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.
2. On macroeconomics and microeconomics – in an objective and considerate way
2.1. Target macroeconomic parameters and the macrolevel managerial tasks
By we mean the range of aggregate products, services and industrial outputs for each item of the range, in accordance with which one kind of products or services differs from the others.
Alongside the manufacturing spectrum some other kinds of spectrum can be used, such as needs spectrum, needs spectrum, consumption spectrum, etc.
The needs that the production and distribution in a society are supposed to meet, are conditioned by morals as such, and by cultural traditions, which have imprinted the morals of the past generations and the trend of morals changes for several generations.
Among the whole set of needs there are some, whose satisfaction causes direct or indirect damage to the consumers, to their human environment, to their descendants and the biosphere as a whole. There are some wants, satisfaction of which only obtain such a quality when the industrial output and the (individual and aggregate, regional, or in the society) demand rate exceed some critical values. The above needs generate the degradation-parasite spectrum of production and consumption.
There are the other wants, whose satisfaction does not cause the consequences mentioned above, at least, when the (personal and aggregate) consumption exceeds a certain minimum value, corresponding to the level of demographically sufficient production and consumption. Those needs represent a fraction of the demographically defined production and consumption spectrum.
The fundamental difference between the demographically defined spectrum and degradation-parasite one is the following:
the demographically defined needs spectrum can be predicted in terms of range and volumes for several future decades to come; the accuracy and details of such a forecast are quite sufficient to prepare the productive forces of the society in advance for its guaranteed and total satisfaction .
This predictability is rooted in the differentiation and limitation of population group needs by such criteria as sex, age, household lifestyle, the demographic pyramid dynamics and cultural traditions, which express the adjustment of the population to living in local natural and geographical conditions. Herein, the publicly secure growth of the population forming the demographic pyramid, is limited by the biocenose stability in the areas populated by locals when it comes to succession of the spices of organisms forming the biocenoses, which imposes one more set of limitations on the demography determined needs spectrum.
the degradation-parasite needs spectrum does not allow to predict the range, volumes or terms of the beginning precisely. This is one of the reasons why the society is unable to satisfy it under any circumstances.
Wants separation into the two mutually exclusive types of spectrum is not pure imagination, it is not an example of subjectivism or voluntarism; whenever the degradation-parasite spectrum needs are satisfied, it inevitably leads to a biological degradation of the nation and the environment, which in turn, causes the decline in the culture of the society. Degradation-parasite spectrum can be indicated by means of statistical analysis of such connections as ‘a piece of ‘wants Ю the consequences of production caused by the needs and the consequences of their satisfaction’.
From what we have said follows that:
sociology is to constantly identify the degradation-parasite spectrum conformably to its changes in particular circumstances; and it has to develop a system of standards of consumption and production sufficiency all over the demographically dependent demand spectrum.
the state is obliged to root out (by means of 1st – 6th priority management tools) the degradation-parasite demand spectrum up to its total disappearance, and it has to provide the guaranteed satisfaction of population needs all over the demographically dependent spectrum in the process of generation continuance.
Thus, system banking usury is not the only aspect of life that needs to be crashed and rooted out in order to normalize the life of the nation. However, neither ‘500 Days’ program (by G.A. Yavlinski &Co, which dates back to the perestroika йpoque), nor “Typhoon” project (designed in 2000), nor other ‘projects’ of economic ‘development’ of Russia say a single word about the whole complex.