Principles of Trans-Capitalist Social[ist] Equity: Citizen Externality Equity

[Miguel]

Principles of Trans-Capitalist Social[ist] Equity: Citizen
Externality Equity

SOLUTION TO CAPITALISM'S "MARKET FAILURES", OF POLLUTION, ETC.
"EXTERNALITIES":
CITIZEN EXTERNALITY EQUITY



alt.postmodern Group Participants,

Below, I have added some emphases and made some edits of my own to an
excerpt from one of the Equitist Advocacy Group's key texts, to render
it more forthcoming [I hope!].



Definition.

"CITIZEN EXTERNALITY EQUITY =

The social principle, and social policy, of 'Citizen Externality
Equity' Rights is both a collective-property, public(s)-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.



Elaboration.

"Externalities" are "market failures" of the markets of Capitalism, as
recognized, and as named as such, by capitalist economists,
constituting a major aspect of theimmanent 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, the
"external benefits", that are imposed, by the operations of capitalist
enterprises, upon those '''publics''' which are neither the owners,
the employees, the customers, nor the suppliers of those enterprises,
and which impose 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 pro-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 of the "externality".

The "equity" tradition, or "equitable jurisprudence" tradition, of
Anglo-American law originally emerged as a system of law/courts,
parallel and dual to the common law/statutory system/courts 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, especially as
distinguished from mechanical application of rules"'.

The equity principle at work in the 'externality equities' '''second
«species»''' of 'generalized equity', is the principle that publics,
which suffer the '''external costs''' imposed upon them without
consent or compensation by private-capital enterprises, thereby, in
effect, '''purchase''' shares of a new, to-be constitutionally
established and mandated class of equities – a publics', collective
form of equity-property – whose disposition must therefore be by means
of collective, democratic decision, arrived at by vote of the publics,
i.e., of the 'externality-equity' owners -- non-capital-owning
'''shareholders''', or '''stakeholders'''.

'Externality Equity' 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 generalized, comprehensive, non-
capital-owning '''stakeholder democracy'''.

'Equitism' begins with constitutional recognition of a new, universal
'socio-ontological category' of all-citizens' equities: 'citizen
externality equities'.

'Externality Equity' 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
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 [capital-equity-
stock-]owners of, nor suppliers of the capital-entity producing the
deleterious "externalities" in question.



Envisioning the Transition

We expect to find — given a protracted and appropriate, including
«samizdat», preparation of the majority social conscience — the
emergence of a majoritarian, popular movement for the 'Equitarian
Reform', an '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
decadent-phase depredations of the capitals-system, in the desperate
efforts of the concentrated-capital-owning ruling class to avert the
"self-contracting-value-dominant", "techno-depreciation-dominant"
phase immanent in the law-of-motion of the capitals-system.

The 'Equitarian Reforms' are envisioned as 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 local, newly bi-
cameral boards of directors: 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
"management committee", or "executive committee" delegates, the annual
'externalities
budgets'/operating plans of each such enterprise, 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 — 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.

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' 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 four branches.

A key effect of the actions of these associations would be a human-
geographical 'de-abstractification' / 're-determination / containment'
of 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 human-social
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 expropriation — expropriation 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 social self-
productivity [of the "social self-re-productive self-force", 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 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 surrounded it, or 'environmented' it, in the
past – namely, the operations of
expropriation and of social-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». Marx --

"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' – M.D.], 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], pages
761-764, emphasis added by M.D.]

Marx foresaw, in The Grundrisse, 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 "meta-fractal" scale – M.D.].

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],
pages 94-95, emphasis added by M.D.]


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 Decadent Capitalism: Towards
a Strategy for Humanity

The Fight for Human Liberty is Now a Life-and-Death Struggle Against
Decadent Capitalism – Against the Unchecked Power of the Totalitarian,
Humanocidal Capitalist Plutocracy of the Advanced Capitalist Core of
the World-Market System.

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 power of 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 species-lethal abuse of that unchecked power, in the formation of
a pro-totalitarian, humanocidal capitalist plutocracy.

Their market competition, which provides economic checks and balances
limiting abuses in the pricing and quality of goods, 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 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 government 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
sufficient to achieve electoral victory.

Thus, successful advanced capitalist democracies are characterized 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-
decadence development of this plutocratic totalitarian, and
humanocidal, self-degeneration of capitalism.

Only the addition of constitutional 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, of a
democratically 'politicized' political economy, can check this
tendency to plutocratic totalitarian 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
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 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.

[M.D.: The details have since been posted to --
http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/AmendmentXXVIII/AmendmentXXVIII.pdf
].
. . .

