TheGreen Book

	Part Two
	The Solution of the Economic Problem
	"Socialism"

 

---

• The Economic Basis of the Third Universal Theory
• Need
• Housing
• Income
• Means of Transportation
• Land
• Domestic Servants

THE ECONOMIC BASIS OF THE
THIRD UNIVERSAL THEORY

Important historical developments contributingto the solution of the problem of work and wages - the relationship betweenproducers and owners, workers and employers - have occurred in recent history.These developments include the determination of fixed working hours, overtimepay, leaves, minimal wages, profit sharing, the participation of workers inadministration, the banning of arbitrary dismissal, social security, the rightto strike, and other provisions contained in labour codes of almost all contemporarylegislation. Of no less significance are changes in the realm of ownership,such as the enactment of laws transferring private ownership to the state,and also those limiting income. Despite these not inconsiderable developmentsin the history of economics, the problem still fundamentally exists, eventhough it has been made less severe than in past centuries through improvements,refinements and developments that have brought many benefits to the workers.

However, the economic problem still persists unsolvedin the world. Attempts aimed at ownership have failed to solve the problemsof producers. They are still wage-earners, despite the state ownership whichmay vary from the extreme right to the extreme left to the centre of the politicalspectrum.

Attempts to improve wages were equally significantto those that were aimed at the transferral of ownership. In the wake of theIndustrial Revolution, benefits from wage negotiations secured for workerscertain privileges that were guaranteed by legislation and protected by tradeunions, thus improving the lot of the workers. As time passed, workers, technicians,and administrators have acquired certain rights which were previously unattainable.However, in reality, the economic problem still exists.

Attempts that were aimed at wages were contrivedand reformative, and have failed to provide a solution. They were more ofa charity than a recognition of the rights of the workers. Why do workersreceive wages? Because they carry out a production process for the benefitof others who hire them to produce a certain product. In this case, they donot consume what they produce; rather, they are compelled to concede theirproduct for wages. Hence, the sound rule: those who produce consume. Wage-earners,however improved their wages may be, are a type of slave.

Wage-earners are but slaves to the masters whohire them. They are temporary slaves, and their slavery lasts as long as theywork for wages from employers, be they individuals or the state. The workers'relationship to the owner or the productive establishment, and to their owninterests, is similar under all prevailing conditions in the world today,regardless of whether ownership is right or left. Even publicly-owned establishmentsgive workers wages as well as other social benefits, similar to the charityendowed by the rich owners of economic establishments upon those who workfor them.

Unlike the privately-owned establishment whereincome benefits the owner, the claim that the income from the public-ownedestablishment benefits all of the society, including the workers, is trueonly if we take into consideration the general welfare of the society andnot the private well-being of the workers. Further, we would have to assumethat the political authority controlling ownership is that of all the people,practised through the Popular Conferences and People's Committees, and notthe authority of one class, one party, several parties, one sect, tribe, family,individual, or any form of representative authority. Failing this, what isreceived directly by the workers with respect to their own interests, in theform of wages, percentage of profits or social benefits, is the same as thatreceived by workers in a private corporation. In both instances, the producersare wage-earners, despite the difference in ownership. Thus, this change inownership has not solved the problem of the producer's right to benefit directlyfrom what he produces, and not through the society nor through wages. Theproof thereof is the fact that producers are still wage-earners despite thechange in this state of ownership.

The ultimate solution lies in abolishing the wage-system,emancipating people from its bondage and reverting to the natural laws whichdefined relationships before the emergence of classes, forms of governmentsand man-made laws. These natural rules are the only measures that ought togovern human relations.

These natural rules have produced natural socialismbased on equality among the components of economic production, and have maintainedpublic consumption almost equal to natural production among individuals. Theexploitation of man by man and the possession by some individuals of moreof the general wealth than their needs required is a manifest departure fromthe natural rule and the beginning of distortion and corruption in the lifeof the human community. It heralds the start of the exploitative society.

If we analyse the factors of economic productionfrom ancient times to the present, we always find that they essentially consistof certain basic production components, i.e., raw materials, means of production,and a producer. The natural rule of equality requires that each of these componentsreceives a share of this production. Because production cannot be achievedwithout the essential role of each of these components, it has to be equallydivided amongst them. The preponderance of one of them contravenes the naturalrule of equality and becomes an encroachment upon the others' rights. Thus,each must be awarded an equal share, regardless of the number of componentsin the process of production. If the components are two, each receives halfof the production; if three, then one-third.

