Ideology of Solidary Living Space –
"Planetary Lebensraum"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The path from a collectivist society to a society of individuals.
From the international and national doctrine of "living space" - lebensraum, which leads to the destructuring of global development, - to the competitive process "Contribution of Individuals, Nations and Countries to World Development" and to the international digital frame of global collaboration.
The main ideological principles of the new institutional frame "Contribution of Individuals, Nations and Countries to World Development", which provides multilateral collaboration and economic cooperation of individuals: https://www.c2n.biz/index_biz_new_ukr.php.
The frame of "social distance" and the free establishment of "polycentric market institutions".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solidary living space - "planetary lebensraum" is based on the principles of "digital individualism", which expands the economic space through: a new space-time continuum of the Internet; new institutions of "digital property" and "digital companies"; increasing the share of intangible assets in creating value added of goods and services, as well as through market mechanisms, which are based on the free establishment of "polycentric institutions" to solve urgent problems and ensure sustainable development.
The concept of "solidary living space" is the source of the scientific and philosophical work of the Ukrainian philosopher of the XVIII century Hryhoriy Skovoroda, the Austrian School of Economics, in particular the Nobel Prize winner F. Hayek ("Individualism and Economic Order"),
The concept of "vital space of solidarity" is the result source of the scientific achievements of Ukrainian philosopher Gregory Skovoroda (XVIII century), the Austrian Economic School, including Nobel Laureate Friedrich August von Hayek ("Individualism and Economic Order"), the works of the 2009 Nobel Prize winners Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson, as well as the results of experimental operation of the "digital institutional business platform", which was conducted in Ukraine and which involved multilateral cooperation of 25 thousand business entities in the digital space.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two problems of the beginning of the XXI century. Two hundred years ago, the "Monroe Doctrine" formed a rigid, pragmatic approach to international relations, which stood and stands on the position of defending its "living space" - lebensraum. To date, despite technological and societal advances, the world has in fact not reformed the paradigm of "living space" and made no progress in this direction, despite the globalization of social and individual relations and increasing global challenges and risks (climate, environmental, demographic). UN attempts to define Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that would unite humanity's efforts for a viable future run into the limitations of the Westphalian system of international relations, which prioritizes national interests. Mechanisms of multi-stakeholder cooperation in solving global issues of viability and development are currently lacking.
Another problem is that all the economic theories that have been the basis of our lives since the time of Jean-Jacques Rousseau not only "did not strengthen our power over events, but actually led us to a state of affairs that no one expected" when uncontrollable events have power over us. As example, pandemic COVID-19, which led to the total lockdown in the economy.
As a result, we are guided by a spontaneous, informal logic of events that we vainly try to ignore, thus deepening the funnel of the crisis. In turn, governments are widening this crisis with reforms of an outdated industrial system aimed at social, financial, and economic policies, without proposing a social philosophy for new development dynamics.
Interaction of individuals vs. collectivist forms of coercion. "From the eighteenth century and the revolution, as from a common source, two currents emerged: the first led people to free institutions, while the second directed them to absolute power" (Alexis de Tocqueville).
The logic of the "living space" lebensraum and our laws constantly forced us to collectivism, which embodied the "social machine of fear" and paved the way for uncertainty and loss of personal moral qualities of individual human capital, which were devalued by leaders from the devastating gray public.
Due to the current period of peak values of K-Waves, the theory of capitalism and socialism - as theories that in one way or another led to absolute power, have lost their significance. The world is moving to digital space with a different space-time continuum and a significant share of intangible assets in the creation of value added of goods and services.
There is a situation that again defines two ways, but for the development of the digital environment:
1. To act on the principle of "economy as the interaction of individuals" and their ability to freely create "polycentric institutions" of public life, where the principles of individualism, spontaneity, instincts and common sense form the mechanisms and laws of digital space "linking the internal parts of an action situation with external rules" (Elinor Ostrom).
