engelsk ekstrakt af riskær pedersen,klaus (2014) 'socialkapitalisme' (tiderne skifter)

Extracts from: Riskær Pedersen, Klaus (2014), Social Capitalism (Publisher: Tiderne Skifter).

Chapter 1Why does the market economy not work?

[The expression “out of sync” comes from the world of music, and describes a situation, in which the image and the

sound are not coordinated. And that is a perfect description of people’s experience, when they are given the notion of

one single reality, only to realise subsequently that something quite different has been at work. The liberal market eco -

nomy does not follow its score, which is why it suddenly plays out of tune.]

[The past ten years’ experience of the liberal market economy further suggests that market forces do not merely act as

an “amplifier” of progress, but sadly also serve as an “amplifier” of recession. Something would seem to imply that, as

time goes on, the liberal market economy is developing processes and customs, which run counter to that very market

economy.]

[Any structure, which predictably - simply by virtue of its own existence - causes its own partial dissolution and anni -

hilation, can only be regarded as a flawed structure. In the nature of things, it does not prevent parts of the structure

from being efficient and durable, but given the design flaws in its overall construction, the need for improvement must

be evident. ]

[We are thus confronted with the fact that there are certain tasks, which the market economy - left to itself - cannot

tackle and fulfil, something which the whole neo-liberal discourse has taken for granted, and which has designated the

market place as the focal point for much of the realpolitik conducted throughout the 80s, 90s and 00s. Incorrect use of

the market as a platform for transactions may cause significant loss to society (as we saw with the financial crisis) or

may lead to a situation where applications are not taken into account at all (as we have seen with medicine), or where

national states’ more altruistic goals are not reasonably satisfied (as we see with mineral resources).]

[That means that “the social aspect” (i.e. welfare) can be said to be in conflict with “the capital aspect (i.e. prosperity),

but with the result that ultimately it seems that “the social aspect” (society), ends up bearing the brunt, when tasks and

solutions taken over by the market economy are apparently not viable, and the bill has to be paid.]

[As I have implied with these introductory words, we are left with the increasingly strong impression that the market

economy - capitalism - cannot exist alone. We can also be very certain that the collective and social aspects - socialism

- cannot exist alone. On the other hand, we do not know whether by combining the capital approach - the market eco-

nomy - with the social approach - society’s collective interest - in a new and different way, we can possibly come up

with a new and partially, error-corrected version of the model, on which our socio-economics is based.

It is this very subject that this book is about]

Extracts from: Riskær Pedersen, Klaus (2014), Social Capitalism (Publisher: Tiderne Skifter) 1

Chapter 2What is social capitalism?

[I introduce a “social capitalist” middle ground: between the familiar social theme from the (typical) social-democratic

welfare state, on the one hand, (which we know in the Nordic region) and, on the other hand, the liberal economic capit -

alism, which is particularly associated with our understanding of the American economy.]

[We, therefore, predict that the population must establish cohesion in their way of acting, in which they consolidate

their various roles. As this influence expands, both the economic space and society’s political institutions will be sub -

ject to organic and peaceful transformation, which will lead to a situation, in which the capitalistic market economy and

the socio-economics of which it is a part, will mutate into a cohesive entity, which will subsequently lead to a better

connection between political wishes and demands, on one hand, and the activities of the corporate world, on the other.

This democratisation of the economy is spread and, therefore, distributed (from the bottom up) as opposed to centralised

(from the top down). This changes the fundamental purpose and operating conditions for large parts of the economy and

the institutional political system. A weakening of top-down management, a change of priorities, a review of objectives

and new influence groups will combine to create a development that gradually and almost imperceptibly, will take place

over a long time.]

[The social component of social capitalism

“Social” should be understood as the collective interests of the whole: altruism and conscientious morality. Everything

that is important for our mutual interaction and the relationship between citizen and citizen, and how we want others to

be treated: everything that has to do with our collective conscience, our social morality and our view of life in the

broadest sense.

