Counter-Currents
2,115 words
On the whole, 2014 was a good year for White Nationalism, European ethnonationalism, and allied trends. Of course, we New Rightists are subtle dialecticians, for whom better is always better, but worse is better sometimes too.
Better is Always Better
1. In France, the Front National took 24.9% of the votes in the 2014 EU election – more than any other party – and 24 of France’s 74 seats in the European Parliament. The FN also won 12 mayoral races. Marine Le Pen is now the front-runner in the 2017 French presidential election. In my view, France is now the key to European liberation. If France goes nationalist, halts immigration, and begins emigration of non-whites, the usual suspects will be screaming for war. But France has an independent nuclear deterrent and the most autarkic economy in Europe. She cannot be treated like Serbia or Austria. If France goes nationalist, and stays nationalist, other European nations will follow.
2. In Denmark, the populist/immigration restrictionist Danish People’s Party won 26.6% of the votes in the European Parliament elections, making them the single largest party.
3. Hungary is ruled by its largest political party, Fidesz, which is to the Right of every other ruling party in Europe. Party leader Viktor Orbán has pledged to create an “illiberal” state, i.e., one that is socially conservative and economically protectionist. In the 2014 elections Hungary’s third-largest party, Jobbik, which is to the Right of Fidesz, won 20% of the vote in the last parliamentary election (to Fidesz’s 44%).
4. In Ukraine the nationalist/populist Svoboda party and its more radical offshoot Right Sector played a prominent role in the revolution that brought down Moscow-backed crook Viktor Yanukovych. My hope is that nationalist forces eventually create an independent Ukraine that puts national identity and social justice ahead of globalization and EU/NATO integration.
Unfortunately, the Russian seizure of Crimea and the Russian special op in Eastern Ukraine has driven Ukraine closer to the EU and NATO and bottled up the Right-wing revolutionary impetus in a national unity government, both predictable consequences of Russian aggression.
5. Communism in East Germany started unraveling in Saxony, when the streets of Leipzig and Dresden were filled with protesters. The Communist regime had been hollowing out for decades because more and more Germans came to disbelieve the ideology and promises of the state. But state terror kept them silent, and state propaganda led them to feel that they were alone. However, in 1989, when the power of the state’s repression wavered just a bit, the streets filled with people, the dissidents discovered that they were not alone—indeed, they were the majority—and the hollow system imploded
Germany today is, of course, ruled by liberal-democratic/multiculturalist version of the same egalitarian lie. But this regime too is increasingly hollow, and the next revolution may be beginning in Saxony as well, as tens of thousands have taken to the streets of Dresden to protest Islamization, multiculturalism, and immigration in protests organized by PEGIDA, which stands for Patriotische Europaeer Gegen die Islamisierung des Abendlandes, or Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West.
6. In Sweden, the Sweden Democrats, another Right-populist, anti-immigration party, won 12.9% of the vote in the 2014 general election, taking 49 seats in parliament (14% of the total), making them the third largest party. This gave them the power to force a new general election, in March of 2015, which they hoped would be a referendum on immigration. The establishment parties, however, have banded together to stop the election. If peaceful reform remains blocked, revolutionary violence may follow.
7. In Austria, the Freedom Party under Heinz-Christian Strache won 19.72% of the vote and 4 seats in the EU elections, its best performance since 1999.
8. In the UK, the Euro-skeptic United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) received the most votes (27.49%) of any British party in the 2014 European Parliament election and gained 11 extra MEPs for a total of 24.
9. On November 9, in a non-binding referendum on Catalonian independence, 80% of voters favored independence, 10% favored greater autonomy within Spain, and only 5% favored the status quo.
10. On September 18, Scotland had a referendum on independence from the rest of the United Kingdom. It was defeated 55% to 45%.
I think that the New Right should cheer on all such secessionist movements, because if we believe in ethnonationalism, it is important to establish precedents for the peaceful dissolution of multicultural societies on ethnic lines.
Now, of course we all have points of disagreement with these parties and movements. But let’s take those objections as read and instead focus on the forest rather than the trees: all of these developments are positive signs that Europeans are awakening to the dangers of immigration, multiculturalism, and globalization; they are awakening to the importance of identity; and they are recognizing that the best solution to these problems is national self-determination.