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 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 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 industry-
employment offered to the regulating bureaucrats by the regulated
industries.

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, who face the ultra-
deep-pockets of their plutocratic, mega-corporate adversaries.

Such exclusively litigious actions for redress are also exposed to the
gradual corruption of the judiciary by the plutocracy's bribery that
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 Stalinoid or
Fascistic 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
«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 is political-only, and
totally vulnerable to political assault [unlike the case with a ruling
class of private owners of capital] 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.

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 aimed at by the
decadence-phase capitalist plutocracy, formed in the core regions of
advanced/decadent private-capital, is quite other than the motive
described above.

It 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"
proletariat world-wide, 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 the zero-radioactivity fuel
regimes 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, including producers' cooperatives entrepreneurial wealth,
threaten the overthrow of this plutocracy's exclusive 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 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 — thus representing, 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, 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';
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 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 central
government legislator.

In any case, attempts by the plutocracy, and/or by their subordinate
lower-capitalist-class elements — elements technically termed '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.



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, regional, national, and
eventually, at the international levels, 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 legally 'electorialized'.

This will create a situation of "dual power" between these new,
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 'duals',
and the "total annihilation"/"abstract negation" of the other, «a la»
the typical Leninoid day-dreams in theory, and totalitarian nightmares
in practice.

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

The new, democratic-economic governance branch would then exist in a
higher, stabilized, ongoing — and partially conflicts-conserving,
conflicts-appropriating, and conflicts-harnessing — dialectical 'uni-
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 those three earlier branches' total prostitution
and plutocratic totalitarian, humanocidal degeneration.



'Containment' and '''Real [Self-]Subsumption''' of the "Capital-
Relation" within the New Human-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 its geographical locus-of-authority, in a
democratic-jurisdictional sense.

These Associations would 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, and have already begun to
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 these branches of 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 decadence — 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, the human
species, and the planetary biosphere as a whole.

That capital-principle, as personified in the capitalist plutocracy,
so becomes in a vain attempt to defend its 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" [Marx] of capital -- and, therefore, the growing
"technical composition" of labor as well, and by the accelerating
exposure of the fixed capital owned, or financed, by that plutocracy
to technological obsolescence depreciation as the [fixed-]constant
capital composition of total capital rises.

That plutocracy therefore, in the decadent phase of capitalist
development, begins to systematically attack those standards, and that
technological development.

The capitalist plutocracy attacks those working-class standards-of-
living, and that technological progress, via the various 'socially-
atavistic', neo-feudaloid, "back-to-nature" ideologies that this
plutocracy concocts, aiming to dupe the producing majority into
acquiescence in a catastrophic, multi-genocidal -- humanocidal --
contraction of global human social reproduction, as if "the survival
of the biosphere" required such a massacre of humanity that, in
reality, the plutocracy requires, in its vain attempt to hold-on to
its rapacious power.



The «Aufheben» Historical [Self-]Negation of the Capital-Relation as
Predominant Social Relation of Production, Pre-Constructed by Analogy
with Historically Earlier Social Relations of Production Self-
Revolutionizations

This 'meta-model' . . . predicts no undialectical, abstract negation
of the «Kapitals» social relations ontology.

It predicts no 'Jacobinoid-Leninoid' "absolute abolition"; no
'convolute' extinction/total de-manifestation, and no fantasy, utopian
de-materialization of the "capital-relation".

The 'social praxis ontology' of the 'Raw Appropriation of Nature's
product[ion]s', or of "predation", did not vanish with/was not
abolished by the emergence of that of Goods / intra-tribal Gifts,
although the former was partly '''subsumed''' by the latter.

The Goods/Gifts 'socio-ontology' did not vanish with/was not abolished
by the emergence of that of Commodity-barter [although the former was
partly '''subsumed''' by the latter].

The bartered-Commodity 'socio-ontology' did not vanish with/was not
abolished by the emergence of that of Money-Commodities [although the
former was partly '''subsumed''' by the latter].

'The Monies social relation of production ontology' did not disappear
with/was not abolished by the emergence of that of
«Kapitals» [although the former was partly '''subsumed''' by the
latter].

On the contrary —

The 'multi-Appropriation', or 'cross-Appropriation' socio-ontological
category of '''human production of fit[ted]-for-humans-by-humans use-
values from "raw" materials produced by pre-/extra-human Nature''',
i.e., of human-Goods / intra-tribal-"Gifts" production . . . first
emerged as merely a new «species» of the «genos»; of the 'human
Appropriation of Nature's product[ion]s in "Raw"/virtually unimproved
[for humans] form' «genos».

