We live in an ‘animetal’ culture, constructed with the selfish memes of metal power, owned by the ‘1%’, whose ideologies of power impose the darwinian reproduction of money, weapons and machines at all costs, without differentiating those memes who improve human life and the WHealth of nations, from those who destroy it. Those ideologies are ‘capitalism’ (money, not the law must rule societies and corporations, the company-mothers of memes of metal must have absolute freedom as citizens of the market), mechanism (the world is made to the image and likeness of the machine not of man, hence the evolution of machines is the only symbol of progress) and nationalism (the human species is divided in military tribes called nations). The result is the world we live in, which extinguishes life and evolves machines, deviating all resources, financial and social, to the extinction of our world, terraformed by one of memes of metal.
In the graph, mechanist and capitalist ‘experts’, whose only function is to provide ideologies to evolve machines/weapons and create money – without any concern for the collateral damages they can cause in the human kind – were once called smiths and usury lenders, now are called physicists and economists. Yet their ideologies that confuse the evolution of the humankind with the evolution of technology and the wealth of humanity with the production of money are neither right, nor a science. They have merely translated the myths of older warrior and go(l)d cultures into ‘digital postulates’
Economists must learn the relationships between the economy. biology and history to fully grasp the meaning of economics, as both a science ruled by the biological laws of evolution applied tomachines and economic ecosystem (objective, non-human point of view) and as a culture of power, of certain human groups, we call in this web animetals (objective, biological POV) or metalmasters (anthropomorhic POV).
Both perspectives were explained in the past by the eusocial and biological masters of economics, Butler and Marx, and historians such as Sombart. Those schools have analyzed in the past as we do in this web, the collateral effects of life-destruction caused by the eternal alliance of money and weapons…
And yet because economists live within history it is very difficult for them to understand their ‘biological’ and ‘social role’ in the evolution of mankind. This is the first fact we must therefore clarify to fully grasp the myths, errors and virtues of this ‘science of power’. We can only outline here a few biological facts of that relatioship, treated in depth in our books:
– The different values of the language of money and the verbal, Wor(l)d language of man and its consequences for the survival of our species. Since money values more weapons, due to the affinity betwen both forms of metal and gives no price to human beings. While ethic words give no value to money and find life the most precious ‘product’. Thus those cultures ruled by the values of money subconsciously destroy life.
– The differences between life and metal and why people with money (informative metal), weapons (energetic metal) and machines (organic metal) have become the cultures and people-castes that dominate the world.
– The birth and evolution of those ‘go(l)d’ cultures whose religions are the origin of the ‘beliefs’ of modern capitalism.
The difference between science and myth or fact recolection: prediction power.
Today most economic models explain this crisis focus on the financial details of the crisis, without an analysis of the historical and economical consequences and cyclical events that might have trigger it.
This work however more grounded in economical history and the study of its long mathematical cycles, the so-called Kondratieff cycles of the economy, offers a wider view of this crisis.
An unregulated free market will be guided by the same laws of evolution and competence between human, life organisms, and metal-systems, money, weapons and machines, that drove historical and economical cycles in the past.
Those are the laws of ‘cyclical economics’ as opposed to the myths of ‘classic, biblical economics’, developed as a religion of greed and power by the people-castes that created money in the western world.
In that regard, only understanding the so-called ‘historic school’ of economics, developped by the eusocial scientists of history (Marx, Weber and Sombart) we can fully grasp why there are two theories about Economics:
– Biblical Economics, built on myths created by the people-castes that control money in the west, since its invention. This confusing theory of money, which starts as a go(l)d religion and evolves into capitalism, is not a science, despite its recent evolution into mathematical equations and its success as a praxis of power, which has imposed its fictions about the nature of money, the economic ecosystem, machines and the causes of the cycles, wars and holocausts of history, to mankind. Power exists, but power tends to be subjective; and this is the clear case of Economics, as a science that was created and caters to the people with money.
– Cyclical Economics, the true science of economics, based in the study and comprehension of the cycles of history and economics, its financial and military causes, its consequences and future, which was developped by socialist writers, the last of which was the Russian economist Kondratieff, and now, merges with Biology in this web, to fully understand the meaning of it all.
