Friday, October 11, 2013

Part 4. of 9. Psychohistorical-Dialectical Derivation of Equitism as the Successor System to Capitalism.

Full Title -- 

Part 4 of 9.  Seldonian, Dialectical-Algebraic Derivation of Fundamental Features 

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

using the Dialectical Meta-Equationthat Models

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

by [guest author] Hermes de Nemores.

Dear Readers,

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

Such questions deserve an answer.  

This blog-entry summarizes the fourth 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 the text of which I have adapted to the locally-available typography.

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



Example 5:  NQ Psychohistorical-Dialectical Meta-Model. TheMeta-Equation of Human-Social Relations of ProductionMeta-Evolution’ [Part 4 of 9].

Historically Specific Commentary, Epoch t = 4.  The Intra-Duality of Monies Drives the Emergence of the Content of the Social Relations of Production Socio-Ontological Category of «Kapitals». The circulation of Commodities which Money mediates, facilitates, and accelerates, in relation to its predecessor praxes of the social interchange of goods and services, impresses upon its human observors, and participants, an abstract pattern which can be symbolized, after the manner of Karl Marx, via  . . . 

->> ->> C' . . ..

This sequence of symbols characterizes a process in which use-value -- the useful qualities of the kind of Commodity denoted by the symbol C' -- is the goal of the two sequential exchanges so symbolized.

The producer/consumer owns a greater quantity than his/her need demands of the useful qualities denoted by C, but lacks a sufficient quantity of the qualitatively-different qualities denoted by C'.

Therefore, the relation C ¬{<,=,>} C' must hold to make this exchange useful [note that C and C' are neither "purely-quantitative", or 'purely-qualitative' variables:  instead, they are 'quanto-qualitative', or 'qualo-quantitative', variables, such as can be expressed starting with the algebra of the third arithmetic in the Seldonian dialectical progression of dialectical arithmetics.  That is, e.g., C denotes a definite quantity of a definite quality, or kind, of Commodity, such as Marx's "1 coat", or a definite quantity of a standard metrical unit[-qualifier] of a definite kind of Commodity, such as Marx's "20 yards of linen"]. 

The meaning of the sequence of symbols above is this:  first a number, or «arithmos», of Commodities, C, is exchanged for a specific sum of Money, M, its “price”, and then, later, M is exchanged for a different number, or «arithmos», of qualitatively different Commodities, C'. 

But this social procession of Cs followed by Ms can be “cut” differently, as a one of Ms followed by Cs instead.

I.e., it is evident that, at least formally, as a possibility, this sequence can be comprehensively inverted to yield an opposite:  

->> ->> M'.  

Assuming a single kind of Money, we must have -- 

M < or > M' 

if M  ~= M' [i.e., it is not the case that ¬{<,=,>} M'].

But this 'intra-duality' of the Money-mediated Commodity-circulation-process is far from merely formal.

Money emerged as a mere means of the Circulation of Commodities, a mediation meant to mitigate, ameliorate, and abate the frustrations an inefficiencies of pure barter -- unmediated Commodities -- exchange.

But regularization of Money-mediated access to Goods makes [the][former] Money-Commodity become, in a sense, more useful than any [other/more concrete] concrete [use-]value:  than any other Good/Commodity.

That is, the Money-Commodity becomes the abstract, general, universal use-value, albeit '''once-removed'''; the unity or universality of all of the ever-growing diversity of concrete, particular use-value, ever-burgeoning as the social productive forces grow, through Money's [ever-increasing] access to all [other] [use-]values.

The growth of human needs and desires for the whole, expanding universe of human products offered as Commodities turns into a universal need for Money.

Money turns, from being a mere means for the Circulation of Commodities, into being all but an end in itself.

The old practices of use-value accumulation, of Goods-hoarding as the '''social risk management''' function of the redistributionist Chieftain, of the redistributionist Temple-State, re-emerge in the latter-day forms of 'Monetized' treasures and Money hoards, which also become the forerunners as well as the continuing accompaniments of the first emergences of Capital -- of the Capital-relation-of-production.

Thus, as the population of Money/Commodity-acts 'densifies', some of the actors come increasingly to appreciate the efficacy of the innovative counter-sequence --

->> ->> M' 

-- such that, and if and only if M' > M.

And yet, Money, and '''Capitalized Money''', can never be adequate to completely become '''ends in themselves''', because they are only, ultimately valuable to the extent that they can be, and are, "cashed-in"; that they can be ''realized" eventually in human '''life-gratifying''' and '''life-reproductive''' concrete/particular, 'use-value-able' wealth.

Indeed, the «Kapitals»-system, and its ruling plutocracy, is destined, at a certain stage in the development of its social [re-]productive forces, to face a choice between either (1) sustaining a quanto-qualitatively expanding human-social reproduction -- sustaining the 'social-reproductive use-value productivity', 'social-use-value-profitability', or 'social forces of production productivity/profitability' of human society, and allowing that kind of productivity/profitability to continue its accelerating advance, thus precipitating the first GLOBAL Renaissance in Terran human history -- at the expense of its own[ed] 'capital-value-productivity' or 'capital-value-profitability', and, hence, at the expense of the power to rule of that ruling plutocracy, or, on the contrary, of (2) temporarily and terminally sustaining its 'capital-value-productivity' or 'capital-value-profitability', and the power to rule of that plutocracy, at the cost of a catastrophic contraction of social reproduction; of a mass-murderous multi-/mega-genocidal [quantitative] collapse of global human population, not to mention of the "living standards"/"quality of life" for the vast majority of humanity; a catastrophic, "New/Final Dark Ages"-inducing reversal of the growth of the social forces of production; of the 'social-forces-of-production productivity/profitability' of global humanity. 

The former may be measured, in proxy, in “dimensionless” or “mass-unit degree zero” form, as the ‘human socio-mass net-gain ratio’, (St - St-1)/(St-1), wherein St denotes the “standing” planetary ‘human Socio-mass’ during period t, including both human bodies’ “biomass”, and ‘humanity-made artefacts-mass’. 

The later may be measured, in proxy, in “dimensionless” form, as the ‘capital-value accumulation value-mass net-gain ratio’, (Kt - Kt-1)/(Kt-1), wherein Kt denotes the standing planetary ‘capital-value-mass’ during period t, which simplifies to (((c + v + s)-(c + v))/( c + v)) = (s/( c + v)). 

The world-historical choice for humanity, then, teetering on the brink of ‘‘‘the end of human prehistory’’’, and/or of ‘‘‘the mutual ruin of the contending classes’’’, is thus --

((St - St-1)/(St)) optimization**   VERSUS    (s/( c + v)) maximization.

As a measure of the sustained rate of reproduction of human society -- of the human-social ‘self-force’ of human-societal self-re-production --  ((St - St-1)/(St)) is also a measure of the Meta-Darwinian fitness of the global Human Phenome/Human Genome complex unity.

As a measure of the transient rate of reproduction of capital-value -- of the capital-value-profitability of global human society -- (s/( c + v)) is also a measure of the transient Meta-Darwinian fitness of The «Kapital»-relation -- and of the transitory socio-politico-economic power of its global ruling-class -- measured in indifference to the welfare of the global human species as a whole.

The capitalist ruling class is destined to make the wrong historic choice, when this historic choice presents itself, at the cusp of the ascendance-phase/descendance-phase transition of the «Kapitals»-system, and requires correction, in terms of that choice -- if that choice is to be corrected at all -- by the world working class.

To the extent that this plutocracy gives increasing evidence of its choice of, and manipulation in favor of, alternative (2), the inherent inadequacy of Capitalized Money as end-in-itself for a viable human praxis of continued species-existence may '''come to the fore''' for the majority of the rest of the human species, leading to revolutionary transcendence of the ‘‘‘real domination’’’ of the «Kapital»-relation, and of its ruling class.

The social relation of productiononto’ of Monies 'self-bifurcates' into an 'irreducible'/'non-amalgamating' sum of two such ‘ontos’:  Monies  +  «Kapitals»:

The ‘‘‘psychohistorical’’’ content of the human ‘socio-ontological, social-relations-of-production category’ of Monies therefore 'self-bifurcates' -- 

[M ---> M<M> = M + qMM = M + K]

-- in response to growing populations, and human-social ‘‘‘densities’’’ [physical-spatial concentrations], of Monies, resulting from the rising productivity -- the rising productive force -- of human labor, into an 'irreducible'/'non-amalgamating' sum of two ‘ontos’:  

Monies  + «Kapitals»:

M ---> ~<M > = M M = <M>2 = <+ D<M >> = <M + qMM> = <M + K>   ¬{<,=,>}   M;

The equation specific to our generic meta-equation’, >-|-<t = <A>2^t, for its epoch t = 4, is --

>-|-<4 = <A>2^4  = 

                                     <<A + G + qGA + C + qCA + qCG + qCGA> ~+~ M>2 =

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

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

-- which means, among other things, that it remains possible for the earlier-possible, A, G, qGA, C, qCA, qCG, and qCGA social relations/’praxes’, to persist in existence, or to manifest again, throughout epoch t = 4, despite their ‘’’real subsumption’’’, during this epoch, by the M relation/social praxis, and despite their ‘‘‘formal subsumption’’’, during this epoch, by the K relation/social praxis.

**Full, step-by-step, systematic construction, and explanation, of the progression of metrics used, by F.E.D., to measure, ‘quanto-qualitatively’, the level of the human “social forces of production”, in the more advanced forms of its ‘psychohistorical-dialectical equations’, is planned for proximate delivery via a different venue.


Next:  Part 5 of 9 --

The 'Self-Duality' of the Capital-Relation and the Emergence of the 'Generalized Equity Relation'.  

No comments:

Post a Comment