But this new ... «species» — its burgeoning population, or «arithmos»,
of ... «genos»-«monads», or '''units''', of "Goods" — soon out-self-
reproduced & dominated the population, or «arithmos», of the
«monads» ['''units'''] of the
"Raw" Appropriation... «genos», at such a rate, and to such an extent,
that the new ... Goods" «arithmos» became, 'psycho-historically' — in
the minds, in the memes — of the humans who animated it, ever since, a
new «genos»-«arithmos» in its own right; a [new, higher, qualitatively
different, socio-ontologically-different] 'gen'-eralization of the
'''Raw Appropriation of extra-human Nature''' «genos».

Indeed, this irruption of the new 'meristemal' Goods
«genos» [re-]acted back upon, 're-fluxed' upon, its predecessor
«genos», initially only subsuming that predecessor «genos»
'''formally''', by virtue of ... having become the new, 'meristemal',
leading paradigm of human social-relations-of-production, and of human
social-forces-of-production, praxis.

But, eventually, that new «genos» '''really''' subsumed its
predecessor «genos»; it largely '''appropriated'' and '''hybridized
with''' that predecessor «genos», yielding a "complex unity" 'socio-
ontology', as exemplified in that of a
tool-equipped [weapons-equipped -- M.D.] [i.e., '''Goods'''-equipped]
hunting praxis, and in that of a tool-equipped digging/plant-
appropriating/'''mining''' praxis, and in other such new human social
phenomena, which are denoted, collectively, in the Encyclopedia
Dialectica notation, by the "hybrid term"/'socio-ontological
qualifier' ... .

Likewise, the 'exchange-use', or 'exchange-use-value' socio-
ontological category of [pre-Money] Commodity barter, ... first
emerged as merely a new «species» of the ["Goods" -- M.D.] «genos»; of
the '''human production of
fit[ted]-for-humans-by-humans use-values, from "raw" materials
produced by the pre-/extra-human Nature''' "Raw" Appropriation
«genos».

But this new, ... «species» — its burgeoning population, or
«arithmos», of ... «monads», or '''units''', of 'barterables'; of
'''Commodities''' — soon out-self-reproduced & dominated the
population, or «arithmos», of the «monads» ['''units'''] of the ...
["Goods" --M.D.] «genos», at such a rate and to such an extent that
the new ... ["bartered Commodities" -- M.D.] «arithmos» became,
'psycho-historically' — in the minds, in the memes — of the humans who
animated it, ever since, a new «genos»-«arithmos» in its own right; a
[new, higher, qualitatively different, socio-ontologically-different]
'gen'-eralization of the Goods, [use-]value «genos»; a new kind of
[use-]value: '''exchange-[use-]value'''.

Indeed, this irruption of the new 'meristemal' bartered-Commodities
«genos» [re-]acted back upon, 're-fluxed upon', its predecessor
«gene», initially only subsuming those predecessor «gene»
'''formally''', by virtue of ... [Commodities-barter -- M.D.] trading
having become the new, 'meristemal', leading paradigm of human social-
relations-of-production, and of human social-forces-of-production,
praxis, initially at the boundaries where distinct, otherwise warring,
tribal communities met.

But, eventually, with the growth of its «arithmos», or population,
reflecting the further growth of the human-social forces of
production, that new «genos» of inter-tribal Commodity-barter
'''really''' subsumed its predecessor «gene»; it largely
'''appropriated'' and '''hybridized with''' those predecessor «gene»,
yielding "complex unity" 'socio-ontology', as exemplified in the
emergence of the 'praxes' of barter-trading in "raw" goods, as well as
in "finished" goods; in the emergence of intra-tribal barter,
supplanting the intra-tribal '''Gift''' ethic and praxis, as extension
of a barter praxis which, in its beginnings, was restricted to
[predominantly war-like, or '''humans-hunting-and-gathering-
other-/"foreign"-tribe/alien-humans'''] 'inter-tribal' relations, and
in other such new human social phenomena, which
are denoted, collectively, in the Encyclopedia Dialectica notation, by
"hybrid terms"/'socio-ontological qualifiers' such as ... .

Again, the 'general-exchangeables', or 'general-equivalents' socio-
ontological category of Money-mediated Commodity exchange, herein
denoted by ..., first emerged as merely a new «species» of the ...
'''barterable Commodity''' «genos» — as that new Commodity-«species»
known, in the Marxian tradition, by the name '''Money-Commodity''' — a
socio-ontological category which tends, over historical time, for
'praxical' reasons, to devolve upon a precious-metal Commodity, such
as silver, or gold; the Commodity «species» of '''specie'''.

But this new, ... ["Money-Commodities" , or "Privileged-Commodites" --
M.D.] «species» — its burgeoning population, or «arithmos», of ["Money-
Commodities" -- M.D.] «monads», or '''units''', of 'gen-eral
equivalents'; of the
'''Money-Commodities''' — soon out-self-reproduced & dominated the
population, or «arithmos», of the «monads» ['''units'''] of the
["baterable Commodity" -- M.D.] «genos», in perceived economic
"value", at such a rate and to such an extent that the new ... ["Money-
Commodities" -- M.D.] «arithmos» became, 'psycho-historically' — in
the minds, in the memes — of the humans who animated it, ever since, a
new «genos»-«arithmos» in its own right; a [new, higher, qualitatively
different, socio-ontologically-different] 'gen'-eralization of the
bartered-Commodity exchange-[use-]value «genos».

Indeed, this irruption of the new 'meristemal' Monies
«genos» [re-]acted back upon, 're-fluxed upon', its predecessor
«gene», initially only subsuming those predecessor «gene»
'''formally''', by virtue of ...[Monies -- M.D.]-mediated circulation
of Commodities having become the new, 'meristemal', leading paradigm
of human social-relations-of-production, and of human social-forces-of-
production, praxis.

But, eventually, that new «genos» '''really''' subsumed its
predecessor «gene»; it largely '''appropriated'' and '''hybridized
with''' those predecessor «gene», yielding "complex unity" 'socio-
ontology', as exemplified in the emergence of the 'praxes' of the sale
of "raw" extractions from pre-/extra-human Nature in exchange for
Monies, instead of via Commodities-Barter, as well as the exchange of
"finished" goods for Monies; in the emergence of "dues" & "tithes"
and / '''redistributive Gifting"' of Monies to the temple/state, in
the emergence of intra-tribal Monies-mediated exchanges of
Commodities, at least partially supplanting the earlier-emergent intra-
tribal Commodities-Barter praxis, of inter-tribal, inter-city-state,
etc., tributes "paid" in Monies form, as well as in "in-kind Goods and/
or Commodities" forms, and in other such new human social phenomena,
which are denoted, collectively, in the Encyclopedia Dialectica
notation, by "hybrid terms"/'socio-ontological qualifiers' such
as ... .

Finally, to-date, the 'Money-Making-More-Money', or 'auto-catalytic
exchange-value' socio-ontological category of «Kapitals», herein
denoted by ..., first emerged as merely a new «species» of the ...
[Monies-mediated Circulations of Commodities -- M.D.] «genos»; of the
'''universal-equivalent Money''' «genos» — as the circulation-based,
non-production-based, quasi-parasitic Money-«species» known
theoretically, in the Marxian tradition, as the "'antediluvian
«species» of Capital'" — e.g., as '''merchants' money-capital''', as
'''usurers money-capital", if also as «latifundia» slave-worked
plantation agricultural productive capital, etc.

But this new, ... [«Kapitals» -- M.D.] «species» — its burgeoning
population, or «arithmos», of ...[«Kapitals» -- M.D.] «monads», or
'''units''', of '''Money-Capitals''' — soon out-self-reproduced &
dominated the population, or
«arithmos», of the «monads» ['''units'''] of the ... [Monies -- M.D.]
«genos», at such a rate and to such an extent that the new ...
[«Kapitals» -- M.D.] «arithmos» became, 'psycho-historically' — in the
minds, in the memes — of the humans who animate it, ever since, a new
«genos»-«arithmos» in its own right; a [new, higher, qualitatively
different, socio-ontologically-different] 'gen'-eralization of the
Monies exchange-value «genos».

Indeed, this irruption of the new 'meristemal' «Kapitals»
«genos» [re-]acted back upon, 're-fluxed upon', its predecessor
«gene», initially only subsuming those predecessor «gene»
'''formally''', by virtue of ...[«Kapitals» --
M.D.]-mediated, mercantile, Money-buying and Money-selling of
'''Commodity-Capital''', and the extraction of ['''usurious''' rates
of] interest as the "price" for borrowing Money, mercantile Capital,
having become the new, leading, 'meristemal' paradigm of human social-
relations-of-production, and of human social-forces-of-production,
praxis.

But, eventually, that new «genos» '''really''' subsumed its
predecessor «gene»; it largely '''appropriated'' and '''hybridized
with''' those predecessor «gene», yielding "complex unity" 'socio-
ontology', as exemplified in the emergence of the 'praxes' of the
mercantile offering of products produced in non-household production
facilities, owned and provisioned by merchant/manufacturer
capitalists, buying labor-capability as if '''just another'''
Commodity-supply for their production facilities, from labor-
capability sellers/'''alienators''', just as they bought, as
Commodities, raw materials and tools for those same production
facilities, from other merchant/manufacturer capitalists; in the
emergence of 'praxes' of the production of "raw" extractions from
extra-human Nature as Commodity-Capital on the same basis, by merchant/
manufacturer capitalists, instead of by, e.g., family-producers,
seeking merely supplementary Monies for their own consumption-needs,
needs not met by their own household production directly, but not
seeking self-expanding «Kapital»-value, ever-expanding via profit, by
means of exchange of their '''mere''' Commodities for Monies, and in
other such new human social phenomena, which are denoted,
collectively, in the Encyclopedia Dialectica notation, by "hybrid
terms"/'socio-ontological qualifiers' such as ... .


Therefore, we also expect that, immediately after its irruption from
out of ...[the <<Kapitals arithmos>> -- M.D.], that the new «species»
of equity of the human-social-relations-of-production ontology of
'generalized equity', denoted herein by ..., will enter into a "formal
subsumption" of the entire predecessor, already partially «Kapitals»-
subsumed ... 'socio-ontology', due to its new, ...[Generalized Equity
-- M.D.] 'social-relations logic' having become the new leading,
'meristemal' paradigm of human-social relations-of-production, and of
human-social forces-of-production, praxis.

However, with time, later, we expect this new, now ...[Generalized --
M.D.] «genos» of '''generalized equity''', developing as a new,
higher, qualitatively different, socio-ontologically-different 'gen'-
eralization of the «Kapital»-equity «genos», to '''really''' subsume
all of its predecessor «gene», especially the «Kapital»-subsumed
«gene»; to largely '''appropriate'' and '''hybridize with''' those
predecessor «gene», yielding new, "complex unity"
'socio-ontology', as epitomized by the Encyclopedia Dialectica
notation "hybrid term"/'socio-ontological qualifier' for the
'culminant' socio-ontological category, ... .

The latter denotes the 'real subsumption' of the entire, decadent,
'''real domination of «Kapital»''', «Kapitals»-system by the new human-
social relation-of-production of 'gen-eralized equity', as denoted
by ...:

...

That is, this ... 'meta-model' anticipates, in "meta-fractal" analogy
with, and in continuity/consistency with, all of these earlier 'meta-
evolutionary' and 'meta-system' transitions identified in this 'meta-
model', the dialectical,
«aufheben» 'annulment-cum-elevation-cum-conservation' of the "capital-
relation", via an appropriate 'containment' of, or 'self-
internalization' by, and [self-]subsumption / "real domination" of
Capital within, the 'meta-monadologically' higher social principle of
'Generalized Equity', as sketched above.



The Emergence of a Fourth, Economic Branch of Democratic Econo-
Political Social Governance, in Sustained Quadruple Power with the
Earlier Three, Political Branches

This 'meta-model' envisions the retention and conservation /
transformation of the three traditional branches of political
government, into a complex, conflictual, and conflicts-conserving
unity of sustained quadruple-power with,
and «vis-a-vis», the new, 'economic-democratic' fourth branch, thus
yet further generalizing the stabilized, conflicts-conserving, checks-
and-balances-delivering complex unity of the earlier-emerged, three,
political branches.

It also envisions the subordination, but not the absolute dissolution,
of the capital-principle.

Thus, is the plutocratic, oligopoly/monopoly-capital-principle
expected to be blocked, by popular power, from any longer attempting
to organize, and to subjugate, the global social totality.

A higher and democratic, humanistic, 'justitial' principle of social
ordering supersedes Capital in that role: the principle of
'Generalized Equity'.

But the latter principle allows the capital-principle, e.g., of price-
competition and competition for customer-adherence, to persist in
operation where it best orchestrates the extant hybridization, or
complex unity,
of genomic and/with '''phenomic''' human nature, providing vitally
needed economic checks & balances that private-monopoly and state-
monopoly economic governance so devastatingly lack. . . . [this
connects to another of the proposed "Generalized Equity" institutions,
that named "Citizen Stewardship Equity", by which the non-capital-
owning majority gain democratic access to the means of [social
re-]production]."




For the full text of the Equitist Advocacy Group's original article,
see --

http://www.equitism.org/Equitism/Theory/PoliticalEconomicDemocracy/PoliticalEconomicDemocracy.htm





Regards,

Miguel