The capital element of social capitalism

“Capital” should thus be understood as the collective quality values built into the very objective of a post-capitalist eco -

nomy. The creation of prosperity (economic benefits for the individual) is replaced by the concept of welfare creation

(social value creation that has significance for everyone).]

[Overall, social capitalism acquires the following characteristics

Social capitalism is thus an improvement of the capitalist economy with new means. By balancing the driving forces be-

hind the market economy, and the introduction of a broader view of corporate value creation, social capitalism will

spread to all power bases in society, in order to safeguard a better cohesion between the objectives that are set and the

means that are used. The agents of change are the people themselves, who through coordination of their interests and in-

fluence across institutions and sectors of society, will establish a connection between the collective’s social ambitions,

on one hand (quality ideals), and overall socio-economic value creation, on the other (welfare expansion).]


Chapter 3Where will the changes come from?

[Social networks will exercise direct influence over elected politicians. This will change the basis of political institu -

tions, leading to the gradual emergence of a true network democracy and safeguarding a better balance between politics

and the will of the people.]

[With the reintroduction of direct democracy, politicians will receive their mandate from diverse, but convergent and

open attitude groups – which will constantly and continuously add legitimacy, force and effect to the policy making

process.]

[As more and more production becomes thereby integrated by global manufacturing companies (bypassing the market-

place), and as a result of the effects of distributed production (products created by consumers themselves), access to free

products in the network economy will be improved, forcing the usual marketplaces to become more competitive, trans -

parent and efficient, in order to adapt to a transformed regulatory and competitive landscape. The fact that the network

economy will act as a “competitor” to the familiar “market” is one component of the discourse that forms the basis of

social capitalism as a different structure from the one we know from the discourse that underlies the market economy.]

[Since any market is driven and controlled by the resources behind it (those which, for example, own the capital stock),

then the network economy’s challenge of the market place means that “capital” will undergo a transformation. The per-

ception of who owns capital, and who controls capital will, of course, change, if capital no longer has the same signific -

ance for the market, in which transactions are made, and is instead (or gradually) replaced by a new type of “market -

place”, which cannot be directly compared to the “liberal market model”. For that reason, transactions will already take

place without creating “ownership” of the result, and without having to pay a market price.]

[While the political system’s power practitioners (politicians, political leaders and special influence groups) by their

very nature are rooted in economic growth, market economy and profitability in the private sector, so the people them -

selves will focus differently and, in this context, set new goals, in which the conditions for growth will generate a situ -

ation, in which growth itself is reduced and the market economy is supplemented by competition from the network eco-

nomy, and companies’ results will turn towards value creation in a broader sense of the word. By “value creation”, in

this context, we mean the creation of value beyond bottom-line, financially based results. Value will be more than an

economic bottom line for the people who create the network democracy.]

[Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” is based on the premise that it is power struggles, which control the future. In

contrast, the premise of social capitalism is that a showdown will take place within civilisations with the centralised ex -

ercise of power (the political and economic power bases in society), but from the bottom up - on the shoulders of the

people.]


[It must be assumed that transparency and the expression of points of view, on one hand, combined with political re -

sponsibility and sanctions, on the other hand, will support the emergence of multi-faceted and diverse, two-sided polit -

ical platforms, with moderators and elected politicians on one side of the platform, and communicators and voters on

the other side1.]

[The release of information flow from one-way broadcast channels (politicians to the people) to two-sided network plat-

forms (now also including the people to politicians) will dilute the influence of political opinion formers, thus hamper-

ing politicians’ planning and management of the formation of political opinion in society. It will be more difficult to im-

pose on the general public an opinion they do not have.]

[However, the development that has already taken place, and where the socialist economy has been capitalised and the

capitalistic economy has been socialised, is very different from the social capitalist model structure by virtue of the fact

that a defining characteristic of both socialism and capitalism is that both models are based on a high degree of central -

ism. Since both the network economy and network democracy are “distributed” (decentralised), then social capitalism

will, as a matter of course, be de-centralised.]

