitism.


The Externality-Equities initial phase of Equitism envisions the constitutional-amendment provision, and partially courts- and legislatures-regulated operation, of bicameral boards of directors, and/or of management committees, in all capitalist enterprises of sufficient size and social impact, with a second house of local-community-elected public directors in all local operating units of such enterprises. 

These publics boards would have constitutionally- and legislatively-ceded authority over the externalities budgets, the quanto-qualitative’, externalities-production local annual operating plans of these enterprises. 

These publics’ boards would thus represent, at the very heart of corporate governance, the externality-equities owned collectively -- in a collective property-rights, public property-rights, or social-property-rights application of the Coase Theorem -- by each such local-community's citizens, as public stakeholders, in virtue of this, their new and special kind of [social]-property right.

The traditional board of directors and its delegates, representing the ownership of internality-equities by the traditional stockholders, would continue to have authority over the dollar-/other-denominated, financial annual operating plan.

Discrepancies between the two operating plans would have to be negotiated between the two “houses” in accord with the constitutionally and legislatively mandated rules for such negotiation, with constitutionally and legislatively prescribed and regulated judicial review and/or arbitration in the event of deadlock/negotiation-failure.

Any effort by the plutocracy to bribe the thousands of grass-roots public directors elected in local communities all across the landscape would face prohibitive costs and risks of exposure because of their vast multiplicity. 

Such massive bribery would be rendered more difficult also by the base-level, the radically “town-hall”-, grass-roots”-democracy-restorationist character of the institution of externality equities.

That is, such bribery would be rendered more difficult by the fact that the locally-resident citizens eligible to be elected as public directors would be fighting to defend their families, their homes, their local communities, and their very lives — e.g., from local toxic pollution, lethal to the lives of their children and to those of their other loved ones; produced, typically, by nearby capitalistic firms, or even produced by nearby stewardship-equity producers-cooperatives, those in which human decency is outstripped by desire for monetary earnings [hopefully less typically] — in a way and from a vantage which would be very non-abstract, very direct and personal, compared to the vantage of the traditional long-distance, or ‘‘‘absentee’’’, central government legislator. 

In any case, attempts by the core plutocracy, and/or by their subordinate capitalist-class elements — subordinate elements, hostage to the core plutocracy, which we technically and collectively term ‘the drooling greedies’ in our social-scientific nomenclature — to buy-off the vast number of citizen-directors nationwide, and, eventually, worldwide, would break the bribery budgets of even the super-richest of the super-rich, as well as, by the repeated public exposure of this bribery, expose that core plutocracy to the total delegitimation that these so richly rotten-to-the-core rich so richly deserve!



Monday, April 08, 2013

Part 3. of 8.: Political-ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY



Dear Readers,

This blog-entry contains the
third part of my serialization, within this blog, of the E.A.g.’s [Equitist Advocacy group's] Way Forward proposal, entitled Alternative to the Totalitarian, Humanocidal Self-Degeneration of Capitalism -- Political-Economic Democracy, with my own edits added to their text, for its improvement [improvement, at least, to my way of thinking!]. 

 

In my opinion, this text is too valuable to be treated as any kind of “sacred text”.





 

It needs to be “improved upon”, and circulated, «samizdat», worldwide, in such “improved” forms -- i.e., in as many versions as are seen as being needed, by every author who thinks that [s]he can “improve” upon it [including this one].

This text is under the Equitist Advocacy group’s omni-copyright umbrella [see item 6, Universal Property”, in text at:   http://www.equitist.org/Equitist/InternalAffairs/InternalAffairs.htm  ], so there are no “copyright violation” issues to hinder such circulation, whether attributed anonymously, or under the name, or under a pseudonym, of the improving author, or under the name of the Equitist Advocacy group itself [although, in that case, the fact of the “improvement” of their original text by (an)other author(s) should be explicitly noted, obviously].


Here are the links to the original version --

http://equitism.org/Equitism/Equitism-entry.htm




Regards,

Miguel











Part 3. of 8. --

Alternative to the Totalitarian, Humanocidal Self-Degeneration of Capitalism -- Political-Economic Democracy.


An Historical Helix of Social Democratization, Spanning and Extending Beyond the Epoch of Capital as Dominant Human-Social Relation of Production.