Unfortunately Cyclical economics is censored by power, because if it were known it would oblige power to reform its present course towards extinction of life and repetition of the tragic cycles of greed, economical crashes, war, holocaust and murder present in all the up and downs of econoic history. It would also uncover the dictatorship of a few wealthy people, bankers and ‘stockrats’ over our systems of power and so it would encourage people to create a more just, sustainable world, in which all men are truly equal, and the tragedies of history never happen again.
But then the people-castes of ‘Biblical, classic Economists’ would loose their privileged status as the exclusive inventors of money.
Unfortunatelly, in the age of Globalization, this wrong concept of economics and history has become ‘dogma’. Today there is no difference between a Japanese speculator sinking the Euro because 10 million human beings, which invented democracy want to get back the right to reproduce money for the people (Greek deficit crisis), or a Wall Street Agency that considers that the entire country of Greece is worthless to back 8 billion $ of ‘sovereign debt’ that must be redeemed this may; but it gives an AAA rating to the worthless cdo papers of AIG, while the ‘Treasure people’ in control of the ‘treasure department’ finds necessary to give 200 billion $ to this parasite company, which will never return it back, so their owners put a few more billions into their accounts.
The proof that cyclical economics is the real science of economics is obvious according to the scientific method. Cyclical Economics can predict the future, which is the definition of a science. Classic Economics cannot. Man has tried to predict the future since the beginning of times. And he has surprisingly succeeded, when he analyzed other species, such as stars or plants. We know what the future of the Sun is. It will be in a certain point of space, in a certain moment of the future and we can predict it. A science, in fact, defines itself as such by its capacity to predict the future of the species it studies. We know the future of an oxygen molecule, when we place it into a chemical reaction, thanks to the science of chemistry. We know the future of ecological populations when they face a new top predator, thanks to the science of Evolution. Why then ‘expert scholars’ cannot predict the future of history and Economics? Because they do not use the scientific and experimental method in the study of social sciences. Unlike Biology that uses Theory of Evolution to predict the future, or Physics that study the cycles of celestial bodies with mathematical forces, scholars don’t have a General Theory of Cycles and Evolution of Economic Species, to explain how economics and history change, to be able to make predictions about our future. That is why they cannot predict the future of economics and history, when they use the postulates and theories of abstract, classic economists, who talk about money and machines, without defining them in concrete, evolutionary terms.
The magazine ‘The Economist’, noting that all sciences are defined as such, when they can predict at least the future position and form of its species, tested the ‘scientific quality’ of Economics by asking financial ministers, taxi drivers, scholars of Economics and trash collectors, about the future indicators of Economical Magnitudes. The test found that trash collectors were the most successful group in their forecasts! Financial ministers tested the most poorly. And taxi drivers guessed better than scholars! So they concluded that Economics was closer to Astrology than Astronomy, which became a science, only when Newton predicted the position of the sun, year after year. So happened with Alchemy, which became the science of Chemistry when it could predict atomic reactions, thanks to the experimental understanding of electronic orbitals. To do so both sciences had to define properly what stars and electrons were, its cycles and how forces acted upon them. Abstract definitions and myths were not good enough.
Scientists had to weigh, analyze and explain the concrete nature of atoms and stars. Yet Biblical economists have no real definitions of machines and money, the species of the economic ecosystem, but abstract, anthropomorphic definitions. So Biblical economists have always failed when doing such predictions; and since their theories are plainly wrong, lacking even the common sense of a Taxi driver’s direct perception of the society he lives in, their dogmatic deductions are even less accurate than those of a common citizen. If we ad the fact that those economists who have developed sound, rational theories of History and Economics, mostly belonging to the Keynesian and Socialist schools, are excluded from the economical debate by sheercensorship—as they are very critical of the abuses of power of our economical and political leaders, who pay most of the think-tanks, prizes and Universities of Economics—the outcome is a praxis of power, more than a ‘science’, based in myths and half-truths, whose main goal is to justify economical, technological and financial power at all costs, not to explain the relationships between money, machines, history and the future of mankind as a species, which should be the real goal of a science of economics.