Chapter 4Is social capitalism just old wine in a new bottle?

[Social capitalism cannot be ranked alongside the familiar middle ground, which we know from Nordic social demo-

cracy, because social capitalism will be a decentralised force, which cannot be managed from the top down, and will not

in itself contribute to the redistribution of wealth, but merely ensure that what wealth there is, will be used for a new,

and better purpose.]

[Where it took the better part of our intellectual history from ancient times to the 16th century to free the economy from

the nobility and aristocracy, it only took about 400 years to introduce a capitalist economy, which broke away from

feudalism, and then only a few more hundred years to replace the physical commodity economy with an economy

driven by - yes - the economy itself!

Now, almost 100 years after the last major paradigm shift, the question arises whether we are facing yet another

paradigm shift driven by competency development and a definition of democracy, which has its basis in the people

themselves.]

[It was in fact a staple priority for workers’ parties that as many people as possible should be ensured access to owning

their own homes. The adaptation of the tax system which thus took place, combined with improved access to housing

finance, along with labour and pension regulation, led to a situation, in which large sections of the working class, not

only were the owners of their own homes, but were also owners of pension capital. The working classes transformed

1Digital “double-sided transaction platforms” are described by Eisenmann, T et.al. (2006) ‘Strategies for Two-Sided Markets (Har-vard Business Review, October 2006 pp.31-53), but I have allowed myself to use the same technology in my assessment of the po-tential interaction between elected representatives and the electorate.


themselves into owners of capital, and Karl Marx’s distinction between “proletarian” and “capitalist” no longer made

any sense. ]

[But it is not only socialism that has been a victim of its own diagnosis. Capitalism was also subject to pretty significant

transformation during the same period.]

[Since the management teams of companies have also become increasingly more institutionalised as a result of co-op-

tion and the lack of direct ownership, the ultimate consequence is that companies and large parts of the corporate world

have been transferred to a form of institutionalised command and control, and thus key elements in relation to motiva-

tion and the impact of business decisions have been taken away from the decision-makers themselves.

The capacity to create innovation, to launch conflict-predisposed, creative destruction and to challenge the status quo is

weakened by the agents of change being forced to involve political considerations in the calculation of unintended con-

sequential loss. The consequence is the loss of dynamism and developmental ability.]

Chapter 5Why has the market economy lost its grip?

The network economy2 will be stimulated and propelled forward by the network democracy, as opposed to how things

are today - where you cannot talk about the market economy being an efficient tool for democracy. It is not often just

the opposite. It is the impending merger between the economic and political agendas, which together create new object-

ives for market generation and change the perception of what is meant by total value creation in the corporate world.]

[The reality, however, seems to have been that interference in, and abuse of market freedom have produced a situation,

in which the real economy has been the victim of artificial market volatility and speculation, to such an extent that the

very structure behind free market generation has been compromised as a result of the consequential loss suffered by so-

ciety as a whole.]

[The finance industry has virtualised the real economy in a synthetic parallel universe, which in size and efficiency has

led to a situation, in which it is the virtual economy that controls the real economy, and not the real economy that con -

trols the virtual.]

[Until applied citizenship and the network democracy have influence on the objectives of banks and financial institu-

tions, there will be a serious democratic deficit between society’s capacity to control markets, on the one hand, and mar-

ket participants’ self-interest, on the other hand.]

[The vast majority of these products and instruments are meaningful and understandable in their basic structure and pur-

pose... several of them are even important to the right economy’s opportunity to protect itself against market fluctu -

ations... but many of these financial service products are compromised due to their own use and the context, in which

2 Benklar, Yochai (2006): The Wealth of Networks (Yale University Press).Extracts from: Riskær Pedersen, Klaus (2014), Social Capitalism (Publisher: Tiderne Skifter)

5

they are embedded. Once a marketplace has become a caricature of the purpose it was intended to fulfil, it risks losing

its own raison d’être.]

