Critique of the idea of justice

The tectonic shift in history that defines the modern era, reflected on the surface in political and philosophical ideas, has a much deeper basis than what is presented in contemporary public consciousness. Just as 150 years ago, people began writing about imperialism — the new era of capital — today, artists, politicians, thinkers, and professors of all kinds are trying to find ideas to match the rapid changes unfolding before them. Attempts to comprehend the impending new era without employing a dialectical understanding of movement lead only to vague slogans of justice. Everyone speaks of justice, from demands to redistribute national wealth to calls for a reallocation of global markets in favor of new globalists led by China. At the same time, while promoting the new globalism through the idea of a multipolar world, the power brokers perform their work using old methods, which weigh them down like anchors and continue to drive them into the same contradictions of new crises.

The free will of the power brokers, as they see it, defines the vector of development, but they act in conditions beyond their control, in real circumstances shaped by the past and inherited from it. In creating a new world, they continue to resort to old ideas to sanctify what they see as their revolutionary efforts to remake the world. Meanwhile, they look at truly new possibilities with fear and wonder, possibilities that alone could clear away all the debris and accumulation of obstacles generated by financial capital and its methods of resolving crises through blood, plunder, and impoverishment of the majority.

The new epoch looming over humanity requires a shift away from the declining ideas of financial capital toward the paradigm of accelerated capital, which is only beginning to penetrate public consciousness and academia. This paradigm easily overcomes the current crisis of capital by increasing the welfare of the individual and society as a whole, reflecting all of humanity's potential for development without wars.

To remake the world and achieve new justice, new globalists needed a new global currency, a new universal medium of exchange. They immediately proposed gold as the measure of the new money — the very thing that the practice of global exchange had excluded from production relations and capital turnover half a century ago. The modern development of capital, with its universal global circulation, required a move toward abstract money, in which no material object, no matter how valuable, could serve as a universal equivalent. Neither gold, oil, gas, nor all of them combined can measure the variety of universal exchange. The commodity mass, with its diversity and enormous volume, is objectively reflected in credit and the refinancing of credit, which is injected and withdrawn from circulation daily, fixing the new money created in the production of goods. Universal circulation, abstract circulation in general, required the invention of a new institution of money — the lender of last resort. This role was assigned to the central bank, but the lender of last resort is not a bank; it is a credit mine, replacing the gold mine. Now, to add money to circulation, it is sufficient to issue credit for expanded production and refinance it to determine the magnitude of the newly created value. The central bank must assess universal circulation daily — the circulation of goods in general, abstract circulation — through the credit issued and its refinancing.

For this reason, money, as the universal equivalent of abstract circulation and as a derivative of exchange, takes on the abstract form of banal credit from the lender of last resort. The reality is that in one unit of today’s world currency, expressed in global GDP, gold constitutes only 0.0004 grams. For gold to reflect the real global circulation of goods at current prices, global gold reserves would need to increase thirtyfold to 1,173,153 tons.

Following this came a practice intended to finally sever abstract money from any material shell, even the mediated one represented by foreign currency assets. The rationale for this separation was established in the recommendations of the Bank for International Settlements in 2013 and 2023, which state explicitly that neither the size of assets nor the losses of the lender of last resort affect its ongoing activities in maintaining monetary and financial stability — that is, issuing credit. The task now is to precisely determine the required amount of credit to expand production in industries where necessary material resources were created in the past or present periods, preventing inflation in any of its forms.

Instead of defining money through the reflection of the entire economy in input-output matrices, in addition to the lender of last resort’s properties, instead of having a real-time balance of supply and demand to avoid inflationary processes, the new globalists in old mindsets are trying to create a new world.

It is now abundantly clear that new world money cannot be created without establishing a global lender of last resort and cannot be measured without evaluating the entire production process through the costs of thousands of product positions. The instability in the price of gold, in foreign currency assets, and in the prices of commodities like oil, gas, and coal will relentlessly push humanity to rely on what has already been established through real relations, rather than clinging to relics of past development. New justice in international exchange relations and in global trade relations is visibly manifested in the process of socializing the lender of last resort.

From a dialectical perspective on our movement in the matter of abstract money, humanity has already used abstract money in ancient times. Thus, we have returned to the starting point at a higher level of development. If we adhere to the viewpoint that money is derived from exchange and that without exchange, money does not arise, we must recognize that there was exchange even in ancient communities, though it did not extend beyond the community and, therefore, could not materialize in physical money. Exchange of resources within the community generated abstract money in the form of justice within the ancient community.

Modern abstract money also points to certain processes in social relations, which manifest clearly in a form of justice that reconciles the contradiction between private initiative and public interest, as well as between capital and labor. Old justice under financial capital can be realized only by restricting public interests or by limiting capital and its private initiative. New justice ensures the maximum benefit for capital and its private initiative through the most effective realization of public interests. Under previous conditions, capital derived profit from surplus labor; in the new conditions, it derives profit from the growth in the welfare of both the individual and society as a whole.

The development of capital shows, on the one hand, that its organic structure has forever ruled out the possibility that the wages of a hired worker can cover the cost of an expensive product without credit. On the other hand, it indicates the mechanism for bridging the capital circulation gap, which was due to this organic structure. This bridging demonstrates a new justice in social distribution. The process of new social justice manifests as follows.

The daily circulation of capital in expanded production requires the refinancing of credit, as the credit issued for production expansion is exchanged for goods needed for production — raw materials, energy, equipment — remaining in the sphere of production consumption. The surplus value generated in production is expressed in the price of goods, which is higher by the amount of markup and/or value-added tax according to the tax base structure under specific legislation.

When the end consumer cannot purchase the product, for the reason described above, a second credit is required to complete the capital circulation. The second credit provided to the end consumer is excess money in circulation since the money corresponding to the new goods mass is already in circulation. Therefore, the second credit, or refinancing, is immediately withdrawn from circulation by the amount of the first credit. Only the funds from the first credit and the portion of the second credit that corresponds to the created surplus value remain in circulation. The lender of last resort and commercial banks will closely monitor to ensure that future funds from the end consumer, burdened with the second credit, are also withdrawn as excess money.

Thus, we see that reducing the price of goods for the end consumer by the amount of the first credit does not affect money inflation but significantly expands consumer demand. This, in turn, substantially increases capital income, as there is corresponding demand for scientifically justified production expansion, backed by resources created in the past or current periods. At the same time, the only entity able to actually reduce prices for final consumption among all market participants is the lender of last resort. This is because its assets or losses do not affect the issuance and refinancing of credit or the stability of the monetary system.

The laws in all countries enable central banks to maintain the stability of the monetary system, including through credit refinancing mechanisms in various forms, provided they do not interact directly with governments, private individuals, or companies. Therefore, a system of fiduciary management through an authorized financial or insurance organization, acting as a fiduciary, allows for the refinancing of credit in the form of central bank bonds equivalent to the first credit amount, without violating laws or creating conflicts of interest.

To ensure that capital circulation in the accelerated capital framework maintains a scientifically rigorous approach to identifying and creating the material and professional resources that limit the amount of production credit, historical development has prepared the relevant tools in the form of inter-industry and inter-sector balance matrices. These matrices provide a topological representation of the entire economic movement. Additionally, capital has created an avalanche of information technologies to implement this topology in real time. The circle is complete. The dialectical spiral points to a transition into a new era of new production relations, now at a higher level of development.

Within the framework of accelerative capital, social justice takes on tangible material forms, contrasting with the vague political slogans associated with the outdated perspectives of financial capital. In these new conditions, demand can be expanded by reducing the price of high-cost goods by the amount of the first credit for end consumers (essentially an investment credit), while simultaneously expanding supply and capital incomes by that same amount. This process occurs without inflation, as at every stage of circulation, the volume of goods is equal to or greater than the amount of money.

For all three main end consumers — private individuals, municipalities, and the state — there are unlimited opportunities to increase their prosperity in this new era’s paradigm. They only need financial resources equal to the newly created surplus value to multiply their welfare growth. Capital, meanwhile, does not lose anything; instead, it gains the capacity to increase supply in line with this welfare growth. This growth is limited solely by the availability of material and professional resources created in the previous period. If these resources are available, municipalities and governments can dynamically develop infrastructure for transportation, education, healthcare, sports, and housing, with budgets significantly lower than the actual work completed by capital. This development is independent of global economic conditions, as it is based on welfare growth, supporting dynamic, sustained development over an unlimited time span.

Furthermore, the synergy of this process lies in the fact that with existing tax structures and the drastic reduction in budget costs for development (since investment credit — that same initial credit, later refinanced for the end consumer — replaces budget spending), tax rates would eventually need to be reduced simply because there would be no place to spend budget reserves.

In these new conditions, already evident in capital circulation and its supporting tools, we witness a shift to an era of new humanism. Essentially, this era of new humanism reflects a dialectical transition from financial to accelerative capital through practical methods. These methods include a dynamic intersectoral balance model that topologically reflects the entire economy, its daily fluctuations in real time, allowing for the calculation of resources required for any developmental goals set by political leadership, and an accelerated capital method that reconciles the circulation of capital to benefit both end consumers and private initiative.

The new humanism of new era holds that every individual becomes valuable to capital as a source of its unlimited development — not through exploitation or redistribution of surplus value to the owners of production, but through the growth of individual and societal welfare. This new humanism requires a mass of professionally educated individuals who generate new ideas, essential for the full realization of these new conditions.
___________________
Olegas Riapolovas
13.11.2024