The Future of Values
Value is a need. What we need more has a higher value. Values can be objective and subjective. Objective values are correct ones, and they directed us to the right way and make our lives right. However, the man has a tremendous contemplative ability to establish subjective values where they do not exist, and then he has the need to impose them to other people. Such values are alienated from their objective essence and once adopted in society, they direct people to the wrong path. People in the wrong way cannot live well. This is just what is happening to us. To improve our lives, we must make a general inventory of the values we adopted. We need to unmask the alienated values and support the natural ones. That will direct society to the correct path.
I will try to explain what it is actually about in an example that compares the value of air and money. Money has market value because it can be appropriated and can realize the power in society, while air cannot be appropriated and it has no market value. But if we compare the use value of money and air, we realize that air is unlimitedly more valuable than money because without air we cannot live.
Now imagine two men and let’s say one of them has 1,000 times more money than the other. In a society where money is the accepted value and air is not, it means that the first man is worth 1,000 times more than the other man. In an alienated society, the possession of value gives power in the community, and that means the first man would have 1,000 times more power than the other man. This is wrong, immoral and unjust. However, this is basically what we have today. Today, people value their own achievements far more than the value of air, and it is very wrong because there is no life without air. Since air is not appreciated enough, people are irresponsible to it, and that means they are irresponsible to their own future. If these two men become aware of the importance of air, they would then be able to make an agreement that let’s say the air they jointly own and breathe is worth at least the same as the amount of money they together possess. Then the ratio between the values these two men possess would no longer be 1:1,000, when only the market value of money is taken into account, but 1:3 when one takes into account the use value of air as well. Such arbitration of the distribution of values would be fairer, more moral and correct to the human point of view and in the long run; it would contribute to the protection of air, and that means, of course, the protection of people.
Such an arbitration of values might seem as unnatural and impossible to realize. I could agree that such arbitration is unnatural, but it is a necessity because we live in an unnatural society. In this way, the society we live in would begin to learn how to appreciate air as a natural asset.
To those who think that such arbitration is unrealizable, I would say that similar arbitrations have been successfully implemented for a long time. Insurance companies can calculate at any time the worth of human life down to the last cent, although it is not objectively determinable. However, such arbitrage is useful because people receive financial support from insurance companies for the death of their partners without which some people would have difficulties making ends meet in the cruel world we live in. Or, courts could precisely calculate how much money the life of a man is worth. It can be calculated by comparing a time imprisonment sentence for murder with the same period of imprisonment for stealing money. There is nothing objective about it, but the benefit of such arbitration is excellent because the fear of criminal law punishments prevents many people from killing other people, what is undoubtedly a great benefit.
Similarly, it would be useful to arbitrate the value of the air that surrounds us. Since the atmosphere is not defined as market value, we do not appreciate it enough as a value and relate irresponsibly to it. When people realize that air is one of the highest natural values, then they would appreciate the atmosphere more. When the air becomes a defined value in society, then people will act responsibly to it. It is a condition of our survival!
Money has an alienated value because it gives power in society. That does not mean that we should negate the value of money because it would just deteriorate the situation in today’s alienated society. We need to establish such a society that would be able to demystify the value of money, in which the value of air will become higher than the value of money. It is a natural orientation of society that will one day be accepted and direct society in the right way.
***
To create a better society, we must define all values that are accepted in society or should be accepted in society. Firstly, it is necessary to determine the values that society holds in common ownership in some territory. These values include land, water, air, and everything that people commonly possess at a particular region, whether they built it or just found it as a value. Then, one needs to determine all the values that people hold in private ownership in the same territory. Why is it necessary? Firstly, to determine what values are. If we define the values that are beneficial to society, people will strive to reach such values for the benefit of the community. This is the path to a good society. Secondly, it is necessary to determine how much of these values each person holds. Man becomes aware of his worth when he compares himself with other people. It is an alienated need but it exists, and that is why we must accept it. Values that every man achieves in his life will be summarized. The sum of these values I call the “productive value of a human” (PVH).
The value of the common properties, which include land, water, air, etc., cannot be objectively compared to the value of private properties. Therefore, the value of the common properties should be determined by arbitration. The arbitration will be based on the ratio between the total value of the common property on the territory of some region and the total value of private property. Experts might propose the most acceptable rate. Then political parties may create a range of possible ratio values through negotiations, and the final result may be determined directly by the people. All the people will choose the ratio that suits them the best.
It should be noted that a higher value of the common property would reduce the value of private property and vice versa. The mean size of the expressions of all the people would determine the total value of common properties that people together own on the territory of the region. Such arbitration cannot be objective whatever the value society adopts, but it will bring significant benefits to society as a whole because people will begin to appreciate values that they do not recognize today.
Given that the common properties belong equally to all people, it is necessary to ensure that all people equally share it. The equal share of the jointly owned property would become a fundamental value of the PVH every human being possesses. Why is this important? With such an act all the people would accept the fact that man is a value and more importantly, he would be equal from birth to every other human being in society. This is an essential condition for the prosperity of society.
Every person may increase their PVH if they, by their own free will, sell the private properties they possess to the region they live in. In this way, they would get values in PVH equivalent to the values of companies, real estate, cash, shares, and all other assets that capitalism recognizes as valuables. The owners of private properties may find an interest in the transfer of their private properties to society because the PVH will present a form of humanistic shares of a pooled public company on some territory. An increased value of PVH will bring them a higher income. Also, PVH will be inherited through generations. In that way, the owners of the means of production would accept PVH as an acceptable universal value.
If owners of private properties would not be willing to sell their means of production to society, they might be forced to do it under pressure from the higher productivity of public companies. Namely, public companies will adopt a principle of work competition of workers for each work position at any time. There is not a more productive economy than the one in which each job gets the best worker available. Such an economy will achieve the productivity that private companies will not be able to follow and therefore they will be forced to join public companies. Last but not least is the fact that the work competition would enable all the workers to choose jobs they love more, which is almost impossible to achieve now. In such a manner, work will become a direct value, which is very important for the formation of a good and sane society.
The productivities workers offer at every work post would not make sense if the workers would be irresponsible for achieving the productivity they proposed. By using the PVH, it would be possible to form an effective system of bearing the responsibilities of workers for the economic productivity they offered in the manufacturing process in public companies. In the case that workers do not meet their productivity proposal, they will bear responsibility by losing an equivalent value of the PVH they own. In the case their company realizes losses, the workers would take their responsibilities proportionally to the numerical value they offer for the total damage of the company.
If workers propose greater responsibility for their work, they would in the case of the company’s losses, achieve a more significant loss of the values of their PVH. In that manner, the PVH would ensure great responsibilities of workers in the production process, which is the basis of the prosperity of society. Conversely, if a company achieves profits, workers who propose greater responsibilities for their work will make a higher gain of their PVH values. PVH actually presents the productive power of workers so that it will be a very stimulating initiator in a productive society. I wrote more about it in the article The Future of Economics.
The PVH will become a simple and easily applicable measure that presents how much an individual has contributed to the creation of advantages and disadvantages to society and to nature. A greater PVH will give a man a higher reputation in the community. But, considering that some people would probably not like to have their PVH be compared to that of other people, such a value may be kept secret, known only to the owner of the PVH himself.
***
A good future for humankind cannot be based only on the value of nature and capital. It is necessary to evaluate all forms of improvements that a person realizes to nature and society, and then add the value of it to his PVH. For example, each award could be evaluated by PVH and then it should be added to the value of PVH of a person who received the award. Conversely, if a man produces damages to nature and society, it is necessary to regulate a punishment for that in the value of PVH. Such measures will be applied automatically whenever needed. Thus, the PVH will stimulate people to do well and prevent them from causing evil. In this manner, the PVH will contribute to the creation of a significantly better future for humankind. This will be better explained in the following examples.
If a region has too low a birth rate, for example, people may decide to stimulate parents who want children with some values of PVH. At this moment it may be difficult to expect because right now the planet Earth has a population of 6.5 billion people, and that number is proliferating. Generally speaking, at some point in time, Earth will no longer be able to feed all its residents. Therefore, today we are in dilemma that should not be: either we would limit the birth rate by mutual agreement, or we will reach a point where we would have to kill each other because there is not enough space on Earth for permanent grow of the population.
I think that the average restriction on the birth of two children per family is reasonable and it would in by the time reduce the population of planet Earth to a reasonable limit. However, do not consider limited birthrate as a ban of birth, but those families that may want to have more than two children will pay taxation which in the last instance may include the value of PVH. That price may be as hefty as to maintain a reasonable number of inhabitants of the planet. But of course, that is conditioned by the fact the whole world accepts such an orientation. If it does not happen, there will not be an acceptable solution to the problem.
PVH will be especially affected by disobedience to the law. If a person acts against the law, they will lose a legally defined value from his PVH. Each crime may be easily judged by existing laws and recalculated into a value representing the PVH. If a person commits a severe crime, he might lose all the value of their PVH and even get into a negative value. Intrusion into the negative value of the PVH cannot be kept secret. If this happens to someone, everyone would know. Thus, the negative value of PVH could become more uncomfortable and painful than prison can be so that prisons will no longer be needed. Each person will avoid committing any crime carefully. If a person still gets a negative PVH, they will try hard to get out of it, and that will only be possible through hard productive work, and outstanding behaviour over a long period.
By using PVH, we could very successfully regulate the protection of the environment from all kinds of pollution. It will be necessary to conduct studies and accept regulations of the maximum allowable pollution of air, water and earth. People who violate the environmental protection defined by laws or rules would be punished by losing money and in the last instance by a regulated value of PVH. It is possible in this way to punish entire enterprises and regions or even countries. Such regulation will surely protect the planet Earth from pollution. If the whole world does not accept an effective system of the protection of the environment, then the consequences will be unacceptable for all of the people.
***
Society may create a complex regulation that will through rewarding and punishing people by a value of their PVH, impact on building a good society. However, all values cannot be regulated, because people have varying individual needs. Therefore, the value representing the PVH should also depend on unregulated values, based on people’s opinions about the free actions of others. This is an entirely new measure and, in my opinion, the most critical rule of the future. I call it democratic anarchy.
Democratic anarchy is a new form of social relations, wherein every person exercises an equal power in society. It is possible to accomplish it in a manner that gives each person the right to evaluate the activity of any other person. Let each person have the power to allocate a total of say six evaluations per month. Three positive and three negative evaluations or five positive and one negative, etc. Each positive assessment should automatically bring a small increase in the total value of PVH to the assessed person. On the other hand, any negative evaluation will result in a punishment of the same form. Let us say that awards and penalties of such assessment would have an equivalent value of one dollar.
When people get such a power, they will become respected members of society, and as such, they will eventually become values in society. Of course, every man will strive to gain more positive and less negative evaluations from other people, and that is why such assessment will direct each member of society to create the highest possible advantages for the community and to diminish or abolish the creation of all forms of disadvantages. As a result, bullies will not harass children at school anymore, bosses will not abuse their employees at work, neighbours will not produce noise at night, salespeople will not cheat their customers, politicians will not lie to people, etc. They will all try to please other people in the best possible way. This is what will eliminate social evil and form a good society.
The system of democratic anarchy will especially affect authorities. The higher the position an authority has in society, the greater the responsibility they would bare to society. For example, President Bush criminally attacked Iraq. Thus, he brought death and suffering to millions of people, including Americans, but Americans not to mention Iraqis were not able to stop him. In a society where money is practically the only accepted value, a person could quickly become worthless in the eyes of another person and because of that, ugly things happen. In a system of democratic anarchy, President Bush could get 100,000,000 bad evaluations from the American people for bad policies, lies, and for criminal aggression on Iraq. This would reduce his PVH for the equivalent of 100,000,000 dollars in only one month.
On the other hand, I doubt that supporters of President Bush would undoubtedly evaluate him positively because they might easily have higher positive evaluation priorities and would spend their positive evaluations elsewhere. By applying the system of assessment, President Bush would not dare perform bad policies anymore. And if it happens somehow, he would run away from his position very fast. Only the most skilful and brave individuals would dare lead countries. They will not be authorities anymore, but our servants.
Democratic anarchy is actually the most potent tool of justice ever. How come? The answer lies in time. There is a saying: “Silent water moves hills.” The permanent power of evaluation even with such a small force like one dollar will make people respect each other strongly. Human beings will become values. Everyone will try hard to please society in the best possible way. Such a social orientation looks pretty much like love. Love can be defined as indiscriminate care about people, and democratic anarchy will surely bring it. Once love is established in society, it will create a good and sane society. In the future, the system of evaluation will probably abolish state laws, police, and very states. Nobody will need them anymore because a perfect society will be formed.
It is very understandable and desirable that the PVH becomes a significant value in society and therefore should be additionally stimulated. This will be achieved by giving people voting power in society proportional to their PVH. In that way, privileged members of society would easier accept full democracy. I wrote more about the new form of democracy and democratic anarchy in the article The Future of Democracy.
***
The new system of values will enable the entire productive orientation of society. What does it actually mean? A person will become a center from which everything proceeds and to which everything returns back. Each person will have equal rights of decision-making in society, and therefore the system will for the first time indeed follow the needs of the people. Each person will have free access to any work post at any time, and that will definitely abolish the privileges and all the disadvantages that come from them. The system will democratically establish a very efficient method of bearing the responsibility of individuals for their free actions, and that will contribute to the development of cooperation among people at all levels of human relationships. That will make a good society. Such a life would liberate people from the pressures of authorities, and that will allow the demystification of alienated values that authorities have imposed on people throughout history. The new life will enlighten people. Authorities will lose power over people. Idols will lose importance. They all will become ordinary people. Money and goods will lose their alienated value. People will accept natural values and learn to live in harmony with their own natures. This will create a good society and bring the joy of life.
It can be expected that by the development of natural values, people will cease comparing themselves to other people. Comparison with other people has always been just an alienated need. As a result of enlightenment, a man may one day lose the need to evaluate other people or to be evaluated. People will probably dismiss the PVH as the last alienated value. Then people will pay attention to natural values. Person to person will become the most significant value. Care for other people, sharing with others, helping others, friendship and brotherhood will become the most essential needs of people. The person will find great pleasure in productive activities and in the act of love. They will love others unconditionally just because they are. Love is the final result of the values that I have proposed. Love is the highest value a person can achieve for himself and for others. Once people start loving each other, they will create an entirely new world, values that are in today’s alienated society practically unforeseeable.
February 12, 2010