 

The incipient political democracy and civil liberty that early, competitive, ascendance-phase capitalism asserted, initially against its feudal and Absolute-Monarchical rivals, can only be restored in a higher form, and preserved from otherwise total destruction by the late, decadence-phase form of that same capitalism, by means of advancing that initially merely political democracy to a politically-and-economically democratized, actualized political-economy.

That political-only democracy can now be restored only by advancing it; by the creation of new, economic checks-and-balances, to regenerate, augment, and support the concentrated-wealth-compromised constitutional political-only checks-and-balances, that have not survived the massive and systematic briberies, buy-outs, and "hostile takeovers" of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of political government, carried out via the "Big Money" of "Big Capital" -- by the hyperconcentrated-capital-ownership, plutocratic ruling class of the late, descendance-phase capitals-system.

We hold that the way to achieve this begins with an extension and generalization of "stockholder democracy" into '''stakeholder democracy''', in a "publics" sense; that is, by way of a constitutional institutionalization of Equitarian, 'externality-equities'-based economic democracy; a public and popular economic democracy that was absent as such throughout the capital epoch, seeded only in that democracy among capitalists — among the holders/owners of 'internality-equity' — as immanent in the principles and practices [however often honored in the breach] of joint-stock company "stockholder democracy".


'Re-Constructive' vs. 'Pre-Constructive' [Predictive] Modeling of the Transition Using an 'Intensional-Intuitional', Heuristic Dialectical Algebra.

 

We propose the following 'heuristic derivation' of a relatively detailed, concretized concept of the next '''social relation of [human-society self-re-]production''', successor to the capital social relation of production [herein denoted K for short], as the next subsuming 'socio-negentropic' organizing principle of human society, based upon the work of Karl Seldon, co-founder of Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.].  

We apply an 'heuristic dialectical algebra' intuitively below; there is thus no need to detail here the algorithmic mechanics of the Seldonian 'dialectical arithmetic' that undergirds the operations of that 'dialectical algebra'.

This predicted next '''social relation of [human-society self-re-]production''' is, we hold, 'the social relation of generalized equity' [herein denoted E for short], with 'citizen externality-equity' as «arché» of these new, later «species» of equity, beyond the present-day concept of capital equity, and seeding a succeeding social [re-]formation which we term -- following Seldon -- 'Equitism', or 'Equitarian Society'.

. . .



Expected Emergent «Species» of 'Generalized Equity' in the Epochal Transition from Capitalism 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
  1. Capital-Owners Internality Equity of private stock-owners, which, of course, continues to emerge, and to develop further, under the general rule of the "capital-relation" today [«arché» 'onto' of equity, seeded in K, partially «aufheben»-conserved but also elevated and constrained / negated — i.e., via Externality-Equity-holding Publics' Boards' constraints,  and other new constraints — 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 "capital-relation", K, by the [rest of the] "generalized-equity-relation", E;  
  2. 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 'Equitarian Society'];
  3. 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;
  4. Citizen Stewardship Equity, superseding the "wage-labor", '''sold labor-power''', or '''alienated labor''' relation of capital.  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' democratically managing the socially-/legally-/constitutionally-favored, mutually-competing 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-capital 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'];
  5. 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.















Elaborations Regarding the Determinations of Some of the New «Species» of 'Generalized Equity' Expected to Emerge in the Epochal Transition from Capitalism to 'Equitism'.

 

We will address herein, at greater length, some of what we have been able to derive regarding the determinations of two of the new «species» of 'generalized equity', namely, the 'Citizen Externality Equity' «species», the 'Citizen Birthright Equity' «species», the Citizen Stewardship Equity', and the 'Citizen Allocational Equity' «species», immediately below.





Citizen Externality Equity.

 

The social principle, and social policy, of 'Citizen Externality-Equity' is both a collective-property, public-property, social-property instantiation of the so-called "Coase Theorem", and an ultimate fruition of the '''equity''' or '''equitable jurisprudence''' tradition of Anglo-American law, in contradistinction to the common law and statutory law traditions. 

"Externalities" are “market failures” of the markets of Capitalism, as recognized, and as named as such, by capitalist economists, constituting a major aspect of the immanent critique of capitalism officially admitted — however much these immanent failures of 'capital-ism' may be officially downplayed — by capitalist economics. 

"Externalities" comprise the external costs, and, sometimes, also in the external benefits, that are imposed, by the operations of capitalist enterprises, upon those ‘‘‘publics’’’ which are neither the owners, nor the employees, nor the customers, nor the suppliers of those enterprises, and which are imposed upon those ‘‘‘publics’’’, without any intrinsic provision for consent by, or compensation to, said ‘‘‘publics’’’.

The life-threatening toxic pollution of the air, water, and soil of residential communities by proximate industrial plants forms a classic spectrum of examples of such “external cost” imposition. 

The Coase Theorem is the name given to the proposition, asserted by Nobel-laureate capitalist economist Ronald Coase, to the effect that externalities do not give rise to ‘‘‘diseconomies’’’, ‘‘‘distribution sub-optima’’’, or ‘‘‘resource mis-allocations’’’, provided that well-defined and enforceable property rights exist, such as to create a market incentive for the externality-producer to ‘‘internalize’’’ the cost(s) of the externalit(y)(ies) being produced. 

The equity, or equitable jurisprudence, tradition of Anglo-American law originally emerged as a system of law, parallel and dual to the common law/statutory system of law, in the English chancery, and which came to comprise a settled and formal body of substantive and procedural rules and doctrines that supplement, aid, or override common and statutory law.

"Equity" in this context connotes justice according to fairness, esp. as distinguished from mechanical application of rules”.

The equity principle at work in the 'Citizen Externality-Equities' ‘‘‘second «species»’’’ of 'generalized equity', is the principle that publics, by suffering the ‘‘external costs’’’ imposed upon them, without their consent, and without any compensation to them by the externalities perpetrators, the private-capital enterprises, thereby, in effect, ‘‘‘purchase’’’, in kind, a kind of ‘‘‘shares’’’ of a new, to-be constitutionally established and mandated class of equities – a public, collective form of equity-property – whose disposition must therefore be accomplished by means of collective, democratic decision, arrived at by vote of the publics, i.e., by vote of the 'externality-equity' owners, the citizen 'externality-equity' ‘‘‘shareholders’’’, or 'externality-equity' ‘‘‘stakeholders’’’in each locality, for 'public directors' for their.  

These publics-elected 'public directors' will sit in "local, second, PUBLIC-INTEREST boards of directors", or "local, second, PUBLIC-INTEREST management committees", one assigned to each local operating unit of each locally-operating enterprise, so as to be in continual negotiation with the traditional, private-interest board-of-directors, or private-interest "management committee", of each operating unit of such locally-operating enterprises, located in that locality, whose externalities-production / external costs production exceeds legislated thresholds, continually negotiating with regard to the statutorially-required 'externalities-budgets' of the annual operating plans of each such enterprise local operating unit, and with regard to, and monitoring, the day-to-day implementation of those 'externalities-budgets', and subject to losing-party-pays adjudications, in the new, constitutionally-mandated Tribunals for Externality Equity, should these negotiations deadlock.

'Citizen Externality-Equities' implies an immanent-/self-expansion of joint-stock-company stockholder democracy principles, inherent in the capital-relation, to encompass the constitutional, legislative, and regulatory 'institution-ization' of a generalized, comprehensive ‘‘stakeholder democracy’’’.

'Equitism' begins with constitutional recognition of a new 'socio-ontological category' of equities:  'Citizen Externality-Equities', as demanded by the mass movement of a majority of the people.

'Citizen Externality-Equities' generalizes core, capital-equity logic to encompass economic democracy, starting with public, democratic ‘econo-political’ governance of the core of capitalism’s ‘‘market failures’’’ – its production and accelerating accumulation of an ever-mounting burden of the ‘‘externalities’’’, that it foists upon its publics, publics who may be “third parties” – neither customers of, nor employees of, nor owners of, nor suppliers of the capital-entity producing the “externalities” in question.





The following image provides a summary visualization of the expected, multi-scale 'Associations of Publicly-Elected Public Directors' administrative infrastructure for the society-wide popular-democratic governance of economic externalities, local to global -- 










Citizen Birthright Equity.

 

The principle of the social generalization, or universalization, of equity-holding, to all social citizens, and of an 'socio-onto-dynamasis' beyond the kinds of such equity presently in existence, to birth new kinds, e.g., 'Citizen Externality-Equities' — the heart and «arché» of the E 'socio-onto' — does not end with the public-democratic 'property-ization' of 'externality-equities'.

