I think it’s nonsense.
Economics is a very immature, that by accident of history has had an opportunity to replace property, law, reciprocity, and markets as the western means of government – because of the world wars, and the destruction of the traditional european order of small state monarchies with houses as markets for the commons, all under traditional common law of torts (reciprocity).
All immature sciences have been problematic due to human rush to judgement and over enthusiastic use of new insights to gain advantages over others. Marxism, scientific socialism, keynesian monetarism, feminism, postmodernism are all attempts to use the violence of government to extract from others by force as a means of circumventing traditional exchanges between the classes – producing predictable results.
Economics is repairable just as all sciences are repairable. Economics is rife with cherry-picking the way that social science is rife with attribution bias. ( see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases#Social_biases )
The Human desire that economic science advance their interests in politics is prohibitable.
But the MATERIAL differences between the genders, classes, and sub-races is not ‘fixable’, other than by small-state nationalism, because all the alternatives -searching for equality- eventually result in castes(hinduism/brazil) or imperial tribalism(islam). And they must. Because no polity can survive competition for leadership without dependence upon its upper classes.
So the problem was not economics, but the REPLACEMENT of rule of law, markets for exchanges of commons between the classes, with monopoly government using pseudoscientific methods of measurement to impose a war of transfers upon the classes – each of which rebels against it.
May 19, 2018 11:21am