February 20th, 2018
Update: that economic system lack a macro factor in the sense of ‘evolution’ is possibly false but in any case I forgot to point out part of my argument, that economic systems have aggregate properties and dynamical ‘motions’, e.g. economic cycles, therefore our distinction of ‘system action’ and ‘free action’ would apply. But it is not clear that there is any process over the course of world history that directs economic systems…
We have explored the macro/micro distinction in several contexts in the process creating an ‘evolution’ category.
And then we noticed the obvious fact that economics has a similar distinction. But we warned that the economic context is somewhat different because it is not an evolutionary category. As far as we know, based on the evidence of history where economic systems are processes insider larger civilizations. (The idea of economic evolution can and has been proposed, again in a different sense). Ironically marx produced an evolutionary theory of economics in the way he distinguished a series of economic epochs. Such a system requires a kind of macro factor, but is there one?
We proposed an emergency solution to this failure of theory by suggesting that communism is about more than economics and that it can be a goal of free agents in history trying to produce ‘real democracy’. In that form it doesn’t require a fictitious macro factor.
So, we have:
macro/micro in evolutionary biology (speciation, adaptation?)
macro/micro in history (the eonic effect, a sequence of transitions, versus free agency, or system action/free action)
macro/micro in economics…But the case is different: economies are processes and not evolutionary in our sense. Note however the interesting way in which microeconomics is about ‘free agency’ in our sense, while macroeconomics still lacks an historical macro effect. Macroeconomics is really a special case of microeconomics in which free agents try to modify large scale economic systems.