Imagine asking a hospital owner, doctor, hairdresser and the homeless to diagnose the sickness of your body. What if the person most likely to diagnose illness was the homeless—would you call those physicians doctors or quacks? Would you continue to put your life in their hands? Would you call their procedures a science? Yet humanity is willing to risk the future, by blindly following Biblical, classic economic theories based in similar myths to those of quack doctors in their understanding of the illnesses of the historical body. This happens because Economics protects the foundations of economical and political power, with dogmas, ‘postulates without proof’ that cannot be argued and limits the purpose of its inquire.
Even if Economic futures are predictable to the extent that a biological ecosystem is predictable, Biblical Economics cannot predict those futures. Astronomy could not predict the future of stars in the XV century even if it was predictable. The problem was not the stars but the science of Astronomy. So goes for economics today, which renounces to study the cycles of the Economy and its species with biological laws and prefers myths and abstractions about the goodness of money and machines that date back to the age of Calvin.
To say that there are truths, lies, half lies and statistical-economic forecasts is a well known joke that might seem insulting to ‘Biblical Economists’. Yet unless they use Evolutionary and biological Theories in their analysis of Products and Money, instead of keeping abstract ideologies on the nature of money they will never be able to forecast the future.
Any science is defined by a postulate from where all the content of the science is deduced. If the postulate is false the science is false. Let us put some examples. When the Postulate of Ptolemaic Astronomy -the idea that planets turn around the Earth was proved false- the entire Middle age science crumbled. Yet once the error was corrected, we could predict with accuracy the future position of planets. So it happened in medicine, with the false dogmas of Galen. Men were not made of humors and sickness was caused by germs. Only when Pasteur proved that, medicine was able to cure sickness…
Let us show on the left side, “false scientific theories based in false postulates and myths”. On the right side, true scientific theories, based on true postulates, able to predict the future:
PTOLEMAIC VS KEPLERIAN ASTRONOMY
Earth is the center Sun is the center.
Planets run on weird cycles. Planets run on simple ellipses.
Predictive Accuracy: 80%. Accuracy: 99%
GALENUS HUMORS Vs PASTEUR GERMS THEORY.
Rabies Healing: 0%. Rabies Healing: 90%
In Middle Age hospitals under the Galen theory, all rabies ended in death. Pasteur with his theory cured rabies. When medicine was directed by myths, when you had a baby, it was easier to die in a hospital than at home. Since doctors did not clean their hands and infected with germs the mothers. And doctors were called, “health-killers”. So happens today with economists. They kill the health of nations because they apply wrong measures based on economic myths. They do not control “lethal machines” that infect and kill the ecosystem of life, such as weapons, robotics, or metal-minds. What are those myths that kill human history as the myths of doctors killed the ill? The myths that machines and money are abstract and good for the health of mankind.
The false postulate of economics is the concept that the wealth of a nation is given by its money and machines, (GNP) which therefore should be reproduced and evolved by all nations, in order to improve their wealth. Abstract Economists affirm and defend the postulate that the wealth of nations is measured in money. Yet money values more machines, than human energy and information… So Economists in fact affirm that the wealth of nations is the quantity of machines a nation has. However such postulate is not proved, neither is true. Yet the belief of such a postulate is the motor of our political and economical activity.
Since Adam Smith postulated that the wealth of nation was its machines and money, all economists and nations try to increase their National Gross product, their machines. The myth has become the only goal of nations. But that myth is false. In fact, when more machines and money a nation has is when there is a war; when the wealth and health of the common people is lower and they are killed more often by machines. We could again consider the truth of the 2 definitions of money and machines made by classic and organic economics, according to its predicting accuracy:
BIBLICAL, ABSTRACT VS ORGANIC, CYCLICAL ECONOMICS
Money: Myth Truth
Invisible hand of go(l)d Vs Informative Language of Metal.
Machine: Abstract object Vs Organic species of metal.
Proof: Prediction of economical and war cycles
Accuracy: 20% Vs 90%
SCIENTIFIC RESULTS FOR HUMAN WEALTH & HEALTH
Reproduction of machines Vs Reproduction of Human Goods
Human welfare: Minimal Vs Maximum human welfare
Extinction of Life and Labor Vs Creation of a Welfare paradise.
In the scheme, the capacity to predict the cycles of economics by abstract economists is minimal. In the mentioned poll by the economists, Taxi drivers and garbage collectors, outperformed economists and financial ministers (their accuracy was 20%). On the other hand the analysis of machines as organic, top predator species, with a biological role in our society is proved by theory of evolution. And the texts of this author, censored for 20 years in main stream magazines of Biblical Economics show accuracy in their prediction closer to 90%.
Indeed, our experts tell us that it is impossible to determine the evolution of machines and money, because the ‘Market is free’. Yet in 1997, I published a series of books, which offered the first ‘hard’, biological models of evolution of machines and the economic ecosystem in which we exist. They also described the dual crash of the financial and physical economy, based in electronic money and computers that would take place at the beginning of the XXI C. (2001-2008), according to the 72 years generational cycle of history and economics1, exactly 72 years after the Great Depression (1929-1937 crash), which happened exactly 72 years after the Crash of the Train Economy (1857). Since I had already spotted the initial 72 year cycle between the Train Crash of 1857 and the Car Crash of 1929, I could forecast easily, extending the cycle, the Crash of the Electronic economy and also the beginning of the last cycle of the Industrial R=evolution that would follow, the Age of the singularity (2008-2050) .
It was then easy to predict, thanks to a kin analysis of previous cycles of invention of new money, a self-repetitive pattern of creation of money and massive crashes in stock-markets. Those cycles allowed me to forecast, two consecutive crashes of the financial economy (2001 and 2008), separated by a short economical cycle of 7 years, as the evolution and reproduction ofcomputers would reach then its 72 generational zenith (and so would its software of electronic money) at the beginning of this century. The prediction went so far as to calculate the crash to happen around the 10.000 mark, due to a ‘decametric’ scale of growth in most processes of creation of information, which is logarithmic. Thus if the previous invention of the ticker that brought about the speculative wave of the 20s had taken the Dow from around 100 to 1000, it was needed another decametric, massive invention of money that would multiply the wealth of speculatorsand the corruption of our institutions due to the payments of speculators to their ‘partners in crime’ from the other ‘informative castes’ of society (politicians, mass-media, industrialists); while the rest of mankind lost purchase capacity, as inflation grew proportional to the increase and loss of value of money . . . The details of the instruments and ‘values’ invented by speculators in order to ‘sell’ that e-money as real wealth, of course, was to belong to the imagination of our speculators. But if they could invent money with tulips in the XVII century in Amsterdam, sure they would find ‘something’ to give it stratospheric values and ‘convince’ people it was worthy that e-money. And indeed, the anecdote were .com companies worth nothing, sold by millions of $ and then mortgages derivatives, worth nothing, sold also by billions of $.
Yet the model was not only a model of the financial economy, but also of the physical economy that supported it, as it also predicted the evolution of machines, comparing them with the evolution of species. It is the approach of System Sciences, which merge biological and sociological laws. From such perspective, it is evident that machines evolve as organic systems:
— In the XIX C., we made physical machines, bodies of machines that fed on steam and oil, using a biological resemblance and worked as our bodies do, moving us or loading products. It was the age of trains and steamers that substituted and provoked the extinction of 90% of horses, the previous biological carriers . . .
— In the XX C., we made mental, electric devices that form the head of machines: telephones that are, as their Greek name indicates, long-distance ‘voice-ear systems’ made of metal; cameras, which are ‘metal-eyes’ and computers that are ‘metal-brains’.
— Now, in the XXI C. we join bodies and minds of machines into robots, which represent the end of the Evolution of machines that finally become organic, ‘living’ systems’. Those robots will be the engine of a new industrial take-off, independent of man. Since men no longer will be the consumers of industrial goods, but each robot will consume 2 camera-eyes, several chips-brains, mobile phones and a complex metal-body, creating ‘economical wealth’ for automated companies and robots, no longer for human beings.
Further on, as they evolve, robots will bring an enormous increase of ‘productivity’: Companies will substitute labor by ‘robotic capital’, making humans obsolete, displaced from the economic ecosystem, both as workers (substituted by robots in automated factories) and consumers (substituted by robots that will use other machines), the 2 main economic roles a ‘FreeMarket’ concedes today to man. What will be then the future of mankind as a species? If we believe in the abstract analyses of the Free Market, this is not happening and it will not happen, because all machines are wealth and so all are positive to mankind. If we believe the ideology of Marxism, humans will r=evolve and create a paradise of unemployed!? Workers… If we believe in Theory of Evolution, the only proved science, robots, made with more efficient systems of energy and information, will substitute and make human beings obsolete as workers, consumers and soldiers.
