THE SCHOOLS OF ECON, AND THE SCHOOL OF JEWISH ECONOMICS (can you say BAM!) (must

THE SCHOOLS OF ECON, AND THE SCHOOL OF JEWISH ECONOMICS

(can you say BAM!) (must read for austrian econ ppl)

RE: http://www.splicetoday.com/politics-and-media/bannon-is-right-about-austrian-economics

Dain.

Let me give you a little argumentative weaponry to use to further this idea:

1) I teach people this set of categories:

a) Austrian School: (Institutions: Political Economy) the application of the calculus to economics, and the use of that innovation to understand Social Science. The study of human relations so that we may improve institutions and reduce those frictions that impede cooperation. Assumption: we are ignorant.

(MONARCHY/ARISTOCRACY/CONSERVATISM)

b) Chicago (freshwater) School:(Rule of Law, with Monetary Economics) The search for formulae under which we can make use of fiat currency to prevent currency shortages that artificially raise interest rates, but do so within the limits of natural law (non-discretion) so that we interfere as little as possible in planning and organizing production distribution and trade while doing so. Assumption: we are ignorant but can insure against shocks. (MIDDLE CLASS/CLASSICAL LIBERALISM)

c) NewYork (Saltwater) School: (Discretionary Rule for the purpose of maximizing consumption). The search for the means of maximizing consumption by discretionary (non-rule-of-law) means. Assumptions: our ignorance is irrelevant since any interference in planning and damage in the medium and long term are offset by the good of increased consumption in the short term. (UNDERCLASS/GOSSIP-CLASS/LEFTISM)

2) Myth and Tradition, moral and norm, historical analogy, reason, rationalism, empirical science, and ‘complete’ science (a term which won’t make sense to you at present), describe a sequence of decidability of increasing precision that requires increasing information. When we possess less information than needed to say, make a scientific proposition, we can rely upon those less precise tools that precede it. Not doing so is called pseudoscience – a pretense. Conversely, relying upon rationalism when sufficient information to use science is available, doing so is called pseudo-rationalism. We must match the tool to the information available – or we are engaged in either fallacy, fraud, or deceit. An austrian (practitioner of social science) will suggest that if we lack the empirical means of decidability, then we must retreat to the rational means of decidability. And this is the honest, and truthful, and scientific thing to do. Attempting to make science fit insufficient information is just fraud. Nothing more.

AND ONE ARGUMENT YOU WON”T LIKE

3) You won’t like this, but so called austrian economics consists of two branches. Polish Austrian (christian), and Austrian-Occupied Ukrainian(jewish). Rothbard and Mises appropriated the term “Austrian” due to anti-semitic biases. Mises was from Ukraine (L’viv), and a jewish city (my current residence). Perhaps the most Jewish city before Israel. But Marginalism (Austrianism), is from Poland (Menger) and Vienna, and “Constructive Economics” (Jewish Economics), has nothing to do with Austrianism other than incorporating marginalism. Even so, Misesian and Rothbardian’s version of marginalism consists of ordered series, not networks (weighted sets). This difference (constructivism) and error (ordered lists) eradicates most of the importance of marginalism from Jewish Economics.

Third, and most damningly, Jewish Economics ignores the commons as well whereas the very purpose of Austrian economics is the improvement of the commons (institutions). So Austrian Economics proper and Jewish Economics proper, are fundamentally different systems of thought – and fourth, as a reflection of that, Mises’ Human Action, through at least chapter 5, is some of the most absurd pseudoscience ever penned by man.

Fifth, austrianism, except for the question of the business cycle, has been fully integrated into mainstream economics.

So the Mises institute continues this ‘terminological appropriation’ by rothbard and mises. It’s Jewish Economics, not Austrian economics, just as Liberalism was appropriated by the left from Classical Liberalism.

THEREFORE

So Economic School (“d”) is Jewish Economics: the search for justification of separatism by which we use pseudoscience, conflation, rational obscurantism, loading, and framing, and overloading, to attempt to construct a justification for parasitic subsistence of a separatist class upon a landed polity that pays the high cost of territorial, capital, cultural, institutional, and genetic monopoly.

What does all that mean: it means almost no one who works in the field economic philosophy (the search for methods of decidability in political economy), whether German Scientific, Anglo Rule of Law, Anglo-Jewish-Mainstream, or Jewish Economics has any idea what he or she is doing – or talking about – other than screwing around with how much lying we can get away with.

Hopefully this serves you.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev Ukraine.