Dissonant Reality
There is a persistent belief among both scientists and non-scientists that good theories must be somehow beautiful or elegant or something similar, because reality itself is ultimately – in some relevant sense – harmonious; or in other words, that science must be beautiful/simple/elegant/etcera because the laws of nature are beautiful/simple/elegant/etcera. This belief is particularly influential in physics and mainstream economics (which likes to mimic physics or an image thereof as much as possible). Sabine Hossenfelder has written an interesting book about how this belief “leads physics astray” rather than that it provides useful guidance. For an illustration of how deep...
No Time for Utopia
Most political thought is “ideal theory”: its arguments are based on an idealized world in which important aspects of reality are abstracted away. Abstraction isn’t necessarily a bad thing – in the contrary, it is often necessary in science – but it isn’t self-evident that the results of abstractions and idealizations are (always) applicable to the real world, and if theory doesn’t descend from the ideal world to reality it turns into an intellectual game without practical relevance; or worse, as the case of neoclassical economics illustrates. In that case abstraction and idealization resulted in a “theory” that explains nothing,...
Rent, Debt, and Power
In 2009 Rolling Stone published an article by Matt Taibbi about Goldman Sachs. Taibbi writes: “The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.” The statement is rather unfair to vampire squids, but aside from that detail the characterization is quite appropriate and, moreover, equally applicable to the finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE) sector as a whole. In Killing the Host, Michael Hudson describes the FIRE sector as parasitic. He writes that “instead of creating a mutually beneficial symbiosis with...
On “Populism”
A decade ago or so, a “populist” was someone who appealed to the supposed reactionary underbelly of the common folk to win votes and/or influence. “Populists” were usually found on the right of the political spectrum, often even the extreme right. But things have changed and nowadays so-called “populist” movements and parties are often better described as leftist than as right wing (or as mixtures of left-wing and right-wing views). “Populism” and “populist” are usually terms of abuse: they express disapproval and disdain. What provokes this disapproval and disdain is that the alleged populist(s) crosses the boundaries of acceptable political...
Economics and Psychopathy
This is a lightly edited excerpt from my book/pamphlet The Hegemony of Psychopathy. * * * The reorientation of political ambitions after the Second World War from power and territory to wealth changed the relation between economics and the ruling elite. The “science” of economics, which already had been more influential and prestigious than any of the other social sciences, now gained an effective monopoly as the official supplier of government plans and policies, putting it in the center of power, and changing its status and what was (and is) expected of it. For one thing, politics demand(ed) “closure” —...
The Hegemony of Psychopathy (Excerpt)
This is an edited collection of excerpts from my book/pamphlet The Hegemony of Psychopathy that was just published. (It can be purchased in paperback or downloaded for free in PDF format at the publisher’s website.) * * * The Holocaust has received surprisingly little attention from social and political philosophers. This is surprising because the scale and extent of the atrocities involved in the Holocaust should be impossible to ignore. If we humans can do that, then that makes a difference — or should make a difference — for our beliefs about the ideal society, for example. At the very...
On Free Trade Ideology
According to conventional “wisdom” free trade leads to prosperity. Usually the idea is based on a version of David Ricardo’s (1817) theory of “comparative advantage” which is taught in most high-school economics classes. There is, however, a fundamental problem with that theory, as was shown by Frank Graham in 1923, and unfortunately that problem tends to be ignored. In the following, I will briefly summarize Ricardo’s theory and Graham’s correction thereof, and discuss why the latter is ignored and the effects and implications of that neglect. Ricardo’s model Assume a world with two countries, “country A” and “country B”, and...
Greece, Europe, and the Hegemony of Psychopathy
Question: Why can’t Greece repay its debts? Answer: Because its economy is in shambles. Question: Why is its economy so bad? Answer: Because the EU destroyed it. That’s the short answer. It’s not the answer you’ll read in most newspapers or hear on the TV – those will tell you that it’s all the Greeks’ own fault. Their incompetent politicians and low productivity are too blame, they’ll tell you, or something similar. While it is undoubtedly true that Greece – like most other countries, by the way – has had its share of incompetent politicians, the story the mainstream press...