[So the marketplace mutates to a global, 24-hour gaming table, with the limited purpose of assisting in the redistribution

of wealth within the financial sector itself, but as a casino economy in a giant zero-sum game minus transaction costs

and taxes (but which people can also avoid with great dexterity.]

[Over a longer period, the price formation in a market always finds its way back to the balance point, which is dictated

by the real economy, but the price fluctuations which are wrapped around the fundamental market needs, do not in

themselves produce any surplus value, since price fluctuations are irrelevant to efficient pricing and so just increase the

transaction costs of the market participants.]

[By devoting time and resources in this way to create cohesion between the network economy and the network demo-

cracy, the individual contributes to the creation of the “social capitalist” economy, which consequently can be viewed as

a natural further development of the market economy. You could say that “social” and “capital” thus come together un-

der a joint narrative and common objective, and supported by the people, who are the basis of both.]

Chapter 6How does network democracy come about?

[There are countless collapsed structures and systems, which are permitted to exist longer than they should. But when

politics loses connection with its own objective, then a critical mass needs to gather strength to enforce change and

transformation, so institutional politics is reorganised and everything is restarted on its original foundation. That is why

improper or inappropriate use of the institutions of democracy should be challenged by democracy itself, and this capa-

city is democracy’s finest test.]

[The structure of political parties and their achievement of a genuine contract policy with the elected officials, supports

a political top-down leadership of the party organisations, which in their tenacity, vigour and lack of compromise in re-

lation to elected politicians, compromises the legitimacy of representative government, whose basis consists of the elec-

ted officials always making decisions in accordance with their own beliefs and convictions. Equally importantly, no

elected representative, by definition, must receive orders in relation to his political decisions and the way, in which he

votes3.

By circuitous routes, the political parties end up replacing elected and direct democracy with a hybrid between a feudal

aristocracy (the power of the few without direct political legitimacy), and a merit-based oligarchy (the power of a self-

perpetuating elite). There is a reason why our constitutions did not foresee these structures: similar features have histor -

ically led to the collapse of the state and power system, and in these processes the people were the losers.

What was originally a practical organisation of parliamentary work has migrated into a situation where the political

parties has taken ownership of political mandates that - constitutionally - belongs to directly elected public representat -

ives. In other words, we have a state of conceptual degeneration.]

3 Provisions, which both figure in the Danish Constitution (1953) § 56.Extracts from: Riskær Pedersen, Klaus (2014), Social Capitalism (Publisher: Tiderne Skifter)

6

[Democratic changes take time, precisely because they are democratic. But changes are inevitable, because more and

more people feel that, in many areas, society interferes with their right to free elections.]

[The momentum created between the voter and the voted will force the individual politician to adapt to a changed polit-

ical landscape, where the mandate will be much more defined from the bottom up, instead of from the top down.]

[The enhanced social universe will thus mutate into a dynamic and efficient tool for direct democracy, and will, as the

network groups’ influence on political development increases and spreads, result in a reduction of the democratic defi-

cit.]

[We witnessed this in a number of southern European countries in the period 2011 to (provisionally) 2013, in the form

of political repercussions from the European public debt crisis. At the time of writing, approximately 25% of the parlia -

mentary basis for democracy has been temporarily paralysed by popular insurrection in Greece and Italy (with similar

trends in Spain and Portugal). But even in a country like France, extremist parties are gaining ground. Economic inter -

ventions, which are top-controlled, injunctions from supranational organisations (the rescue of “Wall Street”, but not of

“Main Street” etc.) all contribute to people’s frustration with their own political representatives.]

[Politicians no longer possess any monopoly on information or knowledge. Information and knowledge are distributed

and, therefore, accessible to anyone, allowing political competencies to evolve among all interested parties. Information

and knowledge are the most important preconditions for developing sustainable policy. Misinformation and a lack of

knowledge, on the other hand, are the surest preconditions for developing non-sustainable policy.]

