History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

are there any competent economists…??/Neoliberalism From the Left

August 7th, 2018 · No Comments

We have tried many times here to warn leftists about the fallacies of neo-liberal economics, a subject not addressed by figures such as marx.
The basic fallacy is that differential equations can work with economies the way they do with physics. Wrong, over and out. In fact, there is no real ‘theory’ when it comes to economic systems. The whole idea of marginalism (which in and of itself may or may not be a useful idea, there are books on the subject that aren’t even about economics) is confusing the whole subject and should be set aside for still another way to consider ‘value’. A close look shows that economic equations are fakes, a notable example being the preposterous lagrangian with a marginalist add on. Rubbish, but naive students think they are being presented hard science. The old fashioned labor theory of value, if taken critically, can be used as simply a useful tool, within limits but the hopeless confusion created by marx et al. suggests bypassing the concept. A subjective idea of value without theory, i.e. that labor corresponds to a core portion of value, is both less prone to theory bombing, and intuitively useful. If anyone can really figure the marginalist version, let him…no, don’t listen without caution…
Clearly the core concepts of economics are flawed. We may be able to simulate economies with computers, but the crown jewels of ‘economic laws’ has not been achieved, nor could it given the nature of free agents inside the system. (physics does not allow free agents to change the outcome of equations, while economic systems are nothing but that).
The idea of equilibrium has been exposed many times, but persists as the gemstone of the whole subject. The inspirational reciprocal curve of supply and demand is intuitive enough, but the passage to grand theory doesn’t seem to work.
We have pointed here to the dangers of theories in history and the social sciences, next to the fallacies of darwinism: please note that the whole academic community has been fooled by economic theory and by darwinism. You cannot trust these people. With darwinism they are either stupid, can’t understand statistics, or lied.
Tread with caution in the presence of ‘experts’ (pronounced ‘eck spurts’). The economic calculation debate has also confused many leftists who might tend to submit to economic theory and market ideology as a result, quite needlessly, but it is true that many marxists were blindsided by this set of sophistries. The issue is of interest, but it doesn’t constitute victory for the market mythology despite the apparent superiority to planning.

We have suggested ‘democratic market neo-communism’ as a hybrid where once a Commons is established markets can be a side angle to planned sectors (plus our third low threshold ‘anarchist’ sector).

Computational economics has suggested that the calculation debate can be bypassed. AI and the new varieties of compu-tech are making the Misean counterattack less than compelling.
The basic issue to to be wary of economists saying a certain system is inefficient (thus, socialism) and can’t be realized.
Economic systems are based on values, not equations. The basic value of a Commons of shared resources and social equality is one of axiomatics, not computational idiocy and economic theory. There is every possibility of versions of our DMNC producing robust economic systems: and they are overdetermined with many irons in the fire: planning, markets (in the context of a Commons), and a ragged open zone.
The obsession with markets is destroying a planet: we MUST ASAP find out way past their total domination, and idiotic misean ideology: as things stand now, we must destroy a planet because that is more efficient.
There is also a leftist legacy here, your move (leftist invented the equilibrium theory in the early 1900’s?), proceed with caution…: Functional Analysis, Optimization, and Mathematical Economics

Now, I hasten to add that neither economistic nor neoliberal leftism should be understood as left parties or politicians simply parroting the things economists say. But once left parties came to depend on economics, it did matter in a whole new way how economists saw things.

Source: Neoliberalism From the Left

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

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

Leave a Comment