Sometimes Worse is Better
In the United States, the only good news for White Nationalists is bad news. Anything that weakens the United States as a global power and increases racial tension, polarization, and consciousness domestically has to be counted a good thing by White Nationalists. Three events in 2014 have particularly gratified my Schadenfreude:
1. ISIS: The rise of the Islamic State has not only prevented the US from exiting Iraq, it is a refutation of US policy in Syria, and it has certainly given whites a new reason to resist Islamization.
2. Obamnesty: Barack Obama’s unconstitutional executive amnesty and the utterly ineffectual Republican response can only increase racial tensions and cynicism toward the system.
3. Dindu Agitation: With their campaigns to canonize as martyrs of white racism worthless black criminals like Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Eric Garner (who invariably claim they “dindu nuffin”) and to whip up more black crime, including full-scale riots, the American media and the Obama administration have done more to raise white racial consciousness and destroy the system’s credibility than decades of White Nationalist efforts.
Black lives don’t matter to blacks, so why should they matter to me?
Past the Peak
In 2014, a number of bad trends seem to have peaked and are now on their way out.
1. Oil Doom: The production of Peak Oil doom has itself peaked, and its value is collapsing. Pretty soon you won’t even be able to give this stuff away on the internet. I never thought I would talk like this, but it is true: “Peak Oil” was premised on a false understanding of markets and technological growth. It was also fueled by a perverse sort of optimism on the part of people who are alienated from modernity and eager to believe that an inevitable historical trend will bring it to an end. Of course everything ends. But ironically, like the people they criticize, Peak Oil doomers are characterized by overweening optimism and hubris in their assumptions that they can know how and when the end will happen.
2. Dollar Doom: Although I admit that my evidence is anecdotal, in my sphere of acquaintances, there is a growing skepticism about Austrian economics-driven dollar doom predictions, and this is not entirely due to my own efforts. It seems to be a ripple in the Zeitgeist.
I think orthodox economic price theory (supply and demand, marginal utility, etc.) is 100% correct, but I am increasingly skeptical of orthodox monetary theory. In fact, I think that it has been empirically refuted by the fact that the dollar supply has been vastly increased over the last 7 years without hyperinflation. Admit it, there is something fishy about hard money advocates funded by a guy who made a business of trading precious metals for soon-to-be-worthless dollars.
White Nationalism needs to completely separate itself from free market/libertarian dogma and explore the wealth of critiques of capitalism from the Right, for example, Social Credit and Distributism. Individual liberty, private life, private property, and private enterprise are all values. But the preservation and perfection of our race and its civilizations are higher values that trump individual and economic interests whenever they conflict.
3. Putin- and Russophilia: At the beginning of 2014, Vladimir Putin was my sentimental favorite in any confrontation with the United States, the EU, NATO, Israel, and international Jewry. I published pro-Putin pieces at Counter-Currents/North American New Right, and I defended their authors and Putin in discussions.
Then the Ukrainian Revolution happened. At first, I looked at all sides of the issue. I even translated and published some of Guillaume Faye’s pro-Russian articles. And eventually I came down on the Ukrainian side against Putin. (And, for the same reasons, on the Russian side against Putin.) Why? Because I am an ethnonationalist, and we believe in self-determination for all peoples, and that is not a principle I am willing to sacrifice on the dubious argument that the only way to oppose US hegemony is to turn a blind eye as the Russians bully their neighbors and try to put their empire back together.
At a certain point, it became clear to me that White Nationalists and the European Right in general were being targeted for some outrageous Russian propaganda. It was rather breathtaking to hear people who 6 weeks before were (wink-wink-nudge-nudge-) neo-Nazis suddenly decrying Ukrainian “Nazis,” praising Putin who claimed to be fighting against fascism and anti-Semitism, and explaining to me that I should not like the Ukrainian “Nazis” because they are mere puppets of the international Jew. When I pointed out the falsehoods and contradictions of this position, I was shocked that people were willing to turn the Russia-Ukraine conflict into a polarizing shibboleth over which they were willing to behave obnoxiously or dishonorably, sacrifice collegial relationships, and harm the greater White Nationalist cause.
For example, on two occasions in 2014, Richard Spencer’s Radix published articles dealing with Ukraine—one by John Morgan, the other by Matthew Raphael Johnson—that subsequently simply disappeared when higher authorities deemed them insufficiently pro-Russian. To put things in perspective, Radix has never had a problem with people who ignore or whitewash the Jewish problem. They have never had second thoughts about publishing philo-Semites and Jews. But being pro-Russian is a litmus test. This is an embarrassment to all involved. There is a lot of taste and talent at Radix. I hate to see it being misspent, and I hope they will get back on track in 2015.