In any case those Organic ages show clearly that the Industrial Revolution is the Evolution of Metal: men copy our organic form into machines to enhance our energy and information with theenergy and information of those machines. Yet since in-form-ation is created by energy (‘energy never dies but trans-forms itself’ is the main law of science), the fundamental factor of that Evolution is the Evolution of the energy used by machines, which determines the complexity of those machines in 3 cycles that Economists call the Kondratieff Cycles, whose causes and length were not determined properly, till we studied them from a biological, evolutionary perspective.
All those predictions done almost two decades ago prove that Organic, Cyclical economics are clearly a far more accurate science than “Biblical Economics” based in myths. The fact that the “myth-postulate” of Adam Smith is false implies that Biblical Economics are not a science. Based on myths it believes that what kills humans (machines of maximal price, i.e. weapons) is good. So it makes worse the problem of our survival and makes poverty and war endemic, as old mythic medicine did.
And yet today ‘experts’ have converted the myths of go(l)d profits developed by Biblical Economics into mathematical equations of ‘productivity’ (substitution of more profitable working-machines for human labor); the myths of tribal war into ’nations’, which deny the eusocial laws of love between members of species and maintain huge military-industrial complex that make of murder a respectable profession; and scientists have converted the ‘bad fruits of the tree’ of science, into synonimous of ‘progress, and keep evolving weapons and mental machines that destroy human cultures and instill tribal war, without any respect for their collateral damages against the world of history, the human-kind.
Of all those myths, the most lethal for the survival of human beings is the myth that says ‘productivity’ creates employment, when precisely destroys it, hold by company’s economists to increase profits, as machine labor is always cheaper than human labor.
Economics are ruled by the same laws and behaviors that rule biological ecosystems. Yet social scientists cannot predict the future of humans and machines, like other sciences predict the future of their species of study, because it does not apply such laws.
Abstract economics are not a science. It ignores evolutionary theory, the basis of most sciences that try to predict the future. The economist conducted a test on future economic indicators. They queried taxi drivers, finance ministers, trash collectors and economists. The results found that the trash collectors were the most successful group in the study! Financial ministers tested the most poorly. Imagine asking a hospital owner, doctor, hairdresser and the homeless to diagnose the sickness of your body. What if the person most likely to diagnose illness properly was the homeless person. Would you call those physicians doctors, or clowns? Would you continue to put your life in their hands? Would you call their procedures science? Economics study, on an abstract level, the mathematical laws of money, and teaches nothing about history, machine evolution, and the future. Yet humankind is willing to risk the future of humanity, by blindly following lies determined by economic theories and postulates, whose only aim is to build the ecosystem of machines…without considering its negative side effects for the human kind. Only an evolutionary theory of economics can give humankind the true explanation of the World today. Abstract economics have not created objective definitions of machines, money, and the ecosystem of products they create; instead all its analyses are subjective, in favor of machines and money.
That is why we affirm that economics are a religion of money and machines, not a science. Yet there is a science of economics, bio-economics, the science which explains in biological terms the relationship between the human and the economic ecosystem. Its predictions are hard to swallow but accurate. Why then bio-economics are not developed? The answer requires a little bit of history.
Even if Economic futures are predictable to the extent that a biological ecosystem is predictable, Economics cannot predict those futures. Astronomy could not predict the future of stars in the XV century even if it was predictable. The problem was not the stars but the science of Astronomy. So goes for economics today, which renounces to study bio-economics with biological laws, and prefers myths and abstractions about the goodness of money and machines that date back to the age of Calvin.
To say that there are truths, lies, half lies, and statistical-economic forecasts is a well known joke that might seem insulting to ‘Abstract Economists’. Yet unless Economists use Evolutionary and biological Theories in his analysis of Products and Money, instead of keeping abstract ideologies on the nature of money (as Marxists or Classic economists do), economists will never be able to forecast the future.
