Шрифт
Source Sans Pro
Размер шрифта
18
Цвет фона
The Economy of the Future. Stage One
Alexey Ryzhkov
DOI 10.55140/2782–5817–2023–3-S1–4–13
The article presents a vision of the Economy of the Future by Alexey Ryzhkov, social investor, founder of Seven Suns Development Group and the Positive Changes Factory.
Alexey Ryzhkov
Social investor, founder of Seven Suns Development Group and the Positive Changes Factory
In his previous works, A. Ryzhkov highlights that the contemporary society is currently facing a crisis, undergoing a transition from the established way of life, in which financial prosperity is understood as the sole measure of success and the essence of life, to the intangible realm, where humans themselves are the focal point of life, as living entities with their natural habitat and respective qualities. This will certainly transform all areas of human life, including the economy.
Throughout their history, the humans have always been striving to develop the theory of a fair economy and to implement it in practice. All these numerous attempts generally fall into the following two categories:
• individualistic
and
• collectivist
The former is best described by the concept “everyone is responsible for their own life,” which received different wordings in different epochs: “survival of the fittest,” “nothing personal, just business,” and even “homo homini lupus est.”
The latter prioritizes the concept of human collaboration, which has also been demonstrated through various models of social organization, from tribal alliances to more recent endeavors such as the ambitious global socialist project.
The economy, being a reflection of the prevailing worldview, naturally aligned itself with the broader division into two dominant lifestyles. The individualistic concept persistently advocated for the economic model of a free market and entrepreneurship, which exerted its influence on every individual within society. Conversely, the collectivist ideology led to an economic model characterized by centralized regulation, management, and distribution of economic benefits, operating from the top-down.
Naturally, both approaches had their strengths and weaknesses; both were also inherently biased. The individualistic worldview, while granting more autonomy and maturity to individuals within the society, often did so at the expense of ethical considerations. This created extreme levels of egocentrism among the privileged few atop the social pyramid, perpetuating vertical hierarchies and exploitation of the weaker social groups by the stronger ones, sometimes as much as seizing control over the entire society. On the other hand, the collectivist ideology consistently upheld high moral values and proudly emphasized the priority of altruistic beliefs over financial gains. However, it also resulted in diminished individual autonomy and greater dependence in thought and action, suppressing the objective impetus for social progress by discouraging any individual development beyond the average level. This inevitably led to a standardized approach to personal growth, homogenization of individuals, societal stagnation, and ultimately, self-destruction of the society.
The confrontation between the two ideas and approaches has always been more or less fierce. Sometimes they coexisted without a visible conflict, but most of the time they were conflicting one way or another. The reason is they are actually two sides of the same coin – the human nature, split into two parts that form two opposing poles of the worldview, with all their strengths and weaknesses, which were reproduced again and again on the global scale throughout the departing historical period. As the society progressed, these opposing positions became more and more pronounced, crystallized as the positive and negative poles of a magnet, and today we are witnessing their ultimate battle.
If we look carefully, throughout history the West has always adhered to the first position; the second position was held by Russia and certain parts of the East and South. In most cases, the centers of power within society remained relatively unchanged, despite the presence of followers for both models in various regions. Although isolated parts of the global society attempted to adopt alternative perspectives repeatedly over the course of history, the deeply entrenched stereotypes associated with their respective worldviews endured. Consequently, these attempts often proved temporary, ultimately reversing to the established order. Nonetheless, they served as valuable lessons, providing insights and knowledge that proved beneficial in many ways.
How can we solve this conflict? Is there a way to reconcile the parties, or does one opponent have to beat the other? Who is right? What model is better? To answer these questions properly, we must first understand the logic of life in general and the logic of its development process.
To this end, it is only fair to remember the general matrix of life applicable to the development of the humans and the society, which contains a sequence of levels that must be mastered step by step, from the bottom up (see Table 1).
At each level, the individual and the society achieve a greater degree of development, improving quality of life in all aspects. These levels are hierarchical in relation to one another – each higher encompasses and defines all lower levels. During the historical period known to us, the humankind has consistently climbed up the lower four levels of life, passing the corresponding events, achieving the corresponding accomplishments, surviving the corresponding crises, which are especially acute in the transitions between the levels. The economy developed accordingly. Of course, the society is heterogeneous, and its different parts may be standing at different development levels, so the measurement should be made by the highest level reached by a significant part of the society. The global society is currently mastering the 4th level of life, and will soon have to transition to the 5th level. This is the current stage of life and the corresponding challenge of the times for all people and the society.
Table 1. The general matrix of life
There is a fundamental difference between the lower four and upper four levels of life. It is the difference between the tangible and intangible, which means a radical transformation of the pivot point around which all of life is built. In the lower half of the matrix (the first four levels), everything is built around financial prosperity; that is, the humans are busy setting up their lives, gathering things around them. The upper half (the top four levels), however, is built around the intangible component of life, the humans’ non-physical nature. Here we must note that during the entire passing epoch, the human society’s attention and efforts were focused not on the humans themselves, but beyond them. Respectively, we know nothing about the humans’ intangible nature, about who they are in reality.
The period we are living in today is a transition from the lower half to the upper half of the matrix of life – from level 4 to level 5 and above. All the events, including the crises, that are happening in every person’s life as much as in the life of the entire society, shall be viewed through the prism and logic of this transition.
The transition from tangible to intangible, as in fact any significant transition, cannot happen overnight; it takes creating a projection of the current level and moving it to the next one, that is, a representation of the new level through elements of the old. This is to some extent a virtual construct, representing the nonexistent through the existing materials. It is always a distortion of reality, a kind of “fake simile” (largely idealistic) of what is coming. In this case, it is an important stage of transition, and generally, it should certainly be considered as something positive and constructive, compared to the existing level. But the transition to the level that is greater evolution-wise will only occur once this idealistic “fake simile” of the reality is torn down. The above can be considered a model for both individual and collective transition.
In the short run, this intermediate stop will be the most urgent and relevant for the humankind – the transition from the material present to an idealistic future (in the good sense of the word), where all the best qualities of the concept of the human developed in the contest of the current era, that is, all its superior qualities, will be revealed and integrated into the social life.
Looking at this intermediate point from the viewpoint of today’s regular societal constructs (including the economy as a mechanism of human interaction), we can say that intangible aspects of life will prevail compared to the tangible ones. Education, management, culture, science, philosophy, religion, all aspects of information handling (sorting, analysis, synthesis, presentation), as well as general knowledge, morality, human relations will become more and more dominant, increasingly important and crucial in relation to the areas of material production, provision with tangible resources, physical security, etc. Among other things, these and other purely material spheres will be transformed into the mixed tangible-intangible form, integrating the missing modules, acquiring intangible meanings and contexts. The society will realize the primacy of intangible spheres over tangible ones, whether applied to a single individual or to the entire society – that is, the value, the context, the individual and societal benefit of a certain activity will be more important than the activity itself and its results in the form of tangible products and financial profits. There will be a shift in focus from the production and possession of things, and the provision of the necessary and desirable items to the person themselves, the way they are in terms of their qualities and competencies. Everything will follow this formula: “Everything that works for human development, in the sense of developing human qualities and competencies, is good; everything that does not work for human development or works for human degradation is bad.” The realization will come that a society of developed people has no place for mess and disorder, including in regard to any material spheres and the economy in particular. The economy, politics, science, education, security, and all other areas are secondary to the individual. A developed individual means every sphere, including the realm of material, is developed.
Accordingly, the entire economy, at this intermediate point of idealistic intangible in the development of the human society, will be fast-tracked to what can be defined as the implementation of positive social impact, where the humans and the society represent both subjects and objects of impact, developing human qualities and competencies at the individual level and at the level of the entire society. The economy of the near future is an economy of positive social interchange, where everyone without exception will contribute – every person, every enterprise, institution, industry, sphere, state, etc. – everyone will create a positive social impact that becomes a common measure for all. This is in fact what we can call a human-centered economy and a human-centered society, where a person is not an object to be provided, equipped and complemented from the outside by the society or the state, acting essentially as a consumer who is owed by everyone. Instead, it is the person developing as a subject, the starting point of everything, who has the primary qualities and competencies to perform any activity, who has the primary initiative to decide to act and who has chosen voluntarily to be creative for the benefit of themselves and the others, and whose development as a subject is the ultimate goal of their actions and the actions of the entire society.
