The generally accepted theories of capitalism are in deep crisis: after centuries of debate, they still cannot tell us what capital is. Liberals and Marxists consider capital to be an economic entity, which they consider in universal units of "units of utility" (utils) and abstract labor, respectively. But these units are absolutely imaginary: they can neither be observed nor measured. And since liberalism and Marxism depend on these non-existent units, they are questioned. They cannot explain the most important thing - the process of capital accumulation. This crisis of theories is not accidental. We argue that capitalism is not a mode of production, but a mode of power, and each mode of power develops along with its dominant theories, dogmas and ideologies. Under capitalism, these theories and ideologies originally belonged to the study of political economy - the first mechanistic science of society. But as the capitalist regime of power continued to change, and the quantitative revolution made it more and more transparent, the power underlying capital became increasingly visible, and the science of political economy disintegrated. By the end of the nineteenth century, as dominant capital took command, political economy had split into two distinct spheres: economics and politics. And in the twentieth century, as the logic of capital's power permeated every corner of society, what remained of political economy was further fragmented into mutually distinct social sciences. The capital was completely monopolized by economists, leaving other scientists with virtually no say in the analysis of capital. And today, when the dominance of capital is almost universal, scientists in other areas of the social sciences find that they have no solid basis for explaining it. The theory of capital as power offers a single alternative to this gap. It argues that capital is not a narrow economic entity, but a symbolic quantification of power. Capital is not absolute, it is relative. It has little to do with “units of utility” (utils) or abstract labor and goes far beyond machines and production lines. In a broader sense, it represents the organized power of the dominant groups of capital to create their own order in society or re-create society (creorder of society). This point of view leads to a different cosmology of capitalism. She proposes a new theoretical framework for capital, based on the dual concepts of dominant capital and differential accumulation, a new concept of the state and a new history of the capitalist regime of power. It also introduces new empirical research methods—including new categories; new ways of thinking, relating and presenting data; new assessments and measurements; and, finally, the beginning of non-equilibrium disaggregate accounting, which reveals the conflict dynamics of society.