It extends as well to the social generalization of the proprietorship of, initially, 'internality equities', by all citizens, by means of a policy of 'Citizen Birthright Equity Endowment', in an amended, constitutionalized Bill of Social Rights & Responsibilities.

This new «species» of equity also flows from principles of 'social risk management', of 'economic-system-risk' management and of 'societal self-investment'.

It means that every child born into 'Equitarian Society', is granted, «ipso jure», at birth, by virtue of fundamental constitutional right, a tax-funded equal sum of capital equity stock, comprised of small portions of all publicly-issued stocks, bonds, and other capital assets meeting legislated standards, and of extant social property "rent" income streams as well, designed as an integrated social/individual risk management trust-fund, and a unified, 'omni-portable', globally-portable "social safety net", for every new-born citizen. 

This new constitutional right, in this sense, makes every baby born into human society a '''trust-fund baby'''.

It means per capita citizen net assets in place of today's plutocracy-mandated, malignantly growing per capita citizen liabilities; the share of each citizen in plutocracy-incurred public debt [a way by which the plutocratic minority finances its destructive imperial enterprises, and their required '''permanent war economy''', via taxes primarily on wages-income, as legislated forced collective consumptions, foisted upon the non-super-rich majority]. 

  • Moral Hazard Mitigations.  The mitigation of the massive "moral hazard" potential of this social policy will require that there be many "strings attached", restricting the uses of this public investment in each citizen-person by that person, and by various parents or guardians and heirs of that person at various stages of that person's expected life-history, and beyond.  Each social equity-endowment must therefore remain a partially-social property; an only-partially-individual/-personal/-private property. 

  • Principles of Universalized Inheritance and of Universalized Birth-Advantage.  This policy of 'universal advantage' / 'universal inheritance' / 'social inheritance' — of the universalization of capital/equity ownership / social property ownership / inheritance as a partial remedy for the viciously self-amplifying hyper-inequalities of plutocratic-minority capital-advantage and capital-privilege; a '''social risk management''' policy designed to achieve an «aufheben»-negation of some of the socially-recognized systemic risks of the predecessor, «Kapitals»-system — envisions a unification of the fragmented and otherwise inadequate «Kapitals»-system epoch legacy of "social safety net" provisions. 



If not, in the beginning, birthing every baby with a golden or even a silver spoon in her or his mouth, every baby would be born with at least a stainless steel "spoon in its mouth".

These unified provisions would address the management of the risk of the "contained" but also "retained" elements of capital-profit-based economics, plus of the new, Equitarian system, as well as of the universal risks to which human social life is heir. 

Society's collective portion of equal initial social investment in each individual citizen, by social right of birth [as distinct from the presently persisting unequal family investment in / inheritance of each child, resulting from, e.g., the unequal fruits of achievements and/or thefts by that child's ancestors], and the partially age-based and tests-of-knowledge-based, constitutionally- and legislatively-restricted allocation of each child's birth-right equity trust-fund, would be legislatively designed to meet the expected, standard costs of foreseeable life-history events, including — 

  • Education — primary school, trade-school, college, professional, '''life-long learning''', etc.;
  • Medical Care — for "normal", plus at least some classes of "catastrophic", illness;
  • Home Purchase — down-payment for young adult first home acquisition;
  • Entrepreneurshippublic "venture capital" funding for first [below legal-threshold employee-count for stewardship-equity requirements] small business, or for producers’-cooperative launch[es];
  • Unemployment Insurance — for cases of economic downturns, producers’-cooperative bankruptcies, etc.;
  • Re-Training — redressing 'technodepreciation', or technological 'obsolescence-depreciation', of '''human capital''', or of the required 'human skill-negentropy', for stewardship-equity-holding producers;
  • Retirement — partially replacing plutocracy-gutted pension, employer 401(k), IRA, & Social Security programs. 


Costs of social failures by the individual — e.g., of welfare livelihood-support in the cases of extended, perhaps non-economic-downturn-induced unemployment, or of incarceration costs in cases of criminal conviction — would be borne out of this birthright equity fund, up to its near-exhaustion, thus also forming a further dis-incentive to such failures. 