I am proud that Counter-Currents has taken a leading role in debunking White Nationalist delusions about Russia, Putin, and Ukraine. We’ve won that battle.
4. Duginism: I am interested in Traditionalism and the European New Right, so naturally I was interested in learning more about Alexander Dugin. Thus Counter-Currents hosted a good deal of discussion about his work, particularly when The Fourth Political Theory was published in English. But when it became clear that Dugin is an enemy of biological race realism and ethnonationalism, I lost interest. Then Dugin’s stance on Ukraine convinced me that he is intellectually dishonest, at which point I took an interest in actively combatting his influence. Duginism has peaked in the West, and again I am proud of the role that Counter-Currents has played in exposing this bearded exotic for the charlatan and distraction that he is. (For my views of Dugin, click here and here. For Adriano Giuliano Malvicini’s series of articles on Dugin, click here.)
One Prediction for 2015
Pretending that blacks are equal to whites is probably the most destructive and expensive folly in human history. For whites, blacks are the totemic non-white “others,” to be humored and patronized at the expense not just of whites but of all other non-white groups as well (except Jews, of course).
Two recent examples.
First, fear of criticizing a black president, primarily from the Left, has allowed Barack Obama to drive healthcare prices up and quality down for millions of Americans and to turn what began as a drive for socialized medicine into the greatest windfall in history for private insurance companies. It is an utter fiasco, but most progressives are too intimidated by Negro sanctity to admit it.
Second, on December 20th, the Dindu Agitation campaign jumped the shark when another worthless black (and a Muslim too, as a bonus) named Ismaaiyl Brinsley murdered his black girlfriend, murdered two New York City policemen (one Asian and one Hispanic), and then killed himself—all to strike a blow against whitey.
The police backlash against race-hustlers like Al Sharpton and New York’s communist, race-mixer mayor Bill De Blasio was swift, and even Pedro and Charlie are wondering why, exactly, they rank beneath America’s sorriest race in the social hierarchy.
Maybe it is wishful thinking, but I am seeing the roots of a new consensus that may make 2015 the year of Peak Negro Patronizing, when blacks will begin losing their sacrosanct status as racial martyrs and touchstones of progress in the eyes of liberal whites. When whites start saying “no” to black stupidity and mischief, many new things will become politically possible.
Happy New Year from Counter-Currents!
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
32 comments
For some reason Catalonia and Scotland have a right to secede but Crimea and Donetsk do not. Good job being a consistent ethnonationalist.
As Colin Liddell put it so nicely, the people of Donetsk and Crimea might well have chosen to secede, but Russians with guns took away their right to decide.
I sure as hell don’t agree with your comments on Russia. You sound like a neocon or one of the warmongers at the State Department. You’re watching too much Fox News.
These sort of evasions, as well as reverting to censorship and character assassination, are the reasons I think the Putin shills have peaked.
But there’s something even more surreal than what I pointed out before: the article cheers the cultural marxists and plutocrats that want to tear apart Catalonia while praising the advance of the Front Nationale in France. The inconsistency is astounding. What does the Front think of separatists in France? What does the Italian new right think about venetian separatists?
This article is about what I think. Not about what Marine Le Pen thinks.
While it may be true that “blacks” in the aggregate or abstract are not equal to whites, it is clearly true that some individual blacks are superior to individual whites. And then, of course, we run into the question of by whose measure. Each of us are, of course, entitled to our own measure.
But I find the argument from superiority to be flawed. An argument from compatibility is possible. But there are counter-examples. An argument from biology is clearly self-contradictory. The only argument that seems legitimate to me is one of preference. The rest all seems to be rationalization, which can be framed to makes a good argument…but can just as easily be countered.
In the end, my observation is that the case for “new rightism” is an aesthetic preference. Even more so, I see the point-of-view of this website deals in abstraction from the concrete experience of real, human beings. To treat individuals as pawns in some great race game may feed the psychological needs of its purveyors, but it does little to enhance the lives of real human beings. Culture is a rich creation. But it seems to me that it pales in comparison to love, which is both real and transcendent.
So we can wrap ourselves in pseudo-intellectual argument until we are blue in the face. But I leave you with a New Year’s wish from a decidedly middlebrow pop group of some repute: “All you need is love.” Which is what I wish you all in 2015. Love and be loved.
“All you need is love.”
It is exactly such naive ideas – undoubtedly derived from Christianity – that make us vulnerable to attacks by the savages of this world. Have you ever read The Color of Crime by Jared Taylor or do you know what is happening to the Boers in South Africa?
Love – and protect – your own people but keep the savages at a distance.
” it is clearly is true that some individual Blacks are superior to individuals Whites. ”
That is not possible because non-Whites belong to and identify with a totally different historical , ancestral , kinship , mythological, legendary, traditional , cultural stream –including red haired blue-eyed Afghanis who also can never be us because they belong to a totally different historical stream . Genetics alone is not enough , but you can’t have the historical stream without the same genetics . White people will only realise that we ARE our past when we have been totally uprooted from it and no longer have a collective past . Identity stops becoming a meaningless abstraction and social construct when you are losing it
Ask yourself this question . Who on the planet can be relied upon to be the most likely to put the interests of the Chinese people first ? Africans ? Arabs ? No, the Chinese . Why ? Because of genetics .
Speaking of ” love ” . It is totally abnormal and unnatural to put the interests of the ” other ” on an equal footing or above one’s own . It is a pathological altruism, a death march . Whites are the only group in history to support policies which make their own group economically , culturally , politically ,territorically and demographically weaker . The only race that is not allowed to organise to defend its interests and future .
The preservation of one’s own kind is the highest and foremost law of nature
Love your people .
Great comment! I was once accused of being a White supremacist but it is not about superior/inferior or physical attributes, it’s all about the unchangeable historical stream. Everything that has happened in the past is immortal, it cannot be changed, it cannot be replicated, it is god-like, certainly sacred, in this sense.
Yes, yes.. Wasnt that song written by that multimillionaire who also wrote that song about “imagine no possessions”? ..talk about wrapping oneself around pseudo-intellectual arguments.. Lol, as they say on the internet.
“In Sweden, the Sweden Democrats, another Right-populist, anti-immigration party, won 12.9% of the vote in the 2014 general election, taking 49 seats in parliament (14% of the total), making them the third largest party. This gave them the power to force a new general election, in March of 2015, which they hoped would be a referendum on immigration. The establishment parties, however, have banded together to stop the election. If peaceful reform remains blocked, revolutionary violence may follow.”
I am Swedish and I can tell you that the idea that revolutionary violence may follow is completely off the map. A more realistic assessment would be that “angry comments on Facebook may follow, but then most people forget and vote for the establishment, pro-immigration parties in the next election”.
It may seem unkind, but I was being ironic. It does seem a bit of a stretch for Sweden today. But when peaceful reforms are blocked, violence is the only way forward. The Swedish establishment knows this, and they are betting that Swedes will go quietly to extinction offering only ineffectual protests in a rigged democratic system.
Happy New Year to Counter-Currents as well!
I agree on Russia, among other things. I think the whole Russia-Ukraine -conflict has been a terrible tragedy for all sides. And it’s certainly baffling to see White Nationalists falling for old Soviet propaganda strategies and start screaming “nazi” and “fascist” at the Ukrainians. It’s another dividing issue that unfortunately raises a lot of animosity. But who are the higher-ups at Radix? I have my suspicions, but I’ll restrain from making any assumptions without knowing any better.
A good number of excellent comments were accidentally deleted today, for which I apologize.
Two observations:
1. Despite the surge in popularity, Marine Le Pen will only have the chance to win the presidential elections if she is against a socialist candidate in the second round. Otherwise, the socialist voters will tilt the balance in favour of the centre-right candidate as it already happened to her father in the 2002 elections.
2. The author seems to share a widespread misunderstanding about the nationalist nature of the recent independence movements in Scotland, Catalonia and elsewhere in Europe. He infers from them being directed against their central government (true), that they are less immigrationist and multiculturalist than them (false).
The opposite is true: These movements have been systematically using a pro-EU and pro-diversity rhetoric to undermine the legitimacy of the central power by showing they are more cosmopolitan, inclusive and that Madrid and London are the real ‘narrow-minded provincials’.
It is a nationalism bereft of a true sense of nationality, a nationalism which is limited to opposition to their ancient homeland rulers, a dichotomy often only for economic reasons which does NOT extend to other peoples.
