If solutions to the problem of inequality are to be as radical as reality now demands, what is instead required is a reimagining of what would be involved comprehensively to tame capitalism through democratic means. This will involve much further development of the kind of plurality of institutional and policy proposals sketched by Meade, and will involve both the private and public – individual and collective – forms of capital predistribution that Meade advocated. Piketty, like Meade, sees the need (...) for both redistribution and predistribution, and both see that the institutional means necessary to create a more equal society will involve pursuing a plurality of parallel paths. It is closely in keeping with the spirit of Piketty’s Capital that the political and intellectual agenda ahead will be one that economics on its own cannot hope to encompass. It’s a vital agenda, with high stakes, and presents challenges to both academic researchers and political activists. On the success of this endeavour depends nothing less than the prospects for legitimate continuation of our economic system. (shrink)

Thomas Piketty’s evidence on wealth distribution trends in Capital in the Twenty- First Century shows that – contra his own interpretation – there has been little rise in wealth inequality in Europe and America since the 1970s. This article relates that finding to the other principal trends in Piketty’s analysis: the capital/national income ratio trend, the capital-labor split of total incomes and the income inequality trend. Given that wealth inequality is not rising markedly, what can we deduce about (...) the putative causes that might be operating upstream? Only the capital-labor split looks like a plausible explanation of the wealth inequality trend. (shrink)

Title: An Analysis of the Flaws of Democratic Elections Through the Lens of the Universal Formula -/- Author: Angelito Malicse -/- Abstract: This paper critically examines the structural and functional flaws in democratic electoral systems by applying the principles of the Universal Formula, a framework grounded in the natural law of balance, systems theory, and the law of karma. While democracy remains a celebrated political ideal, its electoral processes are often prone to systemic imbalances and inefficiencies. This analysis highlights the (...) root causes of electoral failure, identifies how such flaws generate long-term societal imbalances, and proposes a framework for correction based on natural law and system integrity. -/- 1. Introduction Democracy, especially in its electoral form, is widely upheld as the ideal political system for ensuring freedom, representation, and governance by the people. However, despite its ideals, democratic elections are susceptible to various structural flaws that often lead to societal dysfunction. This paper analyzes these flaws using the Universal Formula, a model that interprets human decision-making and collective behavior through the lens of natural law, systems thinking, and karmic cause and effect. -/- 2. The Universal Formula: A Conceptual Foundation -/- 2.1. Law of Karma (Cause and Effect in Systems) Derived from both philosophical and systems theory traditions, the law of karma in this framework refers to the predictable consequences of inputs and processes within any system. If the inputs are flawed or the process defective, the outcomes will inevitably reflect those faults (Capra, 1996). -/- 2.2. Law of Feedback Mechanism All systems, particularly living and societal ones, must incorporate feedback loops to adapt and maintain equilibrium (Wiener, 1948). In elections, feedback should ideally correct errors and refine governance. However, when distorted or ignored, feedback becomes noise, not guidance. -/- 2.3. Law of Balance in Nature Natural systems achieve sustainability through balance. When democratic systems become imbalanced due to misinformation, economic disparity, or structural corruption, they generate instability (Lovins et al., 2007). -/- 3. Structural Flaws in Electoral Democracy -/- 3.1. Representation Deficits Despite universal suffrage, electoral democracy often marginalizes minority groups, discourages dissent, and centralizes power in elites. This contradicts the law of karma, where distorted inputs yield ineffective governance (Dahl, 2000). -/- 3.2. Electoral Corruption and Manipulation Vote buying, disinformation, and election rigging are not mere anomalies but symptoms of a defective system. These practices compromise system integrity and result in long-term dysfunction (Schedler, 2002). -/- 3.3. Misinformation and Media Bias The role of media in shaping public opinion has become increasingly manipulative. When media serves corporate or political interests, feedback loops are hijacked, leading to public decision-making based on distorted realities (Herman & Chomsky, 1988). -/- 4. Feedback Mechanism Failures -/- 4.1. Delayed or Ignored Electoral Responses Election cycles often fail to respond quickly to urgent issues. Moreover, the elected are frequently unaccountable until the next cycle. This lag disrupts feedback mechanisms essential for adaptive governance (Ackerman, 2004). -/- 4.2. Voter Disillusionment When the public perceives their participation as ineffectual, civic engagement declines. The system then operates in an echo chamber, disconnected from its constituents (Putnam, 2000). -/- 5. Societal Imbalances Caused by Flawed Elections -/- 5.1. Economic Inequality Policies influenced by elite interests exacerbate wealth gaps, reinforcing imbalances incompatible with sustainable development (Piketty, 2014). -/- 5.2. Psychological Polarization Partisan systems encourage identity-based division, creating internal psychological imbalances that extend into society. This violates the natural law of harmony (Sunstein, 2009). -/- 5.3. Environmental Neglect Short-term political incentives discourage long-term environmental thinking, violating nature’s equilibrium and furthering ecological degradation (Oreskes & Conway, 2010). -/- 6. Case Study: The Philippines -/- 6.1. Political Dynasties and Patronage Despite constitutional constraints, political dynasties dominate, illustrating systemic failure in ensuring representative governance. The cause-effect dynamic here reveals how entrenched power structures corrupt outcomes (Coronel, 2007). -/- 6.2. Voter Vulnerability and Misinformation Low education levels and economic hardship leave voters vulnerable to manipulation. Without informed decision-making, the electorate becomes a defective input, creating cycles of poor governance. -/- 6.3. Institutional Weakness Regulatory bodies lack independence and strength, making it difficult to uphold electoral integrity and correct imbalances. -/- 7. Path Toward Reform Based on the Universal Formula -/- 7.1. Foundational Education Reform Incorporating systems thinking and natural law into early education can build a generation of informed, critical thinkers capable of balancing societal forces (Meadows, 2008). -/- 7.2. Electoral System Redesign Accountability, transparency, and participatory mechanisms must be built into electoral processes to ensure continuous feedback and integrity. -/- 7.3. Holistic Leadership Training Leaders must be trained not only in policy but in ethics, systems thinking, and ecological responsibility. -/- 8. Conclusion Democratic elections, though idealized, often operate within flawed systems that violate the principles of natural law. The Universal Formula provides a holistic analytical and corrective framework. To create a just and sustainable society, governance must be aligned with the law of karma, feedback, and balance. Only through foundational change in education, structure, and leadership can democratic systems evolve to serve all. -/- References: -/- Ackerman, B. (2004). The New Separation of Powers. Harvard Law Review. -/- Capra, F. (1996). The Web of Life. Anchor Books. -/- Coronel, S. (2007). The Rulemakers: How the Wealthy and Well-Born Dominate Congress. PCIJ. -/- Dahl, R. (2000). On Democracy. Yale University Press. -/- Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent. Pantheon Books. -/- Lovins, A. et al. (2007). Winning the Oil Endgame. Rocky Mountain Institute. -/- Meadows, D. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Chelsea Green Publishing. -/- Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of Doubt. Bloomsbury Press. -/- Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press. -/- Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster. -/- Schedler, A. (2002). The Menu of Manipulation. Journal of Democracy. -/- Sunstein, C. (2009). Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide. Oxford University Press. -/- Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics. MIT Press. -/- . (shrink)

