I was going to write up a Wikipedia article, but apparently that already lost…

The New Definition Of Social Capitalism - The Ingenesist Project
(via Instapaper)

About 3 months ago, I received a cryptic email from what sounded like a 
war-weary Wikipedia Editor pinned down in the trenches by enemy cross-fire. His 
message was stark; Wikipedia will delete “Social Capitalism”, you are in the 
best position to save it”.

Since the dawn of Social Media, many people in the Social Capital domain, 
including myself, had been contributing references, material, ideas, and 
theoretical constructs to the doomed Wikipedia article in naive optimism that 
Social Capitalism may indeed be a new form of social organization. So, upon 
receiving the desperate plea from the front lines of Wikipedia D-day, I jumped 
in and submitted argument after argument to an already formidable defense 
deploring the powerful Wikipedia Editors to preserve the article, the idea, the 

But alas, we failed. Perhaps we did not have proper academic credentials. Maybe 
we were not widely cited by important people. Our oppressors eventually 
provided a weak explanation related to social systems and economics, etc., but 
in retrospect, I think the real problem was that we were trying to define 
something that did not yet exist despite nearly 30 million Google search 

I have to admit that I agree with the Wikipedia editors. In reviewing that 
experience recently, I turned to the definition for “Capitalism 
(disambiguation)” in Wikipedia:

Wikipedia defines Capitalism as an “economic and social system in which the 
means of production are privately controlled”.

Factors of Production (from classical economics) are presumed to be something 
like “land, labor, and capital”. Now, consider that modern day factors of 
production are increasingly cited as: “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, 
and Creative Capital” of people and their relationships. After all, these are 
the assets that are deployed in order to produce the proverbial “basket of 
goods” upon which most global currencies are compared.

This is not trivial. Since these modern factors of production exist between the 
ears of each individual person, they are, by definition “privately controlled” 
and readily exchanged for economic outcomes among people in social networks.

If the US Supreme Court agrees that corporations are people, then it is equally 
valid that people are corporations too. Taken together:

Social Capitalism refers to the economic and social system in which the means 
of production are social, creative, and intellectual assets.

However, (and a big however), in order for Social Capitalism to become the 
dominant form of social organization, quite literally, society must reorganize 
itself to account for exchange and trade of intangibles. Then, all the 
decentralized innovations that we call the “Social Capital Domain” can 
integrate, unify, and dominate. Everything will change.

Perhaps then we’ll finally have a Wikipedia article for Social Capitalism like 
those clear, present, and magnificently organized warriors behind such economic 
facts as Corporate Personhood.

Sent from my iPhone

Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to radicalcentrism+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to