3.1.2         Bases of the Economy of Humanism  

A better future requires reconstruction of the economy as a whole. The introductory statement showed that the planned economy is more stable than the market economy and allows full employment of workers, and that market economy is significantly more productive. A new economy will have to take the advantages of both systems and eliminate their deficiencies.  

The planned economy may be exclusively based on associated ownership of the means of production. The market economy also displays interest in association as it enables to achieve a greater certainty in doing business. Therefore one may conclude that the association of the economy is the future of the economy.  

Association of the economy will be taking place on an exclusively voluntary basis, on the basis of the wish of the owners, and in no way in a forced manner. Private ownership of the means of production is backed by the past labour and that is why its forced socialization comes necessarily across the resistance and inconveniences, and the practice shows that all such attempts have failed. Capital owners may voluntarily surrender their capital to the society if the society forms a new system of values that will replace the conveniences arising from the holding of capital.  

It has already been mentioned that the society needs to establish a measure of the past labour value of each man expressed in the past labour voting points. Each past labour voting point represents an equivalent for a certain value that the man, together with his predecessors, realized in the society. It was already suggested that the past labour voting points determine the power of decision-making in the society. The logic is simple: the more valuable past labour brings major conveniences to the society and needs, therefore, to be allocated greater rights. The measure is just and useful, above all. Namely, the rich individuals will be most suspicious toward the new system. When they legally get greater decision-making rights in the society without any obligation in return for them, they will probably accept the new political system. Since the rich have the main say in the society, the system may materialize. 

This will be followed by a more difficult task of getting consent from the capital owners for associating their private ownership of the means of production into a large enterprise of the commune. This will be achievable through an issue of the past labour income points.  

Past labour income points will constitute a mix of government bonds and capitalistic shares in a humanistic environment. Such points will guarantee decent incomes and the greatest possible safety of securities. Further, they will present the power of each individual in the society. In such a case, the society as a whole can find an interest in replacing the alienated forms of power based on the possession of private ownership of the means of production and other private ownership for an equivalent value of the past labour income points.  

Income points directly determine worker’s incomes in the humanistic associated company. They are based on the contribution of each individual (together with contributions of their ancestors) in creating values in the joined ownership of the people of commune. (Voting points include contribution of each individual in creating values in the joined ownership but also it includes values of private ownership). In the part that private owners of capital keep withholding their private capital they do not realize the income points. Then their income in the commune's associated labour will be smaller. Naturally, if a holder of private ownership has a private activity he would earn money on his own. Then the larger quantity of past labour income points would not be of a great significance for him and he will not sell his private ownership.  

However, the implementation of such system may start even if not a single private entrepreneur associates his ownership in the commune. The system will then be based only on the existing collective ownership of enterprises and institutions. The system will show already there an important progress; however, the results will be far better when private entrepreneurs join the associated economy of the commune.  

Capital owners not interested in surrendering their ownership to the commune in exchange for past labour income points will probably change their minds once they discover that the associated economy is more productive than their individual activity. This particular issue will be further elaborated later in this book. One may assume that capitalistic forms of value will lose the value over time and, therefore, replacement of the values determined in the stock exchanges for the past labour income points is to be expected. The commune will also have to enable the inhabitants to sell their past labour points in return for money. That will make the past labour income points to be a sort of shares which the commune inhabitants will trust. In such a system, private entrepreneurs may find a great interest in selling their ownership to the commune. Over time, the commune may become an owner of all stock-exchange operations, real estates and other values that inhabitants of commune possess.  

Past labour income points will replace the capitalistic system values and complement them with new ones that will allow the society to prosper. When an owner of private ownership surrenders his ownership to the society, his quantity of past labour income points will be fully identical to the quantity of past labour voting points. In such circumstances the past labour voting and income points can be more simply called the past labour points.  

The new system represents an associated ownership of the means of production where all inhabitants would, let's call them so, be the humanistic shareholders of associated enterprises on the territory of a commune. All enterprises in the commune get associated, as large-scale corporations do, in one economic whole, and then smaller organizational units in the form of enterprises would be formed in order to enable easier recording of their business performance. The system also allows equal participation of an individual private entrepreneur.  

Labour Organization  

The united commune will have a single administration. Executive authorities of the administration will no longer tailor the economic policy and propose laws. Instead, they will assume direct administration in all fields of social activity.  

