Abstract

Thinkers of the 16th and 17th centuries, such as Domingo de Soto and Juan Caramuel, developed an ethical conception of value rooted in the common good, positing that any interaction between two parties is only just if there is an equality of risks. Given that this perspective lacked subsequent development, the present work formalizes Hispanic Social Justice (HSJ) to apply it to a contemporary context. Various dynamics of the Anglo-Saxon free market—including marketing, banking interests, social media, gender roles, pension systems, American historical narratives, child-rearing, labor exploitation, and warfare—are analyzed to demonstrate that in each case, the gain of one party is maximized through the covert capitalization of the risks and vulnerabilities of the other. From this analysis, three primary conclusions are derived: 1.- The risk asymmetry inherent in these dynamics renders the modern economic structure a fundamentally unjust system from the perspective of HSJ. 2.- The deliberate concealment of such risks allows for the reinterpretation of the dominant economic ethics as a Theory of Value Based on Implied Risk. 3.- In the absence of internal mechanisms that promote an equitable balance of risks, a reformulation of value is proposed in which maximum profit is aligned with risk equity.