If, of course, oligopoly and monopoly are the rule, rather than the exception, and one never really sees hide nor hair of 'equilibrium', except in a Platonic dream world, as a sort of chimera, then why think of using equilibrium as a paradigm for a 'science'?
Sort of like using 'The Forms'.... or calling God as a witness.
Beckett:
"Madame: Officer, as God is my witness, he had his hand upon it."
"Officer: madame, God is a witness that cannot be sworn."
Murphy
It would make a lot more sense to roll the whole 'discipline' (nondiscipline) of macroeconomics into the category of a subrubric of grand strategy, than to leave it flopping on the deck of history.
Some countries no doubt actually have done it to some extent this way. Think of passages in Friedman and LeBard's book, The Coming War With Japan, for example, on Grand Strategy. Paul Kennedy's work is also along these lines to some extent.
No comments:
Post a Comment