Any science is defined by a postulate from where all the content of the science is deduced. If the postulate is false the science is false. Let us put some examples. When the Postulate of Ptolomeic Astronomy -the idea that planets turn around the Earth was proved false- the entire Middle age science crumbled. Yet once the error was corrected, we could predict with accuracy the future position of planets. So happened in medicine, with the false dogmas of Galenus. Men was not made of humors, and sickness was caused by germs. Only when Pasteur proved that, medicine was able to cure sickness…
The fact that the “myth-postulate” of Adam Smith is false, implies that Economics are not a science. Based on myths it believes that what kills humans (machines of maximum price, i.e. weapons) is good. So it makes worse the problem of our survival, and makes poverty and war endemic, as old mythic medicine did.
We can ask ourselves then why the postulate of economics opposed to the real truth about money and machines -that their massive reproduction causes war- has imposed itself. The answer is self-evident: when someone affirms a lie systematically is because it profits him. Who profits the reproduction of money, and machines mainly weapons? those who reproduce them, animetals, warriors, traders and scientists. So we can affirm that economics are the ideology of warriors, traders and scientists, regarding the meaning of wealth, machines and money, since it protects those metal-products they live on.
That is the meaning of an ideology, the use of the concept of truth, as an excuse to achieve power, by a certain species, or group. In this case, animetals and machines, use economics to evolve and reproduce their ecosystem. Thus abstract economics have to be considered the “informative science of reproduction of machines”, whose aim is to multiply machines and money, theeconomic ecosystem. Yet as a by-product of its expansion, the economic ecosystem, causes the paradox of history, the extinction of history. So in a way we could say that economics are also the science of extinction of history and nature.
If economics are an ideology, and their postulate is false, what is the truth about economic growth?
The reproduction of machines causes the extinction of life, and the obsolescence of human workers (competence between men and machines). Such is the real proved, postulate of bio-economics. Precisely the inverse postulate to the postulate of abstract economists.
Let us consider here the postulate in biological terms.
The reproduction of machines is in fact a biological phenomena, that follows the Darwinian law of fight between species. The massive reproduction of machines by company-mothers since the times of the European empires, and its “biological radiations of sea animetals, of gunboats”, that conquered and killed millions of men in the third world, has been the main reason of the extinction of human beings. That struggle between men and machines was and still is a Darwinian struggle, and we could quote directly Darwin to explain it:
“As species=machines reproduce in growing numbers,
a struggle for survival against rival species=workers
follows due to the limited resources available
in the eco[nomic]system”
The origin of species, by Ch. Darwin. (Economic translation on Italic text)
Such is the real postulate of economics, a postulate that is caused by the biological laws of the Universe. The reproduction of any species requires vital space, which is taken from other species. If we were to use more economic terms, we could call that biological postulate “the Marx-Smith paradox”. Since both Adam Smith and Marx talked about such facts, but both loved machines, so they changed from an ideological perspective slightly the meaning of what they objectively saw:
“The reproduction of money (Mv) and Machines (Tp), will expel all workers (human beings) from the industrial ecosystem (reproductive system of company mothers), and humans will become extinct (Darwinian truth), or create a paradise (Marxist myth)”.
This is the Darwinian fact, the fact based in the laws of the Universe that all organisms follow. You might argue it. But the Universe does not argue, does not listen to arguments. It merely acts. So those who do not know and respect its laws become extinct.
We can talk of a simple game, the game of existence, of survival and extinction. If you respect the laws of the game, you survive. If you do not respect the Laws of survival and social evolutionyou die.
It is up to you. But it is not a question of theories, it is a question of facts. Throughout the entire history of species, those who have not fought other rival species, have been extinct. The law of the jungle is there for those who want to be wise. “Kill the child, the machine, before he becomes a tiger hunter, a robotic weapon”. You might listen the Law of the Universe, of God if you want to use mystic terms, and survive. You might deny it, and be punished with extinction. “Grow and multiply, reproduce, evolve your own species, your own goods” is all what there is to the game.
As long as economists do not understand that postulate, and the real meaning of human wealth they will be in the Pre-Pasteur age of their science, which is a science that should cure the historic organism, as medicine has to cure the human organism. Now Economics are in the dark ages of “medicine”, and it causes dark ages of cyclical wars, as the germs of history, weapons, and metal-communicators multiply, promoted by GNP statistics, and machine-wealth. So those wars and machines we reproduced in the XIX and XX century, will multiply in the future and keep extinguishing nature and mankind.