2. To transfer this function to someone again, and those someone will create digital laws in the hierarchy of coercion at the national level, which will lead us again to defend our "living space" lebensraum. This path many experts consider dangerous, calling it a "digital concentration camp."
In the collective form of organization, violence and collective pressure are the only mechanism for maintaining the viability of the system. This mechanism, founded as a collective machine of fear, is essentially manifested in socialism. In turn, the hierarchical pressure of various forms of administrative verticals, aimed at compliance with the rules, achieves its goal through the mechanism of individual fear, which is used daily in corporate democracies.
The world needs a new ideological foundation of action, the foundation of social philosophy, which encompasses philosophy from international relations to the individual.
The search for such a philosophy leads to an understanding of:
1. the need to change international relations from defending its "living space" (lebensraum) on the "Contribution of Individuals, Nations and Countries to World Development" with appropriate ratings and socio-economic indicators, which eliminates the detrimental effects of K-Waves.
2. True individualism as the second fundamental social achievement of the XVIII century, the principles of which become the basis in today's digital space and the planetary format of economic development of mankind.
The combination of these paradigms is the basic foundation for determining the horizon of the future, new, trans-industrial world.
The competitive process in such a world is guided by the new comprehensive principle "Contribution of Individuals, Nations and Countries to World Development". In turn, the principles of individualism as a fundamental foundation of social life become the basis for the development of a philosophy that ensures planetary security and further democratic, social progress in the digital space of a new trans-industrial relations.
The free interaction of individuals within the new digital institutional frame leads to the free creation of a variety of “polycentric institutions” aimed at economic growth, job creation and a viable future. Such institutions can be created not only by some logical calculation, but also spontaneously and to a greater extent intuitively in the global digital community (E. Ostrom). Polycentric institutions are the social engines of creativity of individuals and an alternative to direct and impersonal coercion, which was the main driving force within the industrial development of mankind.
Digital interaction provides an opportunity in the new, virtual-accelerated digital time to conduct a social, natural selection of those institutions and those new principles and forms that contribute to further overall co-evolutionary development.
Individualism. Definition:
"True individualism is the individual influence on other people based on their expected behavior."
We use the term "digital individualism" in relation to the digital space, digital property, digital companies, which become the basis of global economic relations instead of the generally accepted global "energy resources", which was the material basis of collectivism in the era of industrialization.
We call true individualism democratic because it has formed democracy and in today's expanded sense of the term means: "the rights of one person, country must be limited by the rights of other people, countries and the rights of nature."
Principles of true (democratic) digital individualism, which are laid down in the project "Contribution of Individuals, Nations and Countries to World Development" as the basis of "solidary living space" - "lebensraum of planetary level":
1. Individualism itself shapes its own institutions, which arise without some pre-formed project. They arise in the process of the results of human activity. Forms of digital communities, institutions, as well as forms and institutions that have been created throughout the history of human activity, originate from instincts and reflexes, rather than reason and senses. The viability of institutions is defined as a three-dimensional, enclosed, coherent system that is homeomorphic to the space of activity of the institute. Such institutions are extremely difficult to destroy due to their natural origin, which ensures their digital and economic security. In turn, they may disappear in the process of natural selection.
2. Spontaneous collaboration of free people in the digital space makes real-world creations more majestic than the individual mind can fully achieve.
3. We can state the fact that most of the order in human affairs is an unpredictable result of individual actions. This is becoming one of the effective mechanisms of the digital space.
4. The main factor in the dynamics of individualism is self-love (not to be confused with egoism), which is a consequence of the instinct of self-preservation. The main thing is not to destroy or weaken self-love, which is essentially done by all rationalistic theories and authorities - from the democracy of ancient Greece to the present day, but to give it, in the digital space, such a direction that will promote public interest and public good within the achieving of his own interest.
5. Man is not a highly rational and infallible person - his mistakes are corrected during the social process. With digital interaction, this adjustment process is N times faster.
