Our proposed science of SORAnomics is based on a new paradigm that sees individual entities as naturally part of a larger group of entities which is usually call society. We see this society as a new kind of metaphysical organism that has its own dynamics which is different from the dynamics of the self.
A society of humans has different dynamics from a society of ants, just as a solo human is different from a solo ant. A human society in Saudi Arabia has different dynamics with a society in New York, but their core dynamics are the same.
This is opposite of the current paradigm that sees individuals in society as totally independent and completely self-based as in that of liberalism (which makes up Capitalism). It is also different from the paradigm of Communism which classifies people into static proletariat or bourgeoisie groups and communes.
Like Liberalism, our paradigm sees individuals in society as free, but unlike Liberalism, the interest of the whole society-organism is superior to the interest of the individual-organism. Like Communism, we believe that the interests of the Third Estate is superior, but unlike Communism, we do not believe that the existence of the individual-organism (who wants to be part of that society-organism) should be neglected.
The mother science of our paradigm is metaphysics, which was an expertise of Adam Smith in Theory of Moral Sentiments and David Hume in his Treatise of Human Nature. Smith says that the all classes in society have their role and no single class should be allowed to dominate. Even the sovereign comes from the aristocrats who must compete with each other according to the needs of the times. Also, a person should be free to change his class within society. If society were like a family (a family is a very common society-organism), then the aristocrats would be the parents and the children would be like the Third Estate. Some parents fight each other, while some are able to compromise peacefully. Some children grow up to be parents, just as people can grow from rags to riches quickly, so having static definitions in such cases would be improper.
Normally, this paradigm falls under ‘socialism’ which unfortunately, is ambiguous nowadays. For example, Venezuela’s system is said to be socialist but since they reject their capitalist class, then their idea is not compatible with ours.
Solution: Social Networkism
To introduce the idea of the society-organism which has its own dynamics, we use the name ‘social networkism’, which is associated more with Facebook than with Venezuela or the ‘Socialist Republic of Vietnam’ or the ‘Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.’
The dynamics of social networks match our paradigm very well — in it, people are free act within the group that they choose to belong to, but are bound by the rules of that group. It allows democracy with the confines of a republic. Metaphysically, individual minds agree to combine into a group mind to form a family, town, or tribe. That group mind then agrees to combine with other group minds to form a clan, metropolis, or nation respectively, until even those can combine to form a single mega-group mind that represents the human species. Note that this is true also for animal and plant minds.
Economic systems that use this paradigm can take advantage of ‘network effects’ to grow real value instead of the current system which grows value nominally through ‘fractional reserves’ or ‘leveraging’. The current system is inherently limited because it makes minds subservient to physical objects. For example in the current commercial system, you must wait for money before you can start a business. This then makes everyone subservient to those who have such money, causing the society-organism to be hindered by individual-organisms.
In Adam Smith’s system, moral sentiments* replace money and objects so that the society-organism can move forward even without money-objects. We can say that human moral sentiments is the glue that holds the human-society-organism together and also fuels it forward much faster than animal-society-organisms.
*Note: Social networks are just a secondary feature of our paradigm. The primary feature is actually morality (Adam Smith wrote Theory of Moral Sentiments before the Wealth of Nations and he considers it his greatest work). But as it seems that human selfishness makes people allergic to hearing moral rules, we choose to lay it aside for implementation in the future. (Also, the work and time needed to define our moral system is huge. As the new economic crisis is coming soon, it would be better to implement the system first and explain its nuts and bolts later)