Finding Economic Justice

Locke abandoned the Doctrine of Economic Justice and replaced it with an analysis of the conditions that yield the justice of property rights. To which Marx, the Socialists, (and their predecessors) retorted: let us rather analyze the injustices of property rights. These are the contours within which the legal, social, economic, and political discourse has been carried out during the last few centuries. We might get out of this chasm, through an analysis in three parts. In Part I, we outline three fundamental mistakes in Marx’s analysis; in Part II, we analyze the existence and conditions of economic rights as generators of just property rights; in Part III, we complete the Theory of Economic Justice by adding the plank of Participative Justice to the two traditional planks of Distributive Justice and Commutative Justice.

Four Economic Rights And Responsibilities

Tools to Make the Corporation – and Governments – Serve the Needs of Human Beings

This paper identifies four economic rights and corresponding economic responsibilities in accordance with the needs of the factors of production: land, labor, and capital distinguished between physical and financial capital. Economic rights are the creators of property rights and find their justification in corresponding economic responsibilities. The implementation of these four rights and responsibilities is ideally suited to make the corporation serve the interests of human beings. A brief discussion of the role of governments in achieving this goal is also presented.

An Overall View of Concordian Economics

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”
—Albert Einstein

You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”   — Buckminster Fuller

Where there is no vision, the people perish.”
— Proverbs 29:18

Concordian economics discloses the dynamic nature of economic systems.

To Unify Our Country – The Splendor of Interdependence

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” It will collapse.

It is no longer a question of words. We have reached the point at which, as Lewis Carroll recognized so long ago, we have become the Masters of Words. Words have the meaning we give them.

Take just the words “terrorist” and “patriot.” Apply them to the fact of the assault on the Capital on January 6 of last year. You will see that there is a precise reversal of meaning when used by the right or by the left of our political spectrum.

Worse. Each group has developed a detailed ideology to justify its positions; and each group maintains, with greater or lesser justification, that it is contemplating the truth.

Words can no longer unify our country.