In short, these nationalism stop where they should have actually started, with extra-European mass immigration, and are thus useless to a white nationalist movement if their drive is not redirected.
No, I am not assuming that the Scottish and Catalonians are better on immigration or the EU than the nations they wish to leave. They are pretty much the same. So those issue are a wash. My hope is that (1) the simply shuffle the deck and destablize existing centers of power, and (2) that they provide recent examples of peacefully dissolving larger political units on ethnic lines.
Have to disagree again:
1. A fragmentation of Europe’s political landscape into smaller national units will invariably lead to more power concentrated on the EU level (“divide et impera”). And Bruxelles is, of all, staunchly pro-mass immigration.
2. Unlike European autochthonous minorities, the recent African and Asian immigrants settle dispersed across the countries, mainly in urban centres. Hence, the model of secession Scotland or Catalonia had provided would have had no impact on the relationship between Europeans and extra-European immigrant population. The latter would simply continue to live on in smaller entities.
1. More sovereign European states does not automatically imply more power in Brussels. Stop using phrases like “divide and rule” as substitutes for thinking. Both Spain and the UK are EU members already. If Scotland were independent, that might actually strengthen anti-EU parties in England. At worst, there would be no net increase in EU power, just an increase in the number of EU states. But there are other benefits.
2. Secession need not have any net effect on immigration to be a positive.
You are framing the whole issue of secession wrongly by focusing on EU power and immigration. There are other reasons for supporting secession. Again, the mere fact of a peaceful partition of a nation on ethnic lines makes our work easier.
1. Scottish independence might have strengthened anti-EU parties in England, but at the certain cost of making Scotland a Labour home turf – a zero-sum game from the viewpoint of a white internationalist.
2. The point is that “mere fact of a peaceful partition of a nation on ethnic lines” would not serve as a model in Europe, as a partition of European countries on a line between European natives and the non-European immigrant population is neither feasible nor desirable.
Overall, there is far greater white nationalist potential in the loss of EU legitimacy through the Euro crisis and the popular backlash against the foreseeable rise of Islamic terrorism than in those Western European independence movements which seem already past their absolute peak anyway.
1. I am not sure what a “white internationalist” is, but it sounds unsavory.
2. Scotland is already in the EU as part of the UK, so if England leaves the EU, that is definitely a plus for white enthonationalism
3. Nobody is talking about partitioning European countries between Europeans and Muslims. This is such a flagrant straw man that I have to question your good faith.
Dr. Johnson, happy new year to you and the Counter-Currents staff. If you will be giving a talk in NYC or New England this upcoming year please let the audience know so that we may attempt to make the trip. I’d be disappointed to know that I missed a chance to listen to a lecture. Why is Golden Dawn in Greece excluded from the year round up? I still believe the Greek nation has a better than even chance of experiencing a revival, but as you say if France revives itself all the better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6agS4yfauZE
Golden Dawn had a bad year in 2014, but let’s hope they fare better this year.
Be careful here. With respect to the kind of monetary theory you’re talking about, there really isn’t any orthodox theory. Instead, there are a number of competing schools. In general, the most reliable theories of economics lie in the area of microeconomics. Macroeconomics, in contrast, is far less well understood. Money (or ‘the money supply’), as it relates to the functioning of the aggregate economy, is an issue in macroeconomics and it’s far from settled, so you’re quite right to be skeptical of what any particular school (Austrian or otherwise) has to say about it.
It is interesting to see just how “orthodox” is the idea that inflation is the automatic consequence of increasing the money supply faster than increases in productivity. I find it cropping up everywhere from the New York Times to the Nation. Hayek made a few tweaks to this idea, but it is pretty much Austrian orthodoxy too. This is the main premise of the dollar doomers, and I think it has been empirically refuted. If true, that means that the deeper premises of monetary orthodoxy should also be reexamined.
Greg, you used the term “monetary theory,” but here you’re talking strictly about inflation. Monetary theory covers a lot more ground than merely inflation, and it is contentious. With respect to inflation, I would only say the hyperinflation doomsayers have been refuted – but that’s been the case since they arrived on the scene some forty years ago.
Daniel,
“Absolutely false”? Dream on.
Only the American central bank can print or write to a hard drive somewhere an unlimited supply of the world’s reserve currency. It’s a distinct advantage. If the NSA is running a little short, just print up a few billion. Other countries, even America’s rivals, have to use dollars and a world finance system controlled by Americans or be shut out of commerce.