[On the other side, we have the network-based society’s capacity to incorporate new knowledge and expertise, bolstered

by free access to a creative community (“creative commons”), a source of ideas and conclusions, which can create a

stronger political community (“political commons”4), which can establish an inclusive political process.]

[On the other hand, we may expect the distributed political innovation process, which network democracy results in, to

be more efficient, if we evaluate the potential on the basis of the knowledge we have on innovation elsewhere in soci -

ety. This quality, in turn, represents a strength, which more than compensates for the fear that some people have of a

popular inclination to be reluctant to change.

Whereas the institutionally-driven policy development we know from today has its roots in a rather Byzantine proced -

ural maze, open network groups and virtual meetings will support a faster consolidation of knowledge and insight,

while all decision-making information will be reality-checked for errors and vested interests.]

Chapter 7What role will the corporate world play?

[With the capitalist economy’s size and complexity (more and more is saved up for “speculation”) capitalism has

changed character from being a productive catalyst and accelerator for the real economy to being its trend-setting agent

of change. Free and fair, well-regulated markets, serve society well, while financial systems that have failed can trans-

4The term “political commons” is introduced here to create a natural transition from the concept of “creative commons”.Extracts from: Riskær Pedersen, Klaus (2014), Social Capitalism (Publisher: Tiderne Skifter)

7

form trivial problems in the real economy into serious problems for society as a whole. And it is here that a challenge

for capitalism lurks.]

[If there is no correlation between the objectives of the corporate world, on one hand, and the interests and objectives of

the people, on the other hand, there is a risk of an increase in a democratic deficit, in which “the 99%”5 perceive their

lives as disconnected and without resonance in an everyday life that is planned and produced by the “1%”.]

[The platform for strengthening shareholders’ influence will be network groups, who will establish direct influence on

pension companies and venture capital firms, who currently manage people’s pensions and savings.]

[Consequently, the right to vote will be disconnected from the actual investment, and exploitation will be designated to

the pension-savers themselves, who will then be able, among themselves, to coordinate their wishes with the manage-

ment of the companies, thus increasing their influence on the companies’ long-term objectives.]

[Right now the situation has become such that the pension and savings companies control ownership of the influential

businesses. Thus, about 70% of owner capital in the American S&P 500 share index (the 500 largest publicly traded

companies) is effectively controlled by professional asset managers, who represent other people’s actual ownership. A

similar trend applies to other stock exchanges.]

[The decisive political influence in companies is thus taken over by these venture capital institutions, who, in practice,

react passively to the operational situation of the individual companies, instead leaving it to the production management

and professional boards of directors to make the crucial decisions.]

[As productivity in society increases, more prosperity will still only be achievable through less freedom. But there is

also an opposite choice: safeguarding more freedom by accepting less prosperity. At this point some people will shake

their heads in the realisation that their fellow human beings will probably do anything they can for a more comfortable

existence. However, the reality is that, in line with a growth in prosperity, people must renounce even more of their

meagre freedom in order to safeguard a diminished growth in prosperity. Meanwhile, as a consequence, the opposite

situation will be that only a small decline in the sense of prosperity can contribute to a greatly enhanced sense of free-

dom. That is why the interchange between prosperity and freedom in the developed economies, is a trend that will only

be reinforced.]

[The emergence of the social capitalist economy, is partially the result of a growing collective recognition that quality

of life is improved, when society creates values other than those, which can only be measured and weighed. This will

be reflected in a growing political will among the people to relinquish further productivity gains and new prosperity,

and instead reduce the unintended consequential loss, which economic growth always inflicts on our living conditions

and, instead, strengthen the focus on welfare gains.

By exchanging the creation of prosperity with an improvement in welfare, it is the people, who will take on the role of

the dominant agent of socio-economic change, since improvements in productivity will be linked to the evaluation of

quality of life.]