The principle of election of the commune's managers needs to be directly based on competing programs offered by the candidates for the managing function. The programs will define the work orientation in the economy, as well as the profit that the economy needs to realize in a certain time period. They will also have to define the operation of non-economic activities, and the conveniences that such work structure needs to create for the society. The programs will need to contain answers to all current problems emerging in the commune.

The assembly or council of commune will assess the offers and make selection for the commune's administration. A managing board of the economy may be set up within the assembly. Such board would not be elected in elections. Its members would be the commune's inhabitants holding the largest number of past labour income points, or, more precisely, humanistic shares. The assembly of commune board would from among the competing proposals for work organization select the best offer for the composition of the managing executive authority. The commune management's term-of-office would last until the emergence of a more productive offer. The obligations and duties would be defined by a formal agreement between the commune's assembly and the selected management.  

Production is a highly dependent process and that is why coordination with the centralized hierarchical management system suits it to a certain level. Such form of decision-making allows central planning and, accordingly; a more steady economic activity; a labour distribution allowing full employment of workers with balanced work burden; a more efficient coordination of action, and a fast decision implementation. The communal executive managing authority analyzes the resources of all activities, and then distributes the work in the manner allowing the commune to achieve the highest productivity. The elected commune's management sets up the departments or secretariats in the commune with the consent of the commune's assembly or council and managing board of the economy. 

The secretariats may be those of administration, economy, building industry, trade, health care, education, culture, internal affairs, etc. It will be most likely that the managers of such departments will compete for willing positions together with the managers of commune as a group. But also the candidates interested in heading the secretariats apply for such posts on the grounds of a permanently open public competition. President of the commune's executive council selects from among such candidates the persons who with their specific activity best complement his program.  

Higher-ranking officials form the enterprises, set their purposes, and determine the resources pertaining to them, such as the means of production and number of workers. They also form competitions for lower ranking managing functions. Within the authority accorded to them by higher-ranking officials the candidates for the managing posts in enterprises and institutions propose a highest productivity they can offer. The best proposal maker gets the mandate from the higher-ranking management, together with the consent the enterprise's managing board, and organizes the work in the enterprise or institution. Lower ranking managers determine the rights and obligations of each work post within the mandate accorded to them by the higher-ranking managers, and for each defined work post may apply the worker who offers the highest productivity.  

The managers’ authorities will be distributed in the manner allowing the commune to realize the highest productivity possible. President of the commune's managing authority will be authorized to manage the entire activity of the commune. However, such management would not be efficient, because it is impossible for a single man to make the whole number of decisions that only one composite enterprise may demand. Moreover, it would hamper the lower-ranking management and, consequently, the productivity. President of the commune's executive board would take the number of authorities commensurate with his ability to contribute to larger work productivity in the commune, while the remaining authorities would on a contractual basis be assigned to lower ranking management members.  

Work organization in the commune may freely vary from a centralized production organization to a fully liberal business operation of enterprises, and the management of commune establishes the work distribution and the decision-making power in production that will result in the greatest conveniences for the commune. Such organization of the production has already been in place. Well, where do we see, then, the great progress of such an economic model?  

The humanistic form of production requires a full employment of workers, which is possible to achieve by forming a centralized system of labour distribution, as the case was in the socialist planned form of production. The inefficiency of such form of production will be eliminated by elimination of privileged work posts and introduction of some elements of work competition characteristic for the capitalistic form of business operation.  

The basic criterion in employing workers needs to be the effectively established highest productive power of the worker. Depending on the work post, productivity can be defined by the realized cash profit on the market, quantity of produced goods, but also by the assessment of the consumer's satisfaction with the quality of the goods produced.  

Work competition as a form of employment represents a continuous open competition for all work posts. This means that any worker may at any point of time take the work post of another worker if he performs the concrete job more productively. Of course, in order to avoid possible instabilities in such work distribution the work competition will be performed in a highly regulated manner. It will be explained in chapter “Work Distribution”. For now it should be said that such relationship in production breaks the privileges of the centralized process of production. The system will allow a permanent development of the production process and of the essential forces in the society. Such relationship in production will bring a higher economic productivity than the capitalist form of production may achieve and that is a reason the capitalism will be certainly pushed into history.  

Needless to say that for such a form of production relationship to exist, the society must necessarily form an exact and efficient mode of the risk bearing by workers for the non-realized productivity at each work post. The system could not survive without this component. The efficient system of risk bearing is possible to achieve with the past labour income points. A greater right to work at each post needs to be exercised by the worker who proposes a higher responsibility for his work with an assumption he offers an equal productivity as other workers. 

The scope of accepted responsibility will be established by numerical value. Higher responsibility needs to ensure a higher increase of the past labour points as a reward for the rise in productivity, and a larger deduction of the past labour points as a sanction for insufficiently realized productivity of the worker. And vice versa, a less pronounced responsibility of a worker will bring fewer rewards and sanctions with the past labour income points, but also a reduced competition power for the performance of a desired work. If responsibility were defined in such a way, the irresponsible attitude vis-à-vis the work as the one that existed in the socialist form of production would be definitely overcome, and the prosperity in doing business would be ensured.  

At the end, the new system will enable each worker (including leaders) to directly assess the price of his own current work according to the degree of the conveniences and inconveniences that the work brings him in relation to another work. In order for the current work price to correspond objectively to the work burden, it needs to be subject to the work competition. The job will be given to a worker seeking a lower current work price with an assumption he offers an equal productivity and responsibility as other workers. Such a mode of price determination will form the most objective price of the current work that the authorities or trade union arbitrations cannot achieve. In such a system all workers would be satisfied with the level of the realized income, because it is them who have chosen it. 

Such a system of doing business is becoming possible for the first time in the history of the mankind because the development of the computer technology has allowed to efficiently establish, monitor and process the productivity of the work of workers, the values of their work and the responsibility they bear for their work in the society, in the system of fast changes in the work and work obligations.  

It is important to mention here that associated enterprises in the commune will normally plan the production in the same way in which large corporations do it. Accordingly, such an economy associated in the commune will be getting the features of a planned economy. Such an economy can achieve a stable production of commodities with full employment of workers on the territory of the commune.  

Within the commune, enterprises will no longer compete with each other with the same products. It will be necessary to shift the enterprises' competition with work products to the work competition. In this way a high work productivity of the market economy is ensured; however, excessive production, or to be more specific, irrational use of natural resources can be reduced. The system of evaluation of producers by consumers will give a better presentation of production performance than market of goods. Such a system can eliminate the deficiencies of the market and planned economies and provide for the stability and prosperity of the economy and, accordingly, of the society. The system will be described in more details in the next chapters.   

Democracy in Economy 

In the proposed system each man has the right to decide in the name of the society if he is in such a position; however, he shall be accountable to the society for his decisions. Each member of the society can assess the performance of such man. Negative assessment will cause a sanction and positive a reward. In such circumstances, not a single manager can independently assume responsibility for the decision-making about the regulation of the commune's complete economy because he cannot know for sure how much such regulation will be suitable for the society members. Even the decisions most suitable for the society may not be suitable for a large number of members who would sanction such leader with negative assessments. Beside that, not satisfied members of society may refuse to give support to leaders in realisation of their program what would additionally make their position difficult.  

The managers will not be able to enforce their wish over workers anyhow. Their abilities will be based on good vision of production business, on animation of workers, on bravery and confidence. Therefore the fact that the system is based on the work competition will not matter much because it will have to include cooperation at all levels among all interested sides about all matters of joined interests.

No doubt that for this reason the management of the commune will get the commune's inhabitants included in the strategic direct decision-making process of production and distribution in the commune. Since the money is an instrument in economy regulation, management will facilitate to the population to directly decide about the distribution of commune’s revenue. Basic strategic decisions in economy may be formed by the macro-economic distribution of collective money intended for the development of production, individual and collective consumption. 

As money distribution needs to follow both the needs and possibilities of the society, the commune's assembly representatives will need to establish the possible money distribution intervals in which the production cycle can exist. In the framework of such value intervals, each man by filling out the computer cards or applications needs to participate in the distribution of collective money according to his own wish.  

Taking into account that all members of the society have not equally contributed to the creation of collective material goods, they cannot have the same power of decision-making about the distribution of collective money. The power of economic decision-making needs to be based on the quantity of past labour points, which is equivalent to the power of shareholders' decision-making in the capitalistic system of operation. This means that each man will actually distribute the total quantity of his own past labour points. In this way, a man with a larger quantity of past labour points will have a proportionately greater impact on the distribution of collective money.  