Applying this natural rule to both ancient andmodern situations, we arrive at the following. At the stage of manual production,the process of production resulted from raw material and a producer. Later,new means of production were added to the process. Animals, utilized as powerunits, constitute a good example. Gradually, machines replaced animals, typesand amounts of raw materials evolved from the simple and inexpensive to thevaluable and complex. Likewise, the unskilled workers became skilled workersand engineers; their former huge numbers dwindling to a few specialized technicians.

Despite the fact that components have qualitativelyand quantitatively changed, their essential role in production has remainedbasically unaltered. For example, iron ore, a component of both past and presentproduction, was manufactured primitively by iron smiths into knives, axes,spears, etc. The same iron ore is now manufactured by engineers and techniciansby means of smelting furnaces into all kinds of machines, engines and vehicles.The animal - horse, mule, camel, or the like - which was a component of production,has been replaced by factories and huge machines. Production, based upon primitivetools, is now founded upon sophisticated technical instruments. Despite thesetremendous changes, the components of natural production remain basicallythe same. This consistency inevitably necessitates returning to sound naturalrules to solve the economic problems that are the result of all previous historicalattempts to formulate solutions that ignore these rules.

All previous historical theories tackled the economicproblem either from the angle of ownership of any of the components of production,or from that of wages for production. They failed to solve the real problem;the problem of production itself. Thus, the most important characteristicof economic order prevailing in the world today is a wage system that deprivesthe workers of any right to the products being produced, be it for the societyor for a private establishment.

An industrial establishment is composed of materialfor production, machines and workers. Production is achieved by workers manufacturingmaterials and using machines. Thus, manufactured goods would not have beenready for use and consumption had they not gone through a production processrequiring raw materials, factories, and workers. Clearly, without basic rawmaterials, the factory cannot operate and without the factory, raw materialswill not be manufactured. Likewise, without producers, the factory comes toa halt. Thus, the three factors are equally essential to the process of production,and without them there can be no production. The absence of any one of thesecomponents cannot be replaced by the others. Therefore, the natural rule necessitateseach component receiving an equal share of the benefits of production. Itis not only the factory that is important, but those who consume its productionas well.

The same is applicable to agricultural productionprocesses resulting from only two components: man and land. The product mustbe divided equally into two shares congruent with the number of productioncomponents. Furthermore, if any additional mode, mechanical or otherwise isutilized in the process, production must be equally divided into three shares:the land, the farmer, and the means of production. Consequently, a socialistsystem emerges under which all production processes are governed by this naturalrule.

The producers are the workers; they are calledproducers because the terms "worker," "labourer," and "toiler" have becomeinvalid. The traditional definition is revised because workers are undergoingqualitative and quantitative changes. The working class is declining proportionatelyto the advancement of science and technology.

Tasks once performed by a number of workers arenow being carried out by a single machine. Operating a machine requires fewerworkers; this has brought about a quantitative change in the labour force,while the replacement of physical force by technical skill has resulted ina qualitative change in the labour force.

The labour force has become a component of theproduction process. As a result of technical advancement, multitudes of unskilledtoilers have been transformed into limited numbers of technicians, engineersand scientists. Consequently, trade unions will subsequently disappear andbe replaced by syndicates of engineers and technicians. Scientific advancementis an irreversible gain for humankind. Thanks to this process, illiteracywill be eliminated and unskilled workers will become a temporary phenomenondestined to gradual disappearance. However, even in this new environment,persons will always remain the basic component in the production process.

NEED

The freedom of a human being is lacking if hisor her needs are controlled by others, for need may lead to the enslavementof one person by another. Furthermore, exploitation is caused by need. Needis an intrinsic problem and conflict is initiated by the control of one'sneeds by another.

HOUSING

Housing is an essential need for both the individualand the family and should not be owned by others. Living in another's house,whether paying rent or not, compromises freedom. Attempts made by variouscountries to solve the housing problem did not provide a definite solutionbecause such attempts did not target the ultimate solution - the necessitythat people own their dwellings - but rather offered the reduction, increase,or standardization of rent, whether it went to privately or publicly-ownedenterprise. In a socialist society, no one, including society itself, hasthe right to control people's needs. No one has the right to acquire a houseadditional to his or her own dwelling and that of his or her heirs for thepurpose of renting it because this additional house is, in fact, a need ofsomeone else. Acquiring it for such a purpose is the beginning of controllingthe needs of others, and "in need freedom is latent".

INCOME

Income is an imperative need for man. In a socialistsociety, it should not be in the form of wages from any source or charityfrom any one. In this society, there are no wage-earners, but only partners.One's income is a private matter and should either be managed privately tomeet one's needs or be a share from a production process of which one is anessential component. It should not be a wage in return for production.

MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION

Transportation is also a necessity both to theindividual and to the family. It should not be owned by others. In a socialistsociety, no person or authority has the right to own a means of transportationfor the purpose of renting it, for this also means controlling the needs ofothers.

LAND

Land is the private property of none. Rather,everyone has the right to beneficially utilize it by working, farming or pasturingas long as he and his heirs live on it - to satisfy their needs, but withoutemploying others with or without a wage. If lands were privately owned, onlythe living would have a share in it.

Land is permanent, while those who benefit fromthe land undergo, in the course of time, changes in profession, capabilitiesand existence.

The aspiration of the new socialist society isto create a society which is happy because it is free. This can only be achievedby satisfying, man's material and spiritual needs, and that, in turn, comesabout through the liberation of these needs from the control of others. Satisfactionof these needs must be attained without exploiting or enslaving others; otherwise,the aspirations of the new socialist society are contradicted.

Thus, the citizen in this new society secureshis material needs either through self-employment, or by being a partner ina collectively-owned establishment, or by rendering public service to societywhich, in return, provides for his material needs.

Economic activity in the new socialist societyis a productive one aimed at the satisfaction of material needs. It is notan unproductive activity, nor one which seeks profit for surplus savings beyondthe satisfaction of such needs. This, according to the new socialist basis,is unacceptable. The legitimate purpose for private economic activities isonly to satisfy one's needs because the wealth of the world, as well as thatof each individual society, is finite at each stage. No one has the rightto undertake an economic activity whereby wealth exceeding the satisfactionof one's needs can be amassed. Such accumulations are, in fact, the deprivedright of others. One only has the right to save from his own production andnot by employing others, or to save at the expense of his or her own needsand not of others. If economic activity is allowed to extend beyond the satisfactionof needs, some will acquire more than required for their needs while otherswill be deprived. The savings which are in excess of one's needs are anotherperson's share of the wealth of society. Allowing private economic activityto amass wealth beyond the satisfaction of one's needs and employing othersto satisfy one's needs or beyond, or to secure savings, is the very essenceof exploitation.

Work for wages, in addition to being enslavementas previously mentioned, is void of incentives because the producer is a wage-earnerand not a partner. Self-employed persons are undoubtedly devoted to theirwork because from it they satisfy their material needs. Likewise, those whowork in a collective establishment are also devoted to their work becausethey are partners in it and they satisfy their material needs from the production.Whoever works for a wage, on the other hand, has little incentive to work.

Work for wages has failed to solve the problemof motivation for increasing and developing production. Whether it is a serviceor goods production, work for wages is continuously deteriorating becauseit is performed by unmotivated wage-earners.

EXAMPLES OF WAGE-LABOUR: FOR THE SOCIETY,FOR PRIVATE ENTERPRISE, AND SELF-EMPLOYMENT:

First example:

(a) A worker produces ten apples for society.The society gives him one apple for his production and it fully satisfieshis needs.

(b) A worker produces ten apples for society.The society gives him one apple for his production which does not satisfyhis needs.

Second example:

A worker produces ten apples for another personand gets wages less than the price of one apple.

Third example:

A worker produces ten apples for himself.

The conclusion:

In the first example (a), because the worker'swages are limited to one unit which satisfies his needs, he has no incentiveto increase his production. Thus, all the labour force that works for societyis psychologically apathetic.

(b) The worker has no incentive even to producebecause he cannot satisfy his needs from the wages. However, he continuesworking without any incentives because generally, like all members, he isforced to acquiesce to the working conditions of the society.

In the second example, the worker works basicallyto get wages and not to produce. Since his wages cannot satisfy his needs,the choices are either to look for another master to get a better price forhis work, or be forced, as a matter of survival, to remain where he is.

In the third example, the self-employed aloneis the one who produces eagerly and voluntarily.

In a socialist society, there is no possibilityfor private production to exceed the satisfaction of one's needs because satisfactionof needs at the expense or by means of others is not permitted. Moreover,socialist establishments operate only for the satisfaction of the needs ofsociety. Accordingly, the third example demonstrates the sound basis of itseconomic production.

However, in all instances, even the bad ones productionis associated with survival. The proof thereof is that, even though in capitalistsocieties production accumulates and expands in the hands of only a few ownerswho do not work but exploit the efforts of others, the toilers are still forcedto produce in order to survive. However, THE GREEN BOOK notonly solves the problem of material production but also prescribes a comprehensivesolution for the problems facing human societies so that individuals may betotally liberated, materially and spiritually, in order to attain their happiness.

Other examples:

If we assume that the wealth of a society is tenunits and its inhabitants are ten persons, then the share of each member isone-tenth of the total one unit per person. If some members of this societyget more than one unit each, then a certain number from the society get nothing.Their share of the wealth of their society has been acquired by others. Hence,the presence of rich and poor in an exploitative society. Let us also supposethat five members of that particular society each own two units. In such acase, half of the society is deprived of their rights to the wealth of theirsociety, for what should be theirs has been acquired by others.

If an individual of that society needs only oneof the units of the wealth of the society to satisfy his needs, then thosewho possess more than one unit are, in fact, seizing the rights of other membersof the society. Because the one unit is all that is required to satisfy theneeds of an individual, the additional units are acquired for the purposeof savings. This can only be achieved at the expense of the needs of others;the acquisition of others' share in this wealth. This is the reason behindthe existence of those who hoard and do not spend; those who save beyond thesatisfaction of their needs; and the existence of those who beg and are deprivedof their right to the wealth of the society and do not find enough to consume.Such is an act of plunder and theft, yet according to the unjust and exploitativerules governing such a society, it is legitimate and overt.

Any surplus beyond the satisfaction of needs shouldultimately belong to all members of society. Individuals, however, have aright to effect savings from the share allocated to their own needs sinceit is the amassing of wealth beyond the satisfaction of one's needs that isan encroachment upon public wealth.

The industrious and skilful in a society haveno right, as a result of this advantage, to take from the shares of others.They can use their talents to satisfy their own needs and save from thoseneeds. Like any other member of the society, the aged and the mentally andphysically disabled should have their fair share of the wealth of the society.

The wealth of a society may be likened to a supplyestablishment or a store providing a certain number of people with daily rationssatisfying their needs. Each person has a right to save from such provisionswhat he wants, i.e., to consume or save whatever portions of his share hedecides, utilizing his talents and skill for such purposes. However, thosewho use their talents to acquire excessively from the "supply establishment"are undoubtedly thieves. Therefore, those using their skill to acquire wealthexceeding the satisfaction of their needs are, in fact, infringing upon thepublic right, namely, the wealth of society which is like the store in thesaid example.

Disparity in the wealth of individuals in thenew socialist society is not tolerated, save for those rendering certain servicesto the society for which they are accorded an amount congruent with theirservices. Individual shares only differ relative to the amount of productionor public service rendered in excess.

Hence, human experiences through history haveproduced a new experiment in a unique attempt to culminate the struggle ofpersons to complete their freedom, to achieve happiness through satisfyingtheir needs, to ward off exploitation by others, to put an end to tyranny,and to find a method to distribute the wealth of the society equitably, withoutexploiting others or compromising their needs. It is the theory of the fulfilmentof needs for the emancipation of humanity.

The new socialist society is but a dialecticaloutcome of the unjust relationships prevailing in the world today. The newsocialist society will introduce the natural solution - privately-owned propertyto satisfy one's needs without exploitation, and collective property in whichthe producers are partners replacing private enterprise, which is based onthe production of others without recognizing their right to a just share ofthe product.

Whoever possesses the house in which you dwell,the vehicle in which you ride or the income on which you live, possesses yourfreedom, or part of it. Freedom is indivisible. For people to be happy, theymust be free, and to be free, they must possess the possibility of satisfyingtheir own needs. Whoever possesses the means of fulfilling your needs controlsor exploits you, and may enslave you despite any legislation to the contrary.

The material needs of people that are basic andpersonal start with food, housing, clothing and transport and must be regardedas private and sacred and their satisfaction should not depend on hire.

To satisfy these material needs through rent,gives the original owner the right to interfere in your personal life andto control your imperative needs, even if the original owner be the societyin general. The original owner can usurp your freedom and take away your happiness.The interference of the original owner may include repossessing your clothes,even leaving you naked on the street. Likewise, the owner of your means oftransportation may leave you stranded on the sidewalk, and the owner of yourhouse may make you homeless.

People's imperative needs cannot be regulatedby legal or administrative procedures. They must be fundamentally implantedinto the society in accordance with natural rules.

The aim of the socialist society is the happinessof the human being, which cannot be attained except by the establishment ofone's material, and spiritual freedom. The achievement of freedom dependson the private and sacred attainment of man's needs. One's needs should notbe under the domination of others and should not be subject to plunder byany source in society, otherwise one will live in insecurity. Deprivationof the means of fulfilment compromises freedom because, in attempting to satisfybasic needs, one would be subject to the interference of outside forces inone's basic interests.

The transformation of existing societies of wage-earnersinto those of partners is inevitable as a dialectical outcome of the contradictoryeconomic theories prevailing in the world today. It is also a dialecticaloutcome of the unjust relationship based on the wage system. None of theseissues have been resolved to date.

The antagonistic force of the trade unions inthe capitalist world is capable of replacing capitalistic wage societies bya society of partnerships. The possibility of a socialist revolution startsby producers taking over their share of the production. Consequently, theaims of the producers' strikes will change from demanding increases in wagesto controlling their share in production. Guided by THE GREEN BOOK, this will sooner or later take place. The final step is for thenew socialist society to reach a stage in which profit and money disappear.Society will become fully productive; the material needs of society will bemet. In this final stage, profit will disappear, as will the need for money.

The recognition of profit is an acknowledgmentof exploitation, for profit has no limit. Attempts so far to limit profitby various means have been reformative, not radical, intending to prohibitexploitation of man by man. The final solution lies in eradicating profit,but because profit is the dynamic force behind the economic process, eliminatingprofit is not a matter of decree but, rather, an outcome of the evolving socialistprocess. This solution can be attained when the material satisfaction of theneeds of society and its members is achieved. Work to increase profit willitself lead to its final eradication.

DOMESTIC SERVANTS

Domestic servants, paid or unpaid, are a typeof slave. Indeed, they are the slaves of the modern age.

Since the new socialist society is based on partnershipand not on a wage system, natural socialist rules do not apply to domesticservants because they render services rather than production. Services haveno tangible material product and cannot be divided into shares according tothe natural socialist rule.

Domestic servants have no alternative but to workfor wages, or even be unpaid in the worst of situations. As wage-earners area type of slave and their slavery exists as long as they work for wages, domesticservants, whose position is lower than that of wage-earners in economic establishmentsand corporations, have an even greater need to be emancipated from the societyof wage-labour and the society of slaves.

Domestic servants is a phenomenon that comes nextto slavery.

The Third Universal Theory heraldsemancipation from the fetters of injustice, despotism, exploitation, and economicand political hegemony, for the purpose of establishing a society of all thepeople where all are free and share equally in authority, wealth and arms.Freedom will then triumph definitively and universally.

THE GREEN BOOK thus defines thepath of liberation to masses of wage-earners and domestic servants in orderthat human beings may achieve freedom. The struggle to liberate domestic servantsfrom their status of slavery and to transform them into partners, where theirmaterial production can be divided into its necessary basic components, isan inevitable process. Households should be serviced by their habitants. Essentialhousehold services should not be performed by domestic servants, paid or unpaid,but by employees who can be promoted in rendering their services and can enjoysocial and material benefits as any other public employee would.

 

Return

Click here to discuss The Green Book!