Economics is social science, not a science. It's essentially a study of behavior and its various indicators quantify past data, form graphs and indices etc but cannot predict the future. They merely establish trends. The human mind can use this data and, if applied in the right context, make a really good guess. I could make a very good case for this complexity being seen for more than the sum of its parts but I'm not going to do that here.
Instead I'll put forward that from the earliest days of clashing civilizations the way the world has worked has been by defining interests and identity (based on indoctrination or nationalism, perhaps even cultural, religious, racial and socio economic factors) and forming agendas. These agendas manifest by ambitions to either own or influence territory, resources, diplomacy, media and establish strategical advantage in order to gain control rather than have these elements fall under the control of competing parties.
The competition is historically undeniable.
This same control establishes who wins and who loses and in my view modern economics, finance and currency were systems more relevant regarding what happened after the victory to quantify the spoils and assimilate them into what you already have.
The competition is historically undeniable.
This same control establishes who wins and who loses and in my view modern economics, finance and currency were systems more relevant regarding what happened after the victory to quantify the spoils and assimilate them into what you already have.
Allow your economic institutions to fall under predatory influence from within and Introduce your economic practices into the fabric of world affairs as a global market parading as a free market working on your currency and your banking practices and you can instead use economics rather in a precursory fashion instead, as a FORM OF WAR, to sometimes avoid the battles even, and that is what my next post is about and it will make clear where my last few posts have been heading.