Crime Against Humanity: Pensée Unique in Economics, 75

But now let’s get to the core, and once there let’s call things with their name.
Werner observes how “Neoclassical economics is built on the premise that individuals care most of all for themselves and act independently of each other. The state of happiness of one is assumed to have no impact on others. Social relationships and the desire of individuals to relate to others and receive respect within social groups are outside the neoclassical model. A growing group of economists, originating in France but quickly spreading across the world’s economics campuses, has thus argued that neoclassical economics is ‘autistic’ – as it has difficulties in recognizing that humans need to relate to others.”
As the hand operates the hammer, in observing the model we can see its originator reflected. So now let’s look directly up to the latter.
Autistic? A−social? Not quite. It’s far worse. It’s ANTI−social. As I previously said, to those who know how the true ethics of survival is just a tad different, this vision looks a bit weird, but to those who also know how a suppressive sees others, it looks less weird.
The same idea can be expressed in many ways; it is true that the expression reflects the understanding, but it is also true that then the expression influences the understanding. So I wish to contribute by calling things with their name so as to help lift the fog from them.
Here’s an example from Werner: “Instances of asset inflation are not welfare optimal. For one thing, it cannot be considered efficient nor equitable when new claims on finite resources are created by banks and then granted to a specific group of individuals who use them purely for speculative gain, without adding to productivity or output.”
Well, what about reformulating it like this? “It’s quite obviously no good for us all when suppressive criminals steal purchasing power from us by creating money out of nothing and then, moreover, using it to steal more purchasing power from us through pyramid schemes, without delivering anything good in exchange at all, and to the contrary suppressing production as well meanwhile. Let’s call this with its name: economic suppression.”