The sum of values of all individual statements of the collective money distribution, processed by computer technology, will form the distribution of commune’s revenue for the development of the production, collective and individual consumption. As the quantity of money is limited, a larger quantity of money intended for certain distribution groups would diminish the quantity of money intended for other distribution groups. The money distribution directs the economy. This means that management of the economy will for the first time be directly in the hands of the society.  

Cash assets intended for the development of the economy serve for the expansion of the productive forces, purchase of the new means of production, or of complete installations that promote the production. A larger quantity of cash assets intended for the development of the economy will engage the social work and economic development to a larger extent, which would increase the quantity and quality of the means of production and, accordingly, the productivity. More sizeable investment in the development of the economy will ensure major social conveniences in the future; however, cash assets for current consumption would in this way decrease, which would also reduce the individual and social standard. Such a system will enable each commune to develop by relying on its own forces.  

The system of work distribution in the commune envisages a unique work organization, but also specific specialized production wholes in order to identify to a larger extent the efficiency of business operation. The assets intended for the development of the economy would be distributed to enterprises that would ensure higher productivity or larger cash gain on the free market over a shorter period of time.  

Cash assets for collective consumption serve to meet all collective needs of the society. They are used for the maintenance of the existing structure, and for the building of new social standard facilities. More assets for collective consumption would allow a higher collective standard at the expense of other forms of consumption. Cash assets for collective consumption may, to a certain degree, be distributed by direct decisions of the population, while later partial distribution may be directly made by interested and associated society members. Final distribution of the smallest consumption segments needs to be made by the authorized management, which needs to be directly accountable to the society for the same.    

Assets intended for individual consumption would form a mass of money for workers' incomes or for cash receipts of all inhabitants of the commune. The larger mass of money for cash receipts of the commune's inhabitants would raise the individual consumption at the expense of other forms of consumption, and vice versa, a smaller mass of money would diminish the individual consumption in favour of the development of the economy and collective consumption.  

The total mass of money intended for income of the commune's inhabitants would be distributed proportionately to the quantity and quality of current work, according to the value of the past labour expressed by past labour income points and, finally, according to the needs and possibilities of the society. In the distribution, the society also needs to establish the minimum income of the individual, or to be more precise, the difference range at the level of incomes, by which it can regulate the relationship between the solidarity and interest in the work based on income. If workers were not interested in performing an inconvenient work lowering thereby the commune's productivity, the society may by direct statement reduce the minimal income of workers. They would in that way stimulate, on income basis, the workers to work more and thus realize a higher productivity and a larger share in the distribution of the operation result. On the other hand, if productivity larger than necessary is realized in the society, the society will then increase the minimal income and thus reduce the income-based stimulation for work.  

***** 

What is the underlying point of the system? The system will put the society on sound footings. It enables a free activity of any individual and, accordingly, the finding of the way that is more suitable to the man's nature and the society as a whole. Freedom enables the suspicion, formation of critical views, and the possibility of acting that, together with practice, creates an objective knowledge. Practice demystifies the categories of values and, therefore, allows the breakdown of the dogmatic, non-critically accepted and alienated knowledge that is the cause of inconveniences in the society. Practice is the only possible route to knowledge, the man's power, the only possible way for discovering the correct stand and orientation of the society as a whole.  

In such a system the man is forced to rely on his own forces in realizing his needs. Constant reliance on his own forces and the defined responsibility would teach the man to accept the real objective perception of his own potency. This means also the acceptance of his own impotence in cases where he cannot surmount it. By getting to know objectively his own powers, the man will live in accordance with his own nature. Such a man would form the needs only where he has the power to realize them, which constitutes the essence of the man's balance and of the formation of a constructive orientation in the relationship with the nature and society. Such a system can enable the satisfaction of natural needs of the man and of the society, which brings harmony, peace, love and joy of living.

The new form of socio-economic relations requires formation of new elements needed to establish: the price of work, work distribution, responsibility, the price of commodities, money accumulation, credit-monetary policy, working assets, development and amortization of the production, distribution of individual and collective consumption, as well as of the use of real assets. The new socio-economic policy will, within the limits of possibilities, be presented in greater details in the chapters that follow.  

 Back to Top