Humanism in Brief
People have unsuccessfully tried to build a good society for centuries. I took on the same challenge, was very persistent and finally defined in my book “Humanism” a system that will solve the problems of society for centuries. While working on the problems, I concluded that a good future for mankind requires a total change of the systems we have today. In the future, literally, nothing will be the same as today. That is the reason the new system is not easy to understand or apply, even though it is much simpler and better than any known model. However, if you invest a little effort in studying it, you will find out what the future of mankind will look like. The following short description of my book, “Humanism,” is worth reading.
People aspire to a higher power. They define their power by comparing themselves with other people. This act is most likely a consequence of alienation; however, it exists, and society must accept it. A productive society should develop man's productive power. We can measure such power. The better defined the productive power is, the better social directing is, and the better society is. We need to create a system that will determine the total value of a person’s productive power by means of the values of his past work. This value will have to incorporate the values of real estate, money, shares, awards, education and all other values that person possesses. It will also include the value of labour that contributes to economic productivity and other values generally accepted in society that may aid its development.
On the other hand, if the person causes harm to society, such as a loss in economic productivity, creates inconveniences for the community, or commits any crime, they will lose an appropriate value on the scale that represents the total value of their productive power. Pooling different forms of value will require comprehensive study and, indeed, hard negotiations in society. However, after some time, a new regulated system of values could be established that would create standards for all benefits and damages that a person can do in society. Such a regulation will apply automatically whenever needed. In this way, a new system of values will be created to summarize the total value of man's productive powers. Such a system will supplement and enrich today’s capital-based values with new humanistic values, thus significantly contributing to the development of society.
It is understandable and desirable that such a system of values should become very important to society, and therefore it should be further encouraged. May each person get the voting power proportionate to the total value of his productive power. This measure proposes unequal voting rights. However, it would contribute to democracy's development. So far, influential people have managed society alone, often hiding behind formal democracy. Prominent people have never been willing to share their power with society in the name of the noble idea of equality, because it runs contrary to man's basic, alienated need to achieve higher power in the community. A compromise is therefore needed that would be equally acceptable to everybody. Each person will have the voting power proportionate to his own contribution, together with the contributions of his ancestors, to the building of all forms of values the society has. Unequal voting power would be largely formal because an individual would not be able to significantly influence the democratic process, regardless of their level of voting power. On the other hand, the measure would finally open the possibility for society to participate in decision-making.
The development of computer technology allows people to participate directly, through referendums, in the making of all key decisions of joint interest. Political parties in parliament should agree on the questions for the polls. That is the best way to protect minority interests. Questions not agreed upon would not be forwarded to referendums. Each decision may have a scale of values prepared by the parliament, where each voter elects the value that suits them/best. The middle value of the values expressed by all members of the population, weighted by their voting power, would indicate each decision's acceptability in society. It would be the beginning of a genuinely popular rule and the best way to determine society's needs.
No matter how developed democracy becomes, it will always have limitations, as it cannot respect or even consider individuals' specific needs. Individuals will still be overruled and may, therefore, be endangered. This fault may be eliminated by introducing a new system that allows individuals to adequately defend their rights and protect their specific interests in society. I call it democratic anarchy.
Democratic anarchy is a new form of social relations where every person exercises equal legislative, judicial, and executive power in society. It can be accomplished so that each person has the same right to evaluate any other person's activity. Each positive assessment will automatically increase the total productive power value of the positively assessed. Conversely, any negative evaluation will result in the same punishment. Because all individuals will have the right to evaluate and will provide their own assessments independently of any written rules, this democracy will take the form of anarchy. Democratic anarchy will direct each member of society to create the maximum possible advantages and to diminish or abolish all forms of disadvantages. Such a measure will definitely reduce the uncontrolled or insufficiently controlled power of individuals in privileged positions in society. The privileged status of individuals in society causes considerable inconvenience and problems. In this straightforward way, people will, for the first time in the history of mankind, realize enormous direct power in society, resulting in harmonious and constructive social relations.
Economic prosperity is created by proper planning of the production and consumption, and by appropriate implementation of the plan. The best program of production and consumption is achieved through direct orders from consumers. That is why the new system will accept the existing market economy, but it will also gradually implement production development based on customers' direct orders. That is precisely what today’s companies prefer because known consumption creates stable production. A centralized, hierarchical decision-making system will achieve the highest level of plan realization because it creates the most efficient coordination of the associated work. In practice, a centralized system easily accomplishes great stability in industrial operation and full employment of workers. If new work posts are not needed, full employment will be achieved by reducing work hours proportionally to the rate of unemployment. Such an economy will resemble today’s big corporations, but it will achieve significantly higher production productivity and greater satisfaction for the people than private companies can.
Such an economy may be achieved only by voluntarily pooling producers into a joined “humanistic” corporation on a certain territory. Inhabitants of such territory who voluntarily surrender their private property to society will, in turn, realize an increase in the total value of their productive power proportionate to the value of the surrendered property. The value of man’s productive power may be presented as a humanistic form of shares because each person will receive an income for the work performed in the “humanistic” company proportionately to the total value of his productive power. In the new system, a person will earn income proportionate to his own contribution (including also the contribution of his predecessors) to building all kinds of values that society possesses. The pooled (associated) economy will offer individuals much greater security and may also provide much greater advantages. That fact may encourage the inhabitants of the certain territory to voluntarily pool their private companies into a “humanistic” corporate form. If a private company is not willing to pool into a collective corporation, it will then resume operating as an independent enterprise.
To avoid the privileges of the centralized system of economic operation, which, as a general rule, leads to low productivity, it will be necessary to establish a permanently open labour market. Each public work post will have to be offered to the worker who envisages and offers the highest productivity at any time. Such a measure will probably be difficult to implement because, at first, it may seem risky and painful to people. However, a new regulation of work distribution could prevent these unpleasant side effects. I must stress that this measure is necessary because it will abolish the work privileges that form the basis of inconvenient orientation and problems for society. Also, freedom of choice in work will make work a direct value. Workers will like what they do, and that is probably the most crucial advantage of the proposed system.
The new economy will necessarily require an efficient system to determine workers' responsibility for achieving the envisaged productivity. The system will establish a new mode of bearing workers’ responsibility through their productive power. Unrealized productivity, or its decline, will reduce the total value of workers’ productive power proportionately to their responsibility in the production process. And vice versa, the rise in productivity will increase the total value of workers’ productive power proportionately to their responsibility in the process of production. The system will be based on strong responsibilities for all leaders, managers, and workers, who must cooperate at all levels of the production process and reach a high level of consensus before making decisions.
In the case of limited productivity, a worker must obtain work by seeking the lowest price for current labour and, consequently, a lower income. The labour market would set an objective measure of direct labour value. Once the workers determine the price of their current labour by themselves, they will be most satisfied with their earnings.
In short, the workers, including leaders, will be able to compete for all of the public work posts they want. They will get the work posts they want if they offer the highest productivity for such positions. After that, they will be responsible for achieving the assigned productivity with the values that represent their productive power. Such an economy will easily become significantly more productive than the capitalist one and, therefore, for the first time, private enterprises will be forced to withdraw and join the new system.
The new economy will develop the market of work and reduce the market of goods. That will contribute to the development of a productive economy and to the rational exploitation of natural resources. On the other hand, the reduced market for goods will not diminish product quality because consumers will evaluate all goods. These evaluations will also reflect producers' productivity and, therefore, influence workers’ incomes. That is why producers will organize production in some kind of agreement with consumers. That would be the best production possible.
In such a system, work will become a direct value, and the goods will lose their alienated value. In such an orientation lies the bright future of humankind.
The future of democracy will no longer be based on elected leaders; instead, people will directly create society’s policies, starting with economic policy. In the system of pooled ownership of the means of production, the money will also be pooled. Collectively owned money will enable direct democracy in the economy. Each voter will directly participate in distributing the collectively owned money generated from the collective’s revenue. The funds will be distributed for economic development (total amount of money for investments in the economy), collective consumption (total amount of funds intended for the collective consumption of all inhabitants), and individual consumption (total amount of money for workers’ earnings). Based on people’s decisions, the elected parliament will set the possible value intervals for distributing collective money. Because the new system predicts unequal voting power, each voter will allocate the total value of their productive power to the voting groups. The voting groups' statements will form society's macroeconomic policy. A larger amount of money earmarked in one direction will reduce consumption in others and thus direct the economy. The present-day system of income distribution and the establishment of the community’s fiscal and developmental policies will be upgraded directly through democracy.
The distribution of money is at the core of the social problems in present-day society. We actually do not need democracy anywhere as much as here. If we allow direct democracy to manage money distribution, we could address many of the problems in present-day society. There is no doubt that an equal democratic power would not be acceptable to the people who hold dominant power today. That is why we need to define unequal voting power that is equally acceptable to all, based on the value that represents the people's productive power. If we sacrifice formally equal democratic rights, we will achieve a real democracy. As a side product, this will lead to public ownership of the means of production, equal working rights, unlimited freedom of individual choices, and the highest economic productivity. It’s definitely worth it.
The described political and economic model will improve production efficiency and stability, bring more justice to production and distribution, and provide significant advantages to all members of society. Generally, the described system will rid people of authoritative pressure and give them the freedom to follow their own interests, but will at the same time force them to mutual respect. Such experience will demystify the values imposed by authorities and teach people to live according to their true nature, ridding them of all types of alienation characteristic of present-day society. Further, the system will teach people to set their needs based on their ability to satisfy them. This is the chief prerequisite for overcoming destructiveness in society because those who permanently satisfy their demands are not destructive. The proposed system promises a natural, harmonious and highly prosperous development of society. The development of such a system will, so far, realize an impossible task: “From everyone according to his ability to everyone according to his needs.” If you read my book “Humanism,” available free of charge here, you will at least have less doubt about it.