Some people really believe that the past somehow physically exists even if it's past. Like the universe has some kind of container where all its past states are stored. On the other hand, there are people who believe the future also physically exists. Again, like there is a container from which events are chosen when the future becomes the present.
But both seem implausible: why should there even be a container? Then there seemingly is a solution - presentism. Yet, if the universe is continuous and events happen continuously and even non-simultaneosly, the present also can hardly be defined. According to my view, there are only causes and effects. Causes themselves, of course, can be the effects of other events and the effects can be causes of other events as well. And according to this theory when people talk about something as the past (relative to the event), they are talking about the causes. When they talk about the future, they talk about the effects.
Also, according to this theory, retrocausality makes no sense, because cause is always past, and the future can't affect the past as an effect can't affect it's cause by definition.
Therefore, this theory stands in contrast with eternalism, growing block theory and presentism. Is this a form of relationism? If not, is it already a recognized view in philosophy? Or is it something new to philosophy?