Economy of the near future will be a hybrid of commercial and non-profit mode of operation, where every action will be evaluated in terms of its positive social impact.
It is crucial to note here that this particular economic model does not make a distinction between those in need who receive benefits without actively contributing through creative work, often hiding behind misguided notions of social justice and identifying themselves as “the people,” and the genuinely developed, proactive individuals who work for the social good and assume great responsibility for their actions. Unfortunately, the latter group is frequently disparagingly labeled as “crooks and thieves” by the former. In the new economy, everything depends on the individual contribution of each person to the society of positive interchange, on the real effect of this contribution. This division can be avoided because the society and its entire social and economic activity is put on the same track and measured by the same standards. This stands in contrast to the current division where the commercial sector, although economically sustainable, and even prosperous at the top of the social pyramid, is often perceived as “evil” by the society. On the other hand, the social sector is viewed as “good” but struggles to achieve financial sustainability due to being marginalized and disadvantaged. Such disparity often leads to feelings of deception and resentment among the latter group, prompting them to come together in an effort to restore a sense of “social justice” against perceived “oppressors” who they believe consistently exploit and cheat them. At times, those in power may employ a mix of incentives and concessions, gradually raising the social security standards to placate the dissent and maintain the status quo, preventing the collapse of existing social mechanisms.
What do we mean when we talk about the human qualities and competencies that shape the essence of an individual and indicate their level of development? They can be described as the basic skills and competencies that are natural and universal for all humans, regardless of their external differences, and which can be assessed to determine the development level of the individual and the society. We will name four of them:
• personality strength
• responsibility
• understanding
• morality
It is safe to say that the development of these qualities in any individual or the society in general correlates to the overall development level of that person or the society. The more pronounced these qualities are, the higher the overall level of development, and vice versa. Let’s talk briefly about each quality.
Personal strength is the actual level of power that each person feels within themselves, which is necessary to perform any activity. This is the primary attribute that defines the status or scale of an individual, determines their identity. How much power do I feel inside? Who do I consider myself to be? The way a person answers these questions determines what they feel like. This can also be derived from the way that person behaves in their actions and relationships with other people.
Responsibility means an area in which an individual is able to provide order. Each person chooses a particular level or scale of responsibility, which is determined by the size of the area they are able to control. For some, this area may be limited to “just me”, others take responsibility for themselves and their family; some people can be responsible for as much as an enterprise or even a country. The real responsibility can be measured by the degree of order established within the respective area. If the order is not secured, responsibility cannot be confirmed.
Understanding means the level of understanding – some people understand little, some understand more, some understand a lot. Like responsibility, actual understanding must be verified by practice.
Morality as a word comes from the Latin ‘moralitas’, which means “manner, proper behavior” – which in turn describes one’s taste for life. Some people’s tastes are quite low – bad habits, disorderly behavior, fondness of destructive activity, lack of motivation for development. Others have good tastes – aspiration to constant creative work, the sense of order, beauty, and a love for the people. This determines a person’s level of morality.
But let’s go back to the economy. Based on the above, we can say that the economy of the near future will be a hybrid of commercial and non-profit mode of operation, where every action will be evaluated in terms of its positive social impact, regardless of whether it is produced by commercial or noncommercial means. Since intangible spheres of activity (alone or in combination with tangible production) have immeasurably greater potential for having positive social impact in relation to the old-time tangible production sectors, these new sectors will eventually acquire greater commercial value as they are gradually incorporated into the regular economy. Eventually the new sectors based on intangible or hybrid production will gain economic independence and become the undisputed leaders of the new economy. The old, purely tangible industries (manufacturing of commodities with zero intangible value or utility) will either receive a complementary intangible module, to become hybrid in nature and get integrated into the economy of the future, or will disappear, becoming a thing of the past.
