Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

R48G: the left finally wins the economic calculation debate…//archive: last and First Economies: economic calculation debates

July 28th, 2017 · No Comments

The economic calculation debate has lurked in the background as a confusion sowed in the ranks of the left, quite needlessly since in the end the radicals will carry the day:
new technologies will make planning a very viable option
the ‘last chance’ phase of planetary survival will make ‘efficient markets’ look like a parody
markets have shown themselves to be delusive ecological hallucinations far worse than anything in the socialist sphere

archive: Last and First Economies: economic calculation debates
December 26th, 2015 ·
I have ‘resumed’ (presumed) in Last and First Men a project to resurrect a neo-communinist/socialist perspective.

I am not naive, in fact, am a ‘virtuous’ theorist (eh?) in checking out the hard problem/problems: the calculation debate. I have Rivalry and Central Planning, by Don Lavoie (eighties or so) on my kindle app (smartphone), an attempt to make life hard all over again for socialist ‘naifs’, viz. challenges to challenges, i.e. Lange and Lerner’s challenge to Mises’ books in the early twenties. I can’t think of a more confusing debate requiring access to a university library, and some prep courses in economics which I never took. My current research method is credit card debt to buy books at Amazon, not bad. That won’t work with the calculation debate, although I have found a lot of the required books at Amazon, one for $0.01, a totally boring but useful text, The Theory of General Economic Equilibrium by R. Kuenne. But I see the handwriting on the wall: experts so named still control this discourse. Actually the internet is slowly, or rapidly, changing research possibilities. Nothing more than Wikipedia on this classic debate starts to warm up as indicating future research could be done online alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_calculation_debate
So I am not naive about socialism, but even a little research (I did a lot in the nineties before net happy days) suggests the Mises faction hasn’t won the debate. Clearly a top level view suggests the obvious: a balance of systems is always the case and movement toward a far higher degree of planning (whether market socilism or pure socialist planning) is safe from Von Mises et al. And in the long run a post-market social economics can’t be ruled out. If our situation is desperation confronting climate apocalypse, then the planned economy at its most grotesque ‘bolshevik borscht’ might prove inevitable.
The handwriting on the wall is that an inefficient economic system might have saved the ecology…
Here is the first paragraph from the foreword to Von Mises’ Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth, the classic blast over the bows in the era (1921) of the period of Bolshevik ‘war communism’.

The twentieth century has witnessed the beginning development, and end of the most tragic experiment, in human history: socialism. The experiment resulted in tremendous human losses, destruction of potentially rich economies, and colossal ecological disasters. The experiment has ended, but the devastation will affect the lives and health of generations to come.

Here is the same paragraph with /capitalism replacing /socialism

The twentieth century has witnessed the beginning development, and end of the most tragic experiment, in human history: capitalism. The experiment resulted in tremendous human losses, destruction of potentially rich economies, and colossal ecological disasters. The experiment [is about to end] has ended, but the devastation will affect the lives and health of generations to come.

We can see that at a point of desperation, back to the will, the old Von Mises arguments seem less compelling.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment