Yeah, Lenin seized power by having all the soviets assassinated by bolsheviks after he lost an election to them. Then the USSR descended into widespread famine, surveillance, and state-sponsored massacres.
It’s wild how many people still swear by marxist-leninism, as if “just try it one more time, this time it’ll work, I swear!” Or even wilder “actually, widespread famine, surveillance, and monopolized violence in the USSR was good!”
And then they just smugly tell you to “read theory” because they assume you haven’t already, because they can’t imagine anyone would actually read it and think critically about it, since they sure as hell didn’t…
Yeah, Lenin seized power by having all the soviets assassinated by bolsheviks after he lost an election to them. Then the USSR descended into widespread famine, surveillance, and state-sponsored massacres.
It’s wild how many people still swear by marxist-leninism, as if “just try it one more time, this time it’ll work, I swear!” Or even wilder “actually, widespread famine, surveillance, and monopolized violence in the USSR was good!”
And then they just smugly tell you to “read theory” because they assume you haven’t already, because they can’t imagine anyone would actually read it and think critically about it, since they sure as hell didn’t…
The problem with economics as a science is that testing some theories can be very expensive.
I’ve always viewed economics as a pseudo-science.
There might be some ways to apply the scientific method to economic systems, but even if so it would be a soft science at best.
But that’s not even what’s happening in conventional economic theory, and they try to treat it like a hard science.