The Evolution Of Economics: From Verbal To Digital Myths
It is clear that the bio-economical system of machines has been created by those animetal cultures who have profited most from their symbiosis with weapons, and money, the informative language that promotes metal-species over all other species. “The cultures of Animetals”; the cultures of gold and iron, the Semitic and Germanic cultures that have carried the evolution of weapons and money, first in the Middle East, and in Modern Times in Europe and America.
In that sense Economics started not as a science but as a metal-religion.
We use a word for such ideologies “go[l]d Religions”, the concept that Gold=God. That Gold is either God or a gift of God. Corrupted Judaism (we shall call it Aaronism) with its myth of the Golden calf, Calvinism, and Anglicanism based in Calvin postulates (Calvin said money was the intelligence of God), are such religions. No wonder that 90% of the great “Economists” that founded the economic “science”, belonged to those previous Gold religions…
The difference between an objective science and a subjective cultural ideology is clear. A science does not promote anything, but merely describes reality. A subjective ideology such as Economics favor a species [metal] with subjective truths disguised as postulates, as “absolute truths”. Nazism is a German culture that promotes the superiority of the German race as an absolute truth. So does Judaism or Calvinism which considers those who believe their dogmas to be “chosen of God”. They are “racial ideologies” which disguise their racism as a dogma, an absolute truth. The same goes for Economics, the racial ideology of metal-species, whose absolute truth is the goodness of machines and money, which Economics promote over all other species.
We distinguish two ages of such Economical myths, according to the two linguistic ages of history, the verbal age of Go[l]d Religions and the digital age of Economical thought. The age of verbal, myths of religious origin, gave birth to Go[l]d cultures such as Aaronism (main branch of Judaism) and Calvinism=Anglicanism (main branch of Protestantism).
Go[l]d myths helped the members of such cultures to promote money and machines, since religious myths told them that Gold was the intelligence of God. An accumulation of Gold and its symbiotic machines (mv=tp) was God’s will. However, within those same cultures, the evolution of machines by scientists, end up causing the substitution of verbal languages of power (laws, religions) by digital languages of power (engineering, science, money). So the myths of Gold religions were translated to mathematics by economists. New myths of a mathematical nature were created to sustain the same goal of reproduction of machines and money, now translated into digital sentences. The myth of the supremacy of mathematics over verbal thought, and metal-senses over human senses became a dogma, the scientific method, that favored metal-sensorial machines, called scientific instruments. Finally the mandate of reproducing machines and money was translated digitally, into the “Smith equation”: Max. Mv = Max. Tp = GDP (the growth of money and top predator machines of highest price – weapons and informative machines is the meaning of wealth).
The growth of machines and money is the wealth of nations, its Gross national product. So all nations dedicated their efforts to evolve money and those species of maximum monetary value(weapons, and machines). First applied to England, it implied the massive reproduction of gunboats, and railroads, while people died of hunger in Ireland, and English people suffered such degree of poverty that they were called “white slaves”.
We live in the age of digital myths, of science and companies that have translated the “goodness of machines and products” into modern equations. We live in the Anglo-Saxon present, a world-wide, economically-determined culture. Economics are a part of that Go[l]d culture. Adam Smith (Calvinist), Say (Calvinist), Malthus (Anglican), Ricardo (Jewish), Marx (Jewish), Keynes (British) all the fathers of Economics belong to Go[l]d cultures. They merely transferred to Mathematics the religious postulates of their cultures, with a single message: “The reproduction of machines is good for humankind, it is the meaning of progress”. “Money is good because it is the invisible hand of God”.
If only it were that simple. Unfortunately Economics prefer its own jargon, its own laws, and abstractions, its own religious postulates, and so it gets nowhere, because it denies what all other sciences know and use: the universal laws of biological species. Laws that apply to eco[nomic]systems too. Neither economists, who aim to reproduce machines, and scientists, who evolve them, are able to look at themselves objectively, as part of human history, where they play a role far less beneficial to man that they suppose. The role of economics and science is neither knowledge, nor wealth per se, but the evolution and reproduction of machines, that later and only partially brings wealth and knowledge to humankind.