Much of the recent discussion in progressive circles [e.g., Stiglitz; Galbraith; Piketty] has focused the obscene mal-distribution of wealth and income as if that was "the" problem in our economic system. And the proposed redistributive reforms have all stuck to that framing of the question. To put the question in historical perspective, one might note that there was a similar, if not more extreme, mal-distribution of wealth, income, and political power in the Antebellum system of slavery. Yet, it should (...) be obvious to modern eyes that redistributions in favor of the slaves, while leaving the institution of owning workers intact, would not address the root of the problem. The system of slavery was eventually abolished in favor of the system we have today which differs in two important respects: the workers are only rented, hired, or employed ; and the rental relationship between employer and employee is voluntary. Today, the root of the problem is the whole institution for the voluntary renting of human beings, the employment system itself, not the terms of the contract or the accumulated consequences in the form of the mal-distribution of income and wealth. (shrink)

Dans son plus récent ouvrage, Figures du communisme, l’économiste et philosophe Fréderic Lordon s’attaque au problème brûlant de la double crise, économique et environnementale, actuelle. Lordon désigne le coupable : le capitalisme, qui détruit la planète par son exploitation sans vergogne de la nature, et qui détruit la vie par son exploitation des êtres humains. Face à ce système mortifère, une sortie du capitalisme s’impose. Sortir du capitalisme, certes, mais pour le remplacer par quoi ? Lordon nous présente ici son (...) alternative. Contre le capitalisme destructeur de monde, Fréderic Lordon veut la figure du communisme. En s’inspirant des travaux de Bernard Friot, Lordon nous expose son idéal de société communiste : salaire à vie, garantie économique générale, abolition du marché et de la finance, réduction du travail et accès généralisé à la culture et à l’éducation. Il s’en prend également aux obstacles de la révolution communiste, qu’il s’agisse de la bourgeoisie, des grandes institutions financières, des banques, des multinationales, des médias, de l’État, de son armée et de sa police, mais aussi de ceux que Fréderic Lordon appelle « les scouts », les Piketty et consorts, qui espèrent sauver l’humanité et la planète tout en sauvant le capitalisme. Une critique sans concession d’une actualité brûlante. (shrink)

The rich have two defining capabilities: independence from and command over others. These make being wealthy very pleasant indeed, but they are also toxic to democracy. First, I analyse the mechanisms by which the presence of very wealthy individuals undermines the two pillars of liberal democracy, equality of citizenship and legitimate social choice. Second, I make a radical proposal. If we value the preservation of democracy we must limit the amount of wealth any individual can have and still be a (...) citizen of our polity. (shrink)