Submitted by Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)
In many economic textbooks, the definition of economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources to satisfy human wants. For Adam Smith – one of the founders of economics – economics is “an inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations”. In some modern English dictionaries (the Oxford School Dictionary, the 5 edition) economics is described as the science of the production and distribution of wealth. In the Collins Students Dictionary for the Caribbean, economics is “the study of the production and consumption of goods and services ……..in a society.”
As for the PDC, economics is defined as the inverted political ideology, philosophy and psychology of the Caucasian man (the patriarchal Euro-centric man), and of which – because they are exclusively non-racial, non-class, non-sexual, non-religious, non-historical in their essential characters – have clearly been giving rise to specific sets of repeated changes in the forms of material beforehand, in whatever commercial, industrial, non-government settings; wherefore those reproductions are such that millions upon millions of people across the world must – through their own means – come by them, or have access to them, in order to live in this entire social world, and, as such, this compulsion comes through nothing but the said ideology, philosophy and psychology of the Caucasian man and by extension the political actions of this man consistent with them.
Now, what is the fundamental purpose of economics?
Well, one answer to this can be deduced from the earlier mentioned textbook definition of economics, and it is this, to satisfy human wants. It may even, as Adam Smith in the above definition suggested, be to increase the wealth of a particular nation. Anyhow for us – the PDC – the fundamental purpose of economics – ever since its coming into existence in the 18th century in Europe – is to continue helping the Caucasian man in his political oppression and exploitation of millions of his fellow Caucasian people, as well as to help do similarly to millions upon millions of non-Caucasian human beings across the world, so that in the final analysis he will continue to extract and accumulate and abundance of power, status, wealth and income over the said other human beings.
So, for modern day economists, how could some thing that exists only in the mind/at the level of the intellectual help to satisfy human wants? Through multifarious avenues!!! But, just two avenues though for now. Through the processes of the factors of production being put to use in innumerable ways in a given society, and, in response, those factors being rewarded in the said society; and, of course, through certain forces operating in that society, e.g. the demand for and supply of goods and services.
But, for us, how could economics help in the Caucasian man’s massive oppression and exploitation of so many millions of people across the world?
Well, given that all the economic textbooks that we have come across so far have failed to admit to that reality, we in the PDC and many others across the world and in Barbados must continue to lay bare some of the basic truths about the dangerous and hidden agenda behind this so-called economics.
The fact is that because economics does not have any instrumentation aspects (hence the real terminology being political economics), in the real world it has had to rely on a variety of political legal systems and approaches – of which political actors are a part of as well – to help achieve its intended effects.
So, from it being a discipline/a language taught in schools, in colleges and universities in this world, to its realizing the fundamental purpose for its existence – which is to – again – ensure that multitudes of people on this planet are made too fit into this Caucasian political economic world – it has had to have political (legal) implementation bases upon which to achieve its political objectives.
Without such political (legal) implementation bases it would simply have been categorized as a branch of social psychology, or would have been properly placed in the history of ideas and philosophies.
What is an economy?
For, modern day economists, the economy can be defined as a mechanism through which there is the allocation of scarce resources to satisfy man’s wants. For our political party, an economy, is a model reflex of the physical spaces and motions within which economics is politically applied in the real world.
What is the size of the Barbados economy therefore?
For, economists in Barbados, like Mr. Owen Arthur, Mr. Clyde Mascoll, Dr. Brian Francis, and Dr. Frank Alleyne; the size of the economy is measured from time to time in real or nominal or constant GDP values (statistical estimates) in any given years.
For, the PDC though there is no actual size of the Barbados economy. There is however the actual size (measured, in one way, by income generated proportionate to this physical material activity) of ONLY the Agricultural Sector, the Manufacturing Sector, the Construction Sector, and the other relevant material transforming sectors in the country. Therefore, the so-called size of the economy does NOT include the Tourism Sector, the Financial Sector, the Government Sector, the Public Transportation Sector, the Wholesale, Retail and Distribution Sector, and any other relevant material or human distributing sectors in the country.
These particular sectors form the service sectors of Barbados, and are altogether too big to be properly supported by the productive sectors of this country. (Verily, we shall expound on these realities and the very adverse consequences for Barbados’ so-called economy and for the growth and development of the country in a later PDC contribution).
Who owns the bulk of the Barbados’ economy (or otherwise the bulk of the economic assets, resources, output, etc. to which the term economy properly applies)?
With respect to the said economists like Mr. Arthur, Mr. Clyde Mascoll, Dr. Brian Francis, Dr. Frank Alleyne and Co, there is no known statements coming from them to deal with answering this question. What a shame!! Well, for the PDC, it is the local and foreign based Caucasian business people.
So, given that the above questions have been asked by the PDC, and the answers given both from the PDC’s perspective and from the perspective of modern economists in Barbados, it must have therefore arisen in the minds of BU readers/visitors reading this particular PDC article, the question as to why those above questions and answers (the supposed and real ones) were themselves put forward in this article at this stage.
Well, our party must let them know that by putting across those questions and answers we have decided to highlight – for the benefit of the understanding of such persons – some of the vast differences that exist between, on one hand, some very sinister, mythical and false economic assumptions that continue to be peddled by the likes of Arthur, Mascoll, Francis, and Alleyne in Barbados, and, on the other hand, some unvarnished bold truths about the very reasons for the existence of economics.
As such, here are at least three reasons why we have highlighted these vast differences.
To illustrate that economics – contrary to the nonsense bunkum that is found in the economic textbooks and journals – is ever always the child of Western politics/Western political ideology, philosophy and psychology, in spite of the pretensions of modern economists to the contrary. Economics emerged out of pre-existing social political ideas and systems, such as liberalism, republicanism, oligarchism, feudalism (manorialism), European enslavement, Mercantilism, Wars, etc in Europe in the 18th Century. For, economics to avoid incorporating its unholy, obscene, barbarous, Euro-centric socio-cultural historical foundations and connections into it, whilst at the same time getting – as a discipline – more and more functional and hypothetical, will serve to make economics more and more blind, with less and less vista for coping with political change, Machiavellianism, political corruption and conspiracy.
To illustrate that – by making economics more and more mathematical and statistical too – and still without the said references to class, race, sex, religion, history per se – in order to give a universal cosmopolitan polycentric image and outlook, will mean that it will continue to substantially grossly be misapplied via private and government sector policies, in those contexts and in many regions across the world. For instance, when economics was grossly misapplied in the context of Soviet, Eastern and Asian bloc and the other relevant socialisms, it was therefore seriously conflicting with many anti-liberalist, anti-capitalist, anti private sector, anti-freedom, anti-western trends in those places.
So, not only did it fail to help generate substantial wealth and income for those countries forming those blocs, but also its intended effects were quite fortunately, not sufficient to assist in bringing very great damage, degradation, and destruction to human lives in those societies, as economics has been for years helping to do in Western society.What is important to recognize though is that since those countries that once formed those blocs would have instituted political and political economic liberalization measures and programs, ECONOMICS, greater freedom, capitalism, etc have been correlating with increasing rates of economic growth and national development – China.
Economics have also been grossly misapplied in contexts whereby the traditional family and community structures and functions in various countries have got weaker as a result of greater numbers of women joining the labor forces of the various countries, rather than they continuing to perform their roles as serious family and community builders.
To illustrate the appalling, shocking levels of misunderstanding, bordering on ignorance, on the part of some persons in Barbados, many of whom purport to be Pan Africanists (Dr. Rodney Worrell, Mr. David Comissiong, etc); many of whom purport to be socialists, and whereby many purport to be of both ideological schools, as it relates to the question of which particular stage global capitalism is now found to be at in world history, given the 2008 financial crisis in the US and in Europe and its very adverse political and other effects – the Euro-zone debt crisis, the US debt crisis, etc.
We say out front that these so-called Pan Africanists and Socialists are making entirely false and erroneous assumptions about the stage of global capitalism. Some have said that capitalism is dying; that it is possible terminal decline, and in massive existentialist crisis.
Needless to say, we in the PDC have heard many of those very shallow comments about capitalism for years. No bigger a name than the reputed founder of Modern Socialism, the late German Sociologist, economist, revolutionary, Karl Marx (1818-1883), had also falsely theorized the overthrow of capitalism – by workers’ revolutions. Now, over a century and a third since his death, no such thing has occurred.
However, what these self-styled Pan Africanists and Socialists have failed to recognize in their superficial analyses of Capitalism, economics, and of these particular production and exchange crises is that it is primarily economics and western finance and their political trajectories that have been the fundamental causes and reasons for these periodic crises and their political social fallout.
For us Capitalism is a 19th century Caucasian political legal national international system in which the rights to contract, the rights to own personal property and chattel property, to trade such rights and such property, to invest and make profits, are and have been so inalienable, extensive, democratic, reciprocal, that no one person or social political group in any society where capitalism is pervasive has a hereditary, long term, or even a monopoly of power, control and influence over any other such persons and groups as a result of the natural inbuilt absorbing afflictions afforded by these rights. These are the defining social political legal and cultural conditions of capitalism. So, Capitalism is self regulating – not in the market sense of the term – and it is revolutionary. It is only in crisis or on the decline when the rights are being threatened or are being vanquished. It is clear that capitalism has expanded and deepened across the world since the so-calle d fall
of communism. (In Cuba recently even private citizens are being allowed now to own land).
Finally, it is not those rights and conditions of capitalism that are producing those crises as mentioned earlier, but it is the amount of property owned by persons legal and artificial, the amount of competition, and unfair competition at that, the extent of investment, profit and such like, that are not determined by capitalism but by the results of a multivariate political legal functions operating over time in a systematic way to help produce those periodic production and distribution crises.