1. Introduction to the Topic
To Understanding of Macroeconomу of State and World · перевод (English) · раздел 1 из 7
Перевод исходного произведения; точность перевода оценивается отдельно.
1. Introduction to the Topic
Both existing and possible economic theories may be ranged into one of the two following categories:
· The first group of theories describes the economy of a society in a way, which implies the need to give the answer to the question how an entrepreneur can legally fill up his pockets.
· The second group describes the economy of a society in a way, which implies that the economic activities in the society are to be used as a means of approaching some other, fundamentally noneconomic, goals.
Theories of the first-group originate from understanding that there are the following means of influence, a sensible application of which to the society lets us manage its life and death:
outlook-type information, that is methodology, whose retention allows the people to create (either individually or collectively) their own standard automatisms of recognition and conceptualisation of specific processes as the integrality of the Universe and, being perceived, define the hierarchical order in their mutual embedding.
annalistic, chronological type information to do with all the areas of Culture and all the branches of Knowledge. It lets us see the directivity of processes’ flow and show the correlation between particular areas of Culture (as a whole) and the branches of Knowledge.
factual (descriptive) information; a description of particular processes and their interrelationships comprises the essence of the Third Priority Information; the latter includes religious beliefs, secular ideologies, technologies and factual content of all the branches of Science.
economic processes as means of influence; they are subject to sheer informational means of influence through the finance (money), which is the ultimately generalized type of economy-wise information.
genocide factors, which cause damage to both contemporary and future generations and destroy their genetically specified ability to grasp and develop the cultural and spiritual heritage of the ancestors, include nuclear blackmail, or a threat of nuclear weapons use; alcohol, tobacco and other kinds of drug genocide, as well as food additives; some kinds of cosmetics, the whole lot of pollution factors, and some medications. There is also a latent threat of ‘gene engineering’ and ‘biotechnological’ application consequences.
The other factors are mainly conventional arms, which kill and wound people, damage and destroy the tangible artifacts created by civilizations.
There is no univocal distinction between those factors. The hierarchically ordered structure outlined above is based on the selection of predominate factors of well known heterogeneous means of influence.
When it comes to application of such a set within a single social system, the means represent generalized tools of its management. In case these means are applied by one social system (group of society) to other systems, whose concepts of management do not coincide, they turn into generalized weapons, or means of waging war, in a broad sense; otherwise they can epitomize means of self-rule support in a different social system in case both systems do not feature any conceptual inconsistency between their means of management.
Economic theories for ‘clerks’ apply respectively to the third priority level of generalized arms; they are the ones that constitute the fourth priority of generalized means of management, namely, behavioural algorithms typical for large groups of entrepreneurs, politicians and their economic advisors, journalists, etc. Economic theories for ‘clerks’ can circulate in a society provided the latter warships some distorted notions concerning the way the top priority generalized means of management are believed to affect the life.
Rival and really operable economic theories for masters ensue from recognition of uncertainty in the opinions at the first and third priority levels as well as certain answers to arising questions in terms of which is true and which is glaring falsehood or misapprehension of the essentials.
The lack of opinion and ‘opinion pluralism’ regarding all the six priorities of generalized means of management have to be expatriated; otherwise none of the societies (including the USA) can avoid following the way of ancient Rome; all the neighbouring countries had no choice but to obey the victorious march of Roman legions, they were trembling at the Roman military might; nevertheless Rome went down before such means of war that had not been perceived by the Roman strategists and politicians as means of war at all.
“Commonplace” production goal is the satisfaction of individual wants. It is based on the public joint labour and exchange of products, which follow manufacturing and distribution. Well-being is a mutually complementary unity of manufacturing and distribution; however, that thought is still beyond most politicians and their economic advisors’ grasp.
Well-being is created or undermined by address instructions within the ‘vertical of power’ as well as, outside the ‘vertical of power’, by spontaneous market trade, which operates on the base of established rules, either codified or not.
The ground for trade on all occasions is inability to administer the exchange of goods by force of decrees; such an approach will neither work in manufacturing, nor in distribution of the end product among individual households, the ‘seeds’ the society sprouts from in the continuity of its generations.
Regardless of the particular set of public events in which the inability to handle the exchange of goods is observed, the primitive cause behind trade that creates the ‘market spontaneity’ is inability of single-core structures of management to cope with the huge and complete dataflow (to do with social and economic processes) in real time mode. As a result, the life of society is represented by a multi-core structure of management surrounded by the structureless society management on the basis of addressless data distribution.
Hence, the solution to some socio-economic problems implies the coordination of multi-core structured management and stuctureless social self-rule in the tideway of a unified strategy. Herein, one has to realize that structured management originates from stuctureless management as the profile of data transfer turns steady and people at large start treating them as some professional secular public institutions.
Those involved in self-rule of economic relations in a society would evaluate the improvement of such relations on the basis of such a criteria as the growth in their individual purchasing power. However, their estimations depend on which category the subjects identify themselves in market environment, so those estimations turn to be mutually exclusive. There is an increase in the quality of self-management in producing and consuming social systems.
· for a private entrepreneur (microlevel of manufacturing), this is the price growth for his products relative to the prices of products consumed by him for manufacturing purposes;
· for a consumer of end product (household consumption) this is the growth in his purchasing power: a drop in price for all the products relative to his incomes.
The task of macroeconomic management is a continuous arrangement of quality evaluation of a‘consumer-manufacturer’ macroeconomic self-regulation conflict, both in manufacturing and distribution. That requires to keep the purchasing power of the buyer and the manufacturer within the limits that let the dynamics of particular types of manufacturing at the regional level grow, which, in turn, affects the demographic dynamics, predetermined at 1st - 3rd priority level of generalized means of management in a subjective, ethics-based, voluntary way given the understanding of non-economic factors.
It is necessary because the majority of population is deprived (first and foremost by market competition) from a chance to move into better-of social groups. If a society is unable to reconcile such kind of conflict, it makes internal social conflicts more acute, which can lead to the downfall of the society.
Basically, there are two means of macroeconomic management:
· tax-and-subsidy policy, in hand of the statehood (and partly in hand of conglomerate concern directorates, within their jurisdiction: redistribution of concern’s financial resources among its businesses in a way that does not affect the aggregate profitability of the concern.)
· the management policy of the volume, distribution and discharging of irremunerable debts when borrowing loans at a rate, which is in hands of a supranational usurious mafia-style corporation, whose godfathers are of Jewish ethnic origin, and who usurped banking.
The latter represents the effect of application of the means of management of 1st - 3rd priorities to the global civilization. The Bible and The Talmud represent the doctrine of purchasing the world from fools and making them the slaves on the base of Jewish global usury monopoly, as the 4th - priority means of management; the majority of Jewish populace is good-minded like everybody else, they do not realize the sense of that global policy [1]; they are both biorobotic tools used by their masters in order to achieve the project goals, and at the same time, they are its first victims.
Correspondingly, a conflict between “statehood” and “the international corporation of racist usurers” may arise at any time. Such a conflict can be solved for the benefit of peoples in case the statehood is able to neutralize the activities of the global usury mafia in its home, foreign and global politics. That was put into practice in the USSR under the rule of J. V. Stalin and in the infancy of the Arab Caliphate
However, if the state delivers itself up to the global usury mafia, the solution of the conflict may be solved to the disfavour of the nations. This is what we can currently observe in the West. That is the very system that Russia has been being pushed into in the course of all the disturbances, revolutions and reconstructions, inspired by the globalists since the second half of the XIX century up to now.
Stimulation of a negative attitude to the state taxation policy and governmental subsidies in conjunction withthe idea of SYSTEMS BANK usuryand stock exchange speculation as natural and, therefore, inevitable types of economic activities reflects the global usury mafia’s protection of its production and distribution monopoly policy in such a society.
Any statehood that does not have or did not permeate through the nation a project alternative to the Biblical - Talmudic one of purchasing the whole world and enslavement of the people by means of racially based global usury is doomed to deliver itself up to the usury mafia and serve the goals of their masters either directly or indirectly.
German Hitlerism was not an alternative, but an imitation of the alternative, for it was essentially false in the 1st - 3rd priority sense. The same situation featured its inheritors in post-war period in Germany and other countries.
Correspondingly, social and political movements, Christian confessions (including Russian Orthodox Church), synagogue, rite-fanatic Moslems, who live in contempt of Koran Revelation, bourgeois-democratic, international-socialist (Marxist) and national-socialist parties are not the allies of the commonality and statehood in their fight against biblical-talmudic project, but the means of its implementation on the territory of a state.
That fact does not exclude temporarily co-operation of the statehood with any of them in order to weaken and annihilate the public enemies, making a cat’s paw out of other public enemies, in the tideway of its own, particular strategy, when own powers are not sufficient (that was the way of building socialism under the rule of J. V. Stalin). However, such a policy plunges to the 6th priority level, which will inevitably lead to collateral victims among the uncomprehending people.
Each nation, every multi-national society, where the alternative to the biblical-talmudic project has been expressed and articulated beyond the existing statehood, will generate the new statehood, which will protect the people from the biblical-talmudic enslavers the more efficiently the more conspicuous they will reject the ideology of the biblical-talmudic project and the more honest every single person be to himself and, consequently, before other people. In Russia the alternative to the biblical-talmudic project has already been declared (in particular, see: http://mera.com.ru/category/library/).
Any type of statehood that is going to lend a hand to a public initiative and will not pervert it, will be able to put up with anything, being backed by the Heavenly support of its peoples as well as by deadly civil discords among the enemies.
Correspondingly, the defence of their own country from smites of the masters of the biblical-talmudic project demand an efficient home policy, foreign policy and global policy from the statehood, which includes the self-consistent means of management-arms from 1st priority level up to 6th.
That is why the plan named “Typhoon”, which acquired some popularity with the ruling circles of Russia, and which suggests to strangle the usury activities with the help of 98% profit tax is notoriously inefficient. In particular, when it comes to macroeconomic control, it is notoriously inefficient because it does not imply control over the purchasing power of manufacturers, consumers of goods and services in sectors or regions in order to maintain the favourable demographic dynamics and ecological security of the society. Just banning or oppressing usury is not going to be sufficient if we want to make the society economically secure. So we cannot do without a clearly conceived presentation of the state policy in such areas as manufacturing and distribution of goods, lending and insurance (including the insurance against bankruptcy for private entrepreneurs); and we cannot do without passing the laws that will be in line with that policy, which will express such a policy and protect economic sphere from some moves, incompatible with it; without building up within the society a mechanisms of realization of the state taxation-and-subsidy politics, which will concern all the economic entities.
At that stage of the society self-rule problem consideration, the law is seen as a corpus of standard algorithms for solving problems of management at the acceptable management quality level. Correspondingly, the law-making activities to do with business and finance ought to be algorithmically rational towards the chosen concept of a socially secure mechanism of human life, which implies the generational continuity; it should have nothing to do with the construction of a ‘Babylon Tower’-style maze, where some selected private entrepreneurs, assisted by judges and supervised by prosecutor’s office officials, have a right to hunt on the incomes of the other private entrepreneurs, all the employees and the statehood, with no reflection upon the consequences of the greediness cherished in their circle, or who and how is going to clear up the consequences.
The economic theories for masters are determined by the morals, by a real ethical code, not a meretricious one.
Good-Will originates from the fact that each person is assumed to be the Vicar of God on the Earth. Respectively, the equality of human dignity of each person must be kept in all kinds of relations within the society. As no one is able to replace the humankind, the whole lot of professional skills and other personal distinguishing features do not portray his dignity; they are, so to speak, appropriate to him. That is why in a normal society every single person has to be equally respected both in everyday life and in this labour activity, faithfully supporting each other.
Ill-Will, BLUNTLY, ALLUSIVELY AND BY DEFAULT, assumes that human dignity depends number of people depending on that person, one way or another. The dependence is based on the individual, tribal, or corporate possession of the kinds of knowledge and skills that have not been acquitted by the others. In other words, human dignity is expressed in their belonging to a corporation or a tribe (kings, healers, warriors, merchants, craftsmen, peasants, untouchable etc.) in accordance with the essence of that collective body as a professional corporation. If the masters of the system consequently develop that doctrine, they will have to totally deny that dignity is an immanent attribute of numerous or inconsiderable groups of people and professional corporations.
Depending on the genuine morals of the reader he will either agree with the above distinction between good-will and ill-will, or will insist on an opposite definition, or will ride off on a side issue because of his own immorality, or will admit that good-will and ill-will possess some share of “righteousness” whatever the definition is.
Immoral people always have a chance to turn into a ‘conscious grass’ on the battlefield, which is seen as a reproductive biomass by the participants of the ‘cold war’, which has been being waged for the whole history of the modern global civilization (the war that sporadically transforms into fire-and-sward one); and the livestock numbers of the biomass - depending on the goals of the antagonistic parties - must be either exterminated or preserved to reproduce the future generations of people, which will be morally and ideologically different.
Morals are a blend of good-will, ill-will and immorality. Every individual person has a different mix composition, which leads to mutual misunderstanding and conflicts between individuals and social groups.
Human dignity means that the person continually gets rid of his ill-will; and his good-will shows in the beneficence, which originates from his sincere understanding of the Dispensation; such beneficence cannot come from lucre (including the self-seeking desire of the Paradise or the self-seeking fear of the Hell. The two types of lucre reflect the human disbelief in God.)
People create different types of ethics in accordance with the morals difference shown above, which leads to two incompatible types of politics and two irreconcilable classes of economic theories for masters:
· the theories that originate from good-will answer the question:
How shall we establish production and distribution in a society in a way that will foster the generation continuity as well as the perpetual stability and health of biocenosis (biosphere), that people would not overflow the ecological niche, that there would be neither hungry, nor homeless, people, those who would not have been given any deserving education or deprived from something due to the circumstances beyond their control?
This is the main issue of economic theory.
· the theories that originate from ill-will avoid giving answers to that question, or may give some false answers; and they are fussily sorting out the problem of ‘how many of those bastards’ they need and how to keep their bodies and souls together at a minimum subsistence level so that the ‘real people’ were always very well off.