6. "Everything is created by an unreasonable man." This thesis is directly and clearly manifested in the digital space, when projects, that lie outside the rational logic and create new interpretations of reality, become successful.
7. What Man has created around us is not the result which is inherent to human genius. It is the result of time, accumulated experience, genesis of thought and external factors of human and natural activities. The same applies to digital space, but in a much accelerated dimension due to the significantly increased value of the inverse component of time - the speed of digital social processes.
8. Man has achieved everything impersonally, despite the fact that he is not only rationally "directed by the mind, which is extremely limited and imperfect", but more guided by irrationality, that together was adjusted by the public interest. In the digital space, such adjustment processes occur in a significantly accelerated dimension, which reduces the time for feedback to manage the implementation of personal and social needs of individuals.
9. Spontaneity of social processes, their development is hampered by the "social contract", which in essence puts under control the individuality in the prevailing direction to collectivism, and thus leads to illusory freedom. In the digital space, the principles of individualism operate, which makes it possible to create free institutions that adjust human activity not on the basis of coercion, but on the basis of digital orientation, which will promote the public interest within achieving the own personal interest.
10. If people are given freedom, they can achieve much more than the individual human mind or the artificial intelligence set up to control them. Such freedom is provided in the digital space through the principles of true individualism.
11. The force of circumstances to a greater extent forces a person to behave prudently and wisely in order to adapt his means to his purpose. In the digital economy, such a force of circumstance is the price mechanism and digital property, which, through the legal form of digital companies, stimulate every economic member of society to do what corresponds essentially to the public good.
12. The main thing is not what a person can achieve, but the most important thing is not to cause harm. Digital individualism is the order in which negative people are able to do the least evil. Such a social system does not need honest and decent people to run society and does not require people to become better or to create a class division with the hegemony of one class or party.
13. Digital individualism in different areas of responsibility should not be subordinated to the goal that can be set for it and which it must achieve. Nor should it take the form of the transfer of certain resources to it, which is also a compulsion to fulfill someone's goal.
14. Human behavior, which is predictable, will not reduce uncertainty. A real reduction in uncertainty is achieved by increasing individual knowledge, which, in turn, is shaped by digital resources, communications and actions. Never reduce uncertainty by preventing people from using new knowledge.
15. Digital individualism does not deny power and bureaucracy, but needs to limit them to those areas where they are needed to prevent violence, abuse and to implement the arbitration.
16. Democratic ideals come from the basic principles of individualism. Individualism argues that any government should be a democracy, but it has no superstitious reverence to the decisions of the majority, it seeks like-minded people with whom it forms its own digital polycentric institutions of the minority. This creates a competitive digital environment for achieving public goods.
17. Digital individualism is not anarchism or rule of the people, which profess the principles of collectivism and leads us to illusory freedom. This is a democracy based on the principles of individualism. These are social laws based on the principles of digital individualism. This is a new shape of capital and new economic relations in the modern trans-industrial era.
Individualism means the highest degree of responsibility of person to society and nature. Therefore, today's shift from collectivist forms of economy to the interaction of individuals means the transition from an industrial dualism "man - society" to the triad "man - nature - society", which is the basis of the new trans-industrial development. The format of this transition is represented by 17 Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the UN in 2015. Achieving these goals is possible by establishment of global institutions to manage multi-stakeholder cooperation within the growing economic diversity, complexity, uncertainty and singularity, as well as to ensure a new, viable future amid global planetary risks and threats (climate, environmental, demographic).
Economic growth requires a new conceptual model of development. The winner is the one who captures the future. The future can be captured only by new meanings that define goals, regulate relationships and generate productive activities.
Solidary living space is based on the institutionalization of relations between a wide range of legal entities, individuals and institutions by the deployment of an environment for the creation of "polycentric institutions" (E. Ostrom). This "ecosystem of institutions" regulates the growing diversity of relationships by digitally supporting interaction processes, as well as by digital fixation of projects, ideas, assets, transactions and communications within the achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals and moving towards a new, viable future.