5I refer of course to the United States’ “Occupy” movement (2011) and the Spanish “Los Indignaros” (2011) and their campaign rhetoric.


[Thus, the objectives of the social economy will be imposed on the established corporate world. As a result of a broadly

anchored shareholder activism, the objectives of companies will turn from producing exclusively “shareholder value” to

producing “stakeholder value” as well.]

[The rules that apply to one type of behaviour in the surroundings will rub off on other parts of the surroundings, where

the group behaviour is not changed by itself. The agent of change will be the active population, no longer the individual

entrepreneur with a good idea. It will take collective effort to ensure success and “time-to-market”, so the demand for

the benefits that can be achieved, access to the market and the advantages one can obtain will be subject to new stand -

ards and expectations. Whereas today, when creating new companies, people work with “financial engineering” in their

finances, the main task for a new generation of innovators will be to develop “social engineering” with the goal of creat-

ing marketplace and development height.]

[Turning the wealth pyramid6 on its head will lead to the social company, which in its basic construction will gain mo-

mentum from the non-profit motives in the social economy. When one refers to “non-profit” motives, one must under-

stand that companies as such are run on a “for-profit” basis, and are thus organised and planned in accordance with the

usual cost-effectiveness criteria, market generation etc.]

[The establishment of new core values in this type of company will lead to a new and more holistic understanding of the

socio-economic role and the place of the corporate world. Social enterprises will be an important part of the “social eco-

nomy” and will contribute to its development by pushing companies’ traditional boundaries. The sustainability of the

development will be due to the fact that the “for-profit” part of the objective will safeguard the normal operation within

the framework of normal cost-benefit philosophy, while altruistic motives will be extracted as a surplus disposal.]

[In order for the ultimate owners to exercise their influence, “network capitalism” will come into play as a counterpoint

to the control hitherto exercised by various kinds of professional - but non-political - financial administrators. These

changes will not only happen in relation to each listed company, but the many private shareholders will, in their concur -

rent capacity as voters, also be expected to pressure the political representatives to facilitate this transition.]

[The crucial thing about this social capitalist transformation is that, as such, there will be no change to the manner, in

which these companies are run and developed. The company’s core interests will not be compromised by involving so-

cial capitalist tools. The only change will be in how they dispose of their surplus, and consequently how they relate to

the build-up of capital that takes place, and which need not be earmarked for necessary investments in the company’s

area of business, The social capitalistic reorientation will relate solely to how they relate to the profits, and thus will not

constitute a limitation for the companies’ investments.]

Chapter 8How will the individual contribute to social capitalistic development?

6 Caroll’s “Wealth Creation Model” (wealth pyramid) considers profitability to be fundamental, and philanthropy and charity as a modest residual at the top of the pyramid. But Kang & Wood redesign the wealth pyramid by allowing morality to be the foundation of the sustainable “social company”, in which value creation is seen as more than just the measurable bottom line. Introductory work in this area includes Nicholls, Alex (2006): ‘Social Entrepreneurship’, an edited collection of articles (Oxford University Press). See also: Mawson, Andrew (2008): The Social Entrepreneur (Atlantic Books).


[It is seldom that we can organise our future as well as we want, because significant events in one’s life have a strange

knack of occurring almost by chance. So it becomes the capacity of seizing the opportunity, combined with the will and

the wisdom to exploit it, which allows each of us to position the fence posts that will form the framework for our own

identity. Life is tough in that it only takes one poor choice to wipe out all the other good choices you have made. It re-

quires talented circumspection to avoid mistakes, while any fool can live a happy life. It is a paradox that the good life

is less about the good choices one makes, and more about the bad choices one avoids.]

[One’s participation becomes pre-programmed and permits us handy “opt-outs”, so active participation is selective, and

participation necessary only if we want it. If we get disappointed, unhappy or uninterested, then we are rarely under

pressure to make a meaningful contribution, and for many people the natural reaction is just to “unsubscribe” from the

reality we do not like. We abandon the reality, which does not interest us, which is only possible because the reality is

virtual and has created a social environment, which is dominated by technology and digitisation.]

[The digital universe broadcasts synthetic experiences, thus helping to stimulate the maturity of the young generation,

who, for their part, become increasingly better at handling subtle and complex issues.]

[The comprehensive contact every which way in the social network - virtual or otherwise - enhances our sense of inde-

pendence and responsibility. It has already resulted in a situation, in which we react negatively and unsympathetically to

other people’s shirking of responsibility, while yielding to a passive compliance with the status quo is no longer con-

sidered to be acceptable behaviour in an age with intensified demands in terms of quality of life.]

[The culture of independence will influence the perception of citizenship and all it entails. The delegation of all de-

cisions to elected representatives, which, on the basis of their own assessment and decisions, affects all conditions, from

kindergartens and football clubs to water supply and the use of grant funds, will no longer be regarded as either desir-

able or viable. New friendships will occur between like-minded individuals and families, who via virtual or actual social

networks will exert influence on politicians through “applied citizenship”. The recognition of the value of applied cit-

izenship, and its use in the local community, will be the forerunner of the real network democracy.]

[As the population becomes increasingly influential, network groups will develop as natural agents for the group de-

mands, which will be raised against society’s political institutions.]

[Freedom and quality of life, on the one hand, and an attentive commitment to social conscience, on the other hand, will

thus be inseparable and will strengthen a society, which will reserve the right to freedom for the individual, but will as -

sume responsibility for the community.]

Chapter 9What is the moral basis for the social capitalist economy?

[But the democratic structure is fragile, if it is not built on a morally strong and powerful collective, who can protect the

community against the poor propensities of the human character. It is mankind’s basic disposition to be good. That is


what created civilisation. And it will be mankind’s capacity to maintain a clear conscience, which will safeguard the

continued survival of our civilisation.

Form and manner are just a means, and not an end in themselves. The objective is the future of humanity, and all states

and institutions are subject to that.]

[As the cleavage planes of modern democracy appear increasingly prominent, it seems that an increasing proportion of

the population have become overwhelmed by a sense of impotence. This compromises the very legitimacy of elected

government.]

[Some errors and breakdowns are to be expected in a society, which matures and evolves within its original structure,

but which apparently - in a kind of cyclical repetition - seems to reintroduce new aristocracies and feudal power struc -

tures to replace those that fall by the wayside.]

[But even states and societies must be subject to change, adaptation and reality checks, if they are to adapt to a reality,

which is constantly changing. But since that, which one consequently feels provoked to rebel against, in essence is a

product of one’s own empowerment, the immediate prerequisite for change will be an evaluation, and maybe a trans -

formation of one’s own points of view and habits.]

Chapter 10What is right or wrong, good or bad?

[The individual is directed by his/her understanding of moral obligations and his/her own conscience, which cannot be

invested with meaningful content without an understanding of the origin and background of the ideas, which created our

culture with its appurtenant values, belief system, customs etc.]

[Only by personally finding the delicate balance between our own expectations of personal freedom, on the one hand,

and the justified demands of those around us, on the other hand, can we safeguard our right to make demands on soci-

ety. A community is no more than, or different from the people who create it, and only by example is the credibility of

the people safeguarded as sovereign in the organisation of the state and the development of society.]

[To ignore restrictions and intensified demands for one’s doings leads to selfishness, greed and insensitivity. This risks

disqualifying us as a member of any community. Consequently, a society, which mainly represents selfish life values,

will implode, thereby losing its authority, since any democratic society is based on the will of the people, which is a

community quality.]

[Accepting that you can organise your lifestyle on the basis of a diverse mix of behaviour and priorities forces you to

make certain choices.]


engelsk ekstrakt af riskær pedersen,klaus (2014) 'socialkapitalisme' (tiderne skifter)

Government & Nonprofit