The Future of Economics: A Pyramid that “Must” be Reversed
Ylli Përmeti*
We continue to live in a world where governments, politics and universities base their life on “borrowing”, “belief” and “advertisements”; and No on “needs” and “rationality”. Governments around the world continue to keep their policies based on past philosophy; and such philosophy has in its core the “universalisation” of politics; and therefore such politics base their existence on monies that are produced through different sources. The first source therefore of creating money is a preliminary budget produced by a government; fiat monies that come from nowhere. Politicians around the world do not understand such an art and they are trapped in their monetary policies and in their desire to produce wealth through money. Such an art has a long history. For fiat money started to be considered commodities only then, when authorities pushed their people to use such a paper as commodity. I do not intend to give data in this text about the creation of money; such data has been illustrated in my second chapter of economics. In it, one can find, in detail, the creation of money; the detriment that the bankster’s monies are causing to our human consciousness; and the huge implications that our societies will confront in the future.
For it is not a simple game; it is a dangerous game that will push our governments to fight each-other in order to survive in an internationalised domain. Such domain is full in “money discussions” but not on proper economies; just as our money-whispers in our families. There is sure therefore that we confront two different domains in our effort to accumulate money: The domestic one and the internationalised one. The domestic one is characterised historically an organic economy; organic in the sense of being demythologised ― in some respects; and the internationalised is characterised inorganic; in the sense of becoming a very, very dangerous myth. It becomes a myth in human mind (consciousness) because no one can predict the progress of a country, government or of a company when an investment takes place. All these three domains operate the same: A country through its government issues bonds in order to stimulate the consumption; whereas, a company, issues shares in order to stimulate the people to buy their shares, so that, to invest somewhere in the economy. But no one of the buyers knows if such an investment would bring more money in their pocket. When someone find him/her self in such circumstances, such human being, becomes very nervous and self-destructive.
But politics, despite these conclusions, carries on keeping such beings in its web; nay, they even keep themselves in such circumstances! At first, it gives us the impression that humans are becoming more and more masochistic; in the sense of liking such pains, uncertainty and unsustainability. And at second, such phenomenon pushes our societies towards a “global government”, in which will be installed people that their practical wisdom will be inexistent and the “free power” of other human beings would be characterised as a substitute without any essential importance. Indeed, the last decade, our world has become accustomed to watch on TV-s news, our super-class that allegedly regulate the economy of the world, as if our economy were the wisdom of our super-class and not of our householding and of our own natural power. Such super-class discusses the establishment of a global currency as a compulsion that pushes our sovereign states ― which have been up to their neck in debt ― to become a tiny point on the surface of the planet earth. Consequently, if such an event occurs, as has been laid down by pseudo-philosophers of universal institutions, then, at this point, our world will become for the first time in human history a global dictatorship in which oligarchs will have all the power of humans on their shoulders and will start to play more dangerous games. Such games could be even mass extermination; of a species which could be considered by the super-class undesirable. Our world history has too many lessons to teach us about such powers; especially when it gets accumulated to a few or even to one hand. But despite this fact, there is a tendency to go towards a global currency which for such scholars is the ultimate solution of our economies of the world! Again, if such an event occurs, then the implications of applying such philosophy, which is grounded on three main blocks ― that is, transnational corporations, the transnational capitalist class and the culture-ideology of consumerism [1], will be too many.
First, ideologies and social theories are not possible to be realised in the social domain. Such evidence could be inferred easily by our traditional states which in order to keep the masses ― in order ― produced and applied different theories and ideologies. Second, if we acknowledge that the “traditional state” has failed then we can equally infer that the “global state” will surely fail with unpredictable results, since it will be based on money and not on proper commodities. Third, if we ignore ethnomethodolgies as a mean of producing wealth and sustainability then we can equally ignore the above main blocks.
On which bases then could one justify such a development? Unfortunately, there are not sound bases. This is because, our economies have been reversed and the pyramid of our global economy goes like this: (a) Money; (b) retail trading and (c) householding. In ancient societies, such pyramid was the opposite: Householding and retail trading were the means of producing wealth and the money (gold) used to be a mean of exchange not commodity. In time, because of the king’s manipulations such a precious metal started to be considered a commodity; and today we have our fiat money which is subject of two different schools ― Keynesian and Austrian ― who cannot offer anything sustainable in our economy: Both these economies are based on pure money and scholars of such schools are pre-determined to fail when they try to rationalise the system. Thus, the means of productions are the government’s fiat money not the labour class, as has been considered such a case in classical economics.
However, if we really want to change our world ― that world has to reverse the pyramid of our economics: (a) Housekeeping, which must establish its counterpart: The indispensible economy; (b) retail trading, which must establish a full rationality in order to know a priory the end of the production; and (c) getting rid of money [2].
[1]See, The Transnational Capitalist Class and the Discourse of Globalization, By Dr Leslie Sklair, Oxford University. Or, Governance of Supernationalism: Backing Multinationals Companies in Order to “Loot” Countries, from the second chapter: Beyond an Autonomic Democracy: Economics vs. Phronesis, p 80, on which you’ll find in detail our economics and e new plan of economics. www.phroneticanddemocracy.blogspot.com
[2]See for example, the Second Chapter of Phronetic and Demotic Manifesto, on which I elaborate in detail the impasses of the present economy and the steps of how to go from an economy based on money to an economy based on pure commodities.
Ylli Përmeti, is the author of the book “Demotic and Phronetic Manifesto”.
http://phroneticanddemocracy.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment