Today, few if any Ph.D.s of economics know the history of their field. If they know a history, likely it is one produced of propaganda to support their current false paradigm, a paradigm that fails to describe the reality of trade. Trade, of course, is the purchase and sale of property in pursuit of profit, is the only activity that gives rise to an economy.
It's unlikely that Ph.D.s like Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen much less your local university department staffers would know the connection of Jacob Vanderlint, Dudley North, Aristotle and Socrates to trade if you were to mention those names to them.In an essay titled, On the Science of Economics and Its Relation to Free Exchange and Socialism, the brilliant banking lawyer Henry Dunning MacLeod gave a brief on the history of the academic field of economics, which all who care to reason about and discuss their lives and their government should know.
MacLeod begins to take down the myth of Adam Smith.
MacLeod reveals the Physiocrats as the founders of modern economics.
MacLeod connects liberty, which is freedom, or that realm where politicians are content to leave alone anyone. Said another way, liberty is the absence of law in the presence of government. And of course, where politicians make no law, there are no right and no corresponding duty.
Here, MacLeod reveals the connection between property, which always means the right of ownership and not what is owned, with liberty, which always means the absence of law in the presence of government.
MacLeod examines the doctrines of the Physiocrats.
MacLeod reveals what the ancients already knew.
MacLeod discusses the strange fallacy of money (coined metal by weight and fineness) as the only wealth.
MacLeod discusses what the Physiocrats had wrong.
MacLeod discusses the rise of Adam Smith.
MacLeod discusses the confusion Adam Smith expressed in his work.
MacLeod discusses the foolishness of J.B. Say, an early hero to those who claim to be adherents of the Austrian School of Neoclassical Economics, which was once known as the Psychology School, but as a school of neoclassical economics, its adherent fail to understand the reality of trade.
MacLeod exposes the foolishness of John Stuart Mill.
Suffice to say, in his day, academicians loathed Henry Dunning MacLeod precisely because the man revealed many expressed fallacies from which academicians of economics espoused their theories.
Today's academicians of economics have compounded their errors by building upon the cherry-picked false foundation of the Physiocrats, Smith, Ricardo, Say, Mill and others who came after and made more mistakes like Alfred Marshall, John Maynard Keynes, Paul Samuelson, and cast of other 20th century clowns. These days, jokers like Paul Krugman and Thomas Piketty preach the false doctrines of economics.
The basis of the academic field of economics is the pseudo-scientific concept of utility, a faux psychological phenomenon never proven. Thus, the entire field as it stands is bogus.
As I explained in WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE, the entirety of trade, or commerce, or real economics ties up with two words — property and profit. Without profit from effort, anyone would lack buying power to buy anything else. Without property, no one can trade.
Trade, or commerce, or real economics is about acquisition of rights to own stuff. No one can derive satisfaction until that one owns. All talk about pleasure, pain, satiation, utility and the like is irrelevant until acquisition.
All should reject contemporary economics. It's fake. All of its priests, ministers, and preachers are little better than self-deluded con men.
Gab It