[Economic downturns may continue to occur, irregularly, during the period of the '''formal domination''', or '''formal subsumption''', of the capital social-relation-of-production by the rest of the emergent social-relation-of-production of 'generalized equity', although any immanent social processes described in terms of a '''socio-economic law-of-motion''' of such downturns is expected to be increasingly 'socio-ontologically' distinct from the immanent social process which drives the iterated irruption of escalating periods of contracted social reproduction within the [sub-]epoch of the '''real domination''' of, and of the more or less exclusive social rule of, the "capital-relation"]. 

This unification, with each citizen as cost-concerned customer, given the voucher-like personal stake of each citizen in the conservation, and expansion, of the principal of each's birthright-equity social trust-fund, would 're-marketize' social welfare provision, and 're-competitivize' the pricing of medical and other social welfare services, and, thus, the exercise of cost-efficiency and cost-discipline in their production, de-incenting the "take it for granted" moral hazard of "free-of-charge", state-bureaucracy-produced, or state-bureaucracy-subsidized, '''social welfare''' provisions. 

The policy of 'Citizen Birthright Equity Endowment' raises questions of the disposition of such endowments in the event of termination of pregnancy, averting the birth of a new citizen, by right of the mother. 

Parents must not be allowed to '''profit''' monetarily from their children's social trust-funds, though, even so, the financial worries and burdens of parenthood would be significantly mitigated by this policy, even countervailing against the extreme amplification of the "demographic transition" presently evident, in part, in advanced capitalist nations' growing tendency toward negative rates of human population growth

The 'Citizen Birthright Equity' policy would not constitute a direct financial incentive to never abort a fetus.

However, the high social valuation of each and every life implicit in this policy suggests a certain resolution of the prevailing "right-of-choice" versus "right-of-life" social conundrum, a conundrum which is allowing the ruling plutocracy to further distract -- and to divide and conquer -- the majority of the population against itself, distracting it away from the realization that the real mortal enemy of all of these citizens is the ruling plutocracy itself. 

This conundrum presently forms an apparently unsolvable antinomy, but one which we see, rather, as yet another dialectical self-antithesis or 'self-duality' within the prevailing social concept of right.

This 'intra-duality' has been opportunistically exploited, manipulated, and amplified — quite predictably, in anti-dialectical, rigid, frozen, "either-vs.-or" fashion — by the 'Meta-Nazi' plutocracy's 'ideological engineering' operations, so as to foster and reinforce the protracted social strife of both sides of a diametrically opposed, antagonistic, "irreconcilable" social antithesis, as yet one further tool for the 'Meta-Nazis' ideology-based divide-and-conquer subjugation of the majority public — of the 'producers-class'.



Aside:  The "Abortion Rights" Conundrum, An Instance of the 'Intra-Dualities' of Human Rights Generally.

 

The apparent antinomy between the community's right and duty to safeguard the lives of all of its members, and thus to enforce severe sanctions against homicidal behavior, on the one hand, and of citizens' rights to the free disposition of their individual bodies with minimal governmental or communitarian encroachment, on the other hand, can be resolved in a higher, socially-mediated, complex unity which preserves both dimensions of right, including some aspects of their sometimes conflictual mutual relationship.

Humane society can never permit the decision to end a human life, even an embryonic life, to be a casual decision.
 
If a healthy prospective mother, with science-based expectancy of a birth-outcome unthreatening to her health, chose to terminate her pregnancy, she would, per this expectation of the '''values''' of a 'democratic communist' society, be incentivized, by democratically-legislated rewards and/or penalties, to register her intention to do so in the appropriate portal, set aside for this purpose, of what we call the global 'Omni-Com' — of the social Omnibus Communications social-property utility; of the globally-socialized heir to today's "internet". 

Other legally-qualified prospective parents, perhaps biologically unable to birth children of their own, would have the constitutional right, by assuming all of the medical and other cost-burdens of the pregnancy and of the delivery, to adopt the child[ren] resulting from the registered pregnancy, as long as the medical court — a jury of publicly-elected physician-justices — certified the mother as physiologically and psychologically safe to go to term within the 'legislatedly acceptable' outcome probabilities, hopefully quite stringent with regard to the safety of the mother.

If the medical court found otherwise, the planned abortion would be free to proceed. 

If, globally, no qualified prospective adopters were willing to "speak up for" the life of the child in this substantive way, this silence would constitute consent to the abortion — a relinquishment, by the human community extant, of its right to preserve the potential extrauterine life of the fetus in question. 

The mother would, in such cases — hopefully rare — be free to proceed with the abortion. 

In such cases, no 'Citizen Birthright Equity Endowment' would accrue to support the thus-prevented extrauterine life of the embryonic child.






Citizen Stewardship Equity.

 

The 'Citizen Stewardship Equity' 'justicial principle' is designed to redress and to repair the fundamental, tragic psychohistorical, social wrong that resides at the root of the "modern proletariat" [Marx and Engels] -- that constitutes the origin of the social victimization and denigration of the working class:  the separation of the producers from direct access to [from at least "usufruct" ownership of] the "land", i.e., their exclusion from access to agricultural livelihood/sustenance, and from direct access to all other means of production/livelihood, at the hands of modern capital, allied with modern landed property, so that "universal prostitution" [Marx] -- "self-alienation", i.e., "self-selling", to capital and/or landed property -- became their only recourse for survival.  

The positive aim of the 'Citizen Stewardship Equity' principle of equity is therefore to facilitate a new historic political-economic regime of 'collective entrepreneurship', or of 'entrepreneurial collectivism', among the associated producers [Marx], by making the usufruct of social-property means of production available to qualified collectives, or associations, of producers.

Such collectives of producers, associations of producers, or socialized producers' cooperatives, must first produce a business plan, and a system of by-laws for their own, internal, democratic self-governance, that qualifies for such access by the criteria set forth is statutes promulgated by the democratically-elected, democratically recallable producers' legislature, and in the eyes of a likewise qualifying, citizen-stewards' social bank producers' cooperative, willing to risk their solvency by committing a part of their means of production procurement fund to this citizens' collective, and to its business and self-governance plans.

Thereafter, to continue in existence, this thus-qualified citizens stewardship cooperative must pass the test of competition, for the consumer-credits spending of other producer-citizens, against other qualifying citizen stewardship cooperatives that offer competing goods/services to the public, remaining solvent in the face of that competition for such de facto consumer-credit "consumer votes".






Citizen Allocational Equity.

 

Truly equitable distribution of, e.g., the public assets ceded, from the stock of global social property, in stewardship [not in local ownership], to local and regional producers' associations, may involve, especially initially, from the point of view of the internationally base-elected A.I.D.P.Association Internationale des Directeurs Publiques»], if it so decides through its democratic process, compensatory and reparative elements, until the injustices of past capitalist-imperialist social auto-cannibalization of the capital-hinterland and former "Second World" and "Third World" regions of the globe has been adequately redressed. 

Such allocative equity, in any case, involves the solution of presently unsolved — and hardly even posed — problems of 'social-negentropy accounting' in the context of a 'meta-market' social system, in which mere monetary-valuations provide an even more inadequate metric of 'social-reproductive use-value' than they do now, still within the integument of “the capital-relation”. 

The nature of 'Citizen Allocational Equity' is thus that of an historical equity-principle, which targets an “ideal” of equal «per capita» regional allocation of socially-owned social negentropy, but which recognizes that such an ideal standard becomes relevant only once an “equipotential” among all regions of the globe has been achieved with regard to life-opportunities. 

There will be a role for the constitutionally and juridically regulated and monitored 'Declarations of Peace and Prosperity' — replacing, and hopefully preempting and obviating the whole history of '''Declarations of War''', up to today — adopted by one global region, with respect to another, as part of the process of achieving the necessary compensatory and reparative allocations that constitute '''the correction of the past''' in terms of human-labor-created-wealth-sharing and natural-resources-sharing. 

Such 'Declarations', and, even more so, their implementation, would have to involve subtle applications of a mastery of human-social science — of the science of the catalysis of accelerated human-social self-development — that are all but beyond the ken of our current, capital-compromised and capital-corrupted civilization.
  

These declarations might involve something of what Marx envisioned, with respect to Russia, and with respect to the Russian Mir, '''given a successful proletarian revolution in the West''', in his Preface to the Russian edition of Capital (volume I), and in his draft letters to Vera Zasulich.