The theory of economics has been and remains one of the biggest mystifications of modern society. And yet it has almost no scientific status. Using the same theory figures like Lange showed how the net equivalent of a central system could guide an economy. But the fall of the original theory, which is news to most economists, told us to drop that claim. The whole game in reality is a parade of bogus theories. Therefore we can conclude nothing about socialism, planning, etc… It is important to note this: no theory, no proof of anything.
As a matter of fact we should consider subjective judgments on the issues of planning, but these have become so biased as to be suspect.
And we know one fact: under very stringent conditions to be sure, bolshevik russia, history has shown that a planned economy can function, not very well, but empirically demonstrating that a planned economy can function, industrialize, and show growth. This was under conditions of heavy industry and so it is claimed can’t be right for today. As usual assertions are made, without real proof.
The Mises/Ayn Rand fantasy world can’t determine these questions and we should also be wary of leftist assumptions. Leftists tend to not even discuss these issues, but that is a mistake. Here we have shown that in a few days work, using only the net, and no university library, and books available from Amazon, with credit card debt, the needed literature, or a start thereto, can be found and assessed. The fetish over markets here is obviously propaganda. We should study the Miseans, to be sure, but their view is seen to suffer severe limits. We can see that a new form of economy can be researched even by an amateur. This is important because the views of economists can’t be trusted. We must try to determine the issues ourselves.
Economics is unique in the way that very intelligent people come to understand a surface theory which they don’t know is bogus and yet don’t grasp economies very well at all.
And discussions of socialism’s flaws pass over the flaws in capitalism. The tyranny of bolshevism is endless trumpeted while the sufferings of billions, billions, is shunted aside because markets have been proven to be better than planning.
The real test is a form of capitalism that doesn’t suffer the faults its victim find all too obvious.
Let’s list the requirements:
full employment, if necessary via New Deal programs
full social services, medical, …
ability to function in the new challenge of no-growth constraints
no influence on government via organized bribery
a new form of democracy not controlled as above by corporate svengali…etc…
strong labor conditions
robust public sectors no subject to privatization predation
we now confronted with the issue of the limits of growth, another blow to capitalist thinking.
This is a short list.
Forgotten is that capitalism was a bargain with the devil to finance the fruition of a social democratic substitute for socialism. The system came close briefly but then its dynamics reversed and begins to destroy even this minimum. This is in fact a very strong plus for genuine socialism.
But champions of capitalism seem to think that capitalism at its most savage is condoned if we have produced a few quibbles on the issue of socialism…
The list above shows us that a reasonable system of social democracy is possible, and has been achieved more or less already, but the capitalist sector is unable to accept even the small doses of corrective.
And now we see that it is not only unable to show market feedback to the climate crisis, it is downright conspiratorial in its indifference to the future: present profits gave ‘license’ to corporate entities to sabotage corrective action.
We need to conclude something about the disastrous failures of capitalism..