Thanks for a hugely interesting and informative essay. That long quote from Z. was a revelation.

I am not a resident of Academia. My understanding of Hegel, such as it is, comes primarily from From Hegel to Existentialism (Robert C. Solomon: 1987) and Reason and Justice (Richard Dien Winfield: 1988).

If I may, I think what would be best for people psychologically--I know it did a world of good for me--is to get out of ourselves by focusing on (perceived) material existence, but beginning with the material fact that we humans are social beings: we live together in groups. Keeping that fact in the forefront of our conscious being is at a minimum a means to avoid getting lost in the infinite labyrinth of the subjective realm.

Living together in groups imposes a need for governance upon us. To remain wholly within material existence, and avoid the undelineated infinitude of immateriality, we need an ethic to govern governance that is wholly contained, both its determinant and its referents, within materiality.

According to Winfield, in Hegelian terms justice is "mutual respect among willing agents" (i.e., agents with wills--humans). Warren J. Samuels observed that we humans have no choice but to effect choices, i.e., choose among perceived alternatives and take action to bring that choice to fruition ["Welfare Economics, Property, and Power," Perspectives of Property, Gene Wunderlich and W. L. Gibson, eds. (1972)]. That makes choosing integral to being human. 'Real justice' becomes respecting one another's capacity to choose in effecting any choice. Whether we do that or not is reflected by our actions involving other people in effecting any choice. So the determinant of justice is that observation and its referents are those actions, keeping all of justice in material existence.

If curious, "Can't Get Any Simpler" is a "2 min read" here in Medium, with links to more about that approach to governance (with nothing I publish here behind the paywall--given what I would expect to receive for my efforts).