The economy of the future is the economy of mutual exchange of intangible values and tangible values that have acquired the status of manifestation or carrier of intangible values. In other words, there will be tangible things carrying intangible value, or a tangible thing will be part of a module combining tangible and intangible items that have a positive social impact or meaning to a person and/or the society. That is, all the products in the economy of the future will have an intangible module, representing their positive social impact.
The economy of the future will assign the greatest value to those products carrying intangible value that offer an opportunity to increase the development level of the humans (i.e. their qualities and competencies). These can be products in the field of information, knowledge, culture, or any other field. Accordingly, the leaders of the new economy will be those industries and enterprises that create such products.
The logic and model of the new human behavior in the economy of the future will be based on the understanding of values as products of positive social impact, that is: “I buy something that will make me better (as a person, in the sense of the development of my qualities and competencies), increase my development level and will therefore improve my financial well-being.” That is, the entire society will be working to create a more developed person, which in turn, through having all the necessary qualities and competencies, will contribute to the development of themselves and the society, thus acquiring even greater development and helping others to develop and fully supporting themselves and those around them financially. It is crucial to highlight that the development agenda is not forced or compulsory for anyone. Everything must happen freely, exclusively because of individual’s goodwill and desire. The reason is that the society understands that each person has their own development level and stage, their own development path, which they feel and identify on their own.
From here emerges an open, free economy of mutual benefit, of mutual positive impact, where everyone has their own understanding of the benefit to themselves, to the others, and to the society, and also acquires a corresponding measure:
• the personal capital – that is, the individual inner self-perception
• the social capital, that is, collective external measure – social recognition, status, social opportunities, etc.
• financial capital, that is, individual external measure – money and things surrounding that person
In other words, the more benefit and positive impact a person produces, the more capital of each type they earn.
All human and social interaction will be translated into the equivalent of positive social impact and its corresponding measure, including social and financial capital.
All products in the new economy will be assigned a positive impact index, which measures the usefulness of each product for the new human and social development paradigm. The higher the positive impact index a product has, the greater its cost, and therefore the value in terms of personal, social and financial capital. This will affect producers, sellers and buyers of these products accordingly. That is, the producers, sellers and buyers will all gain personal, social, and material capital by producing, selling and buying products with a higher positive impact index.
The concept of social value and capital must include, among other things, social recognition and appreciation for those who produce and buy products with a high positive impact index. This recognition can be expressed through specific additional social opportunities, such as the respective increases in social standing, “social doors,” “social elevators,” the opportunity to take on more important and responsible social positions, the opportunity to receive support from social funds working for the development of the new society.
In the economy of the future, all products, including ordinary material products, will be labeled according to their positive impact index (PII) on humans and the society, on a scale from extremely destructive through neutral, safe, and ultimately high positive impact.
All economic agents, market players, companies and individuals working for these companies, will be assigned their positive impact index, which will change along with the changes in the activities of that company or individual. The higher the PII rating is for a person or a company, the greater their personal, social and financial capital and the greater their social opportunities are. Everyone, including the government, will prioritize the people and enterprises with high positive impact index.
Customers buying products with a high positive impact index will also receive social and financial capital points.
Already at this intermediate stage of transition to idealistic intangible, it will be possible to leave behind the most obvious destructive trends of all kinds (including through the positive interchange economy) and towards the true humanity – the summit of what the humans are capable of today. Needless to say, that society will still have its share of problems and threats, to be addressed at the next stage of development – the transition from the idealistic intangible to the real intangible economy.
At this stage, the economy of the future will place a strong emphasis on the notion that everyone’s pursuit of human development is inherently beneficial to the society. This concept will not only be proclaimed but also actively integrated into daily practices, becoming an important component of the new global humane society. The economy will encourage active participation from all individuals, inviting them to engage in the process of personal and collective growth.