If people want to understand money, I’m not sure it makes sense to start with arcane theory as if you’re trying to solve a science or logic problem where the proper application of rationality will control the outcome. Rather, I think you start by examining the motives of the people who print the money including Greenspan, Bernanke, Yellen and Fischer.
Re: Austrian economics, it is clear that the Hayek/Mises doomsday predictions were alarmist, prompting many of its former students (many of whom are Republican and Pro-White) to discard pure capitalism as an essential part of their worldview. I think this is easier for younger white nationalists, since we do not carry the baggage of the Cold War in needing to define themselves in opposition to left economic-socialism.
On Putin supporters/Russophiles, I think it is a mistake to ‘take sides’ in the Ukrainian conflict from a WN perspective – Svboda and Right Sector aren’t going to succeed in establishing a NS ethnostate, and neither will Putin oversee a Traditionalist ‘anti-west/anti-oligarch’ white Ukraine. I would only point out that within broader WN/Traditionalism there is a sentimentality towards Orthodoxy and Russian people and culture that does not necessarily implicate one in her geopolitics, any more than being a Francophile makes one ‘pro-Hollande’.
The reason I cant think straight is that apologists like you for Russia make my skin crawl, you will say anything or blame anyone who makes the Russian and Pro Russian separatist’s case look better. 290 odd people who had nothing to do with the Ukraine either for or against have been blasted out of the sky, and Putin cannot even say sorry we made a mistake, No, nothing to do with us, nothing to see here, move along. I am prepared to accept that they thought they were targeting a military plane, but they pulled the trigger, don’t you think they should at least check or be certain it is, or take the responsibility when it isn’t.
Daniel, when Greg said he believes “orthodox price theory 100% correct” the theories he is agreeing are those that form part of the cumbersomely titled “new neoclassical synthesis,” the basic mainstream of academic economists that unites the New Keynesians and the New Neoclassicals. So it is by no means “absolutely false” when I point out that within this mainstream synthesis the microeconomic aspects are the more reliable. (Reliable in the sense that their theories are good approximations of economic events, not “reliable” in the sense of 100% ultimate economic truth.) Post-Keynesians and their affiliates, like this Stephen Keen fellow that excites you so much, don’t form part of this synthesis.
Please, for your own good, back off on your true believer acceptance that the demand curve isn’t downward sloping. Keen’s angle of attack is that the derivation of a market demand curve from individuals is mathematically untenable. That may be so (though I bet you don’t understand the math any better than I do), but it’s beside the point. Emphasis is placed on individual demand in order to emphasize the importance of marginal benefit to the individual and how it affects individual decision-making; but one can ignore all this and simply look at the real world to see that demand generally slopes downwards (not necessarily at every point along the curve, though).
The “totems” (that’s straight from Keen) of microeconomics may not scale up, true, but hello, don’t you suppose that might be why I urged Greg to be wary of “orthodox theory” at the macro level? The macro level is where the greatest disagreement among adherents of the mainstream synthesis lies.
Lastly, that link you posted was not a “helpful intro” to the macro/micro distinction at all, except in that it “helpfully” concludes: “The idea that the macroeconomy cannot be studied separately from the microeconomy is deeply ascientific.” Poppycock. Consider physics. The findings of physics as they relate to life on earth and our solar system don’t scale up to the level of the entire universe nor do they scale down to the quantum level. So what? It’s still eminently useful and informative.
You really need a better grounding in the basics.
(a) What you said is true of you with respect to bananas and the general range of prices bananas take. You are not the market. Other people differ. Many people do look at the price. Some of them are affected by even very slight changes.
(b) The demand curve for necessities tends to be very steep. It’s considered “inelastic” – for most people, it varies little in relation to price changes. No economics textbook fails to cover this.
Reading Keen, I was very surprised by his argument that the market demand curve couldn’t be derived by aggregating individual demand curves (unless extremely unrealistic assumptions were made). I couldn’t follow his mathematical reasoning to be sure of what I was reading, but the reviews of his book that I read seemed willing to concede his point – though they typically claimed market demand could be derived via other means. Fundamentally, though, he’s committing the same sin that he accuses mainstream economists of when he ignores very basic economic realities like downward sloping demand in favor of mathematical models that produce sine wave-like demand curves.
Yes, you got me. I misread the passage I was quoting.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment