TOTALITARIAN ECONOMICS is perhaps the most challenging study we have presented to date. - Which is why we are posting it in instalments. The aim of the study is to draw the enlightening parallels between economic theory and the political concepts that it never addresses where it does not actively seek to conceal - and their ultimate link to a vision of social totality and co-ordination, of orchestration and regimentation, that justifies our use of the epithet "totalitarian" to orthodox bourgeois economic analysis.
To recapitulate, it is a common fallacy to mistake mathematical equivalence with “truth”. Indeed, it is common for some philosophers to claim, in the interests of democracy and political equality, that even God himself is subject to their “truth”. But where this equivalence represents mathematical symbols and operations, it is quite simply and incontrovertibly a tautology. In and of themselves, mathematical equations do not tell truth: they do not refer to any objective value or reality: they tell us absolutely nothing. – Which is why mathematical equations are purely conventional, and the hypothetical applications to which they are put are problematic in the extreme. This is because the moment we use these mathematical tools and equations to calculate elements of experience that we reduce to objectified and quantified entities or variables, then and only then do these tools assume a purpose because we attribute to them an intended meaning that they clearly lack so long as they are mere equivalences: they become hypothetical, coercive, because they embody the will of the hypothesizer who selects the purpose of conducting and testing the experimental hypothesis.
In other words, to the extent that calculations pretend to have meaning because they are applied to real entities, they are false. And to the extent that they lack meaning because they are pure, not applied to real entities, they are just tautological and therefore conventional: they tell us nothing about any objective reality or “truth”. They tell us nothing outside the hypothetical purpose for which we seek to manipulate the real categories and entities to which we apply the mathematical operations. It follows that mathematical calculations or “tools” can never be neutral – because to the extent that they are not applied to real categories, they are meaningless or tautological, and to the extent that they are so applied, they must be used for a purpose, whereby their “neutrality” is invalidated!
Mathematical id-entities and logical axioms are borderline concepts (Schmitt, Politische Theologie); they de-monstrate (in the Wittgensteinian sense of “showing”, “pointing to” but never explaining meaningfully or proving!) both the ultimate attempt and the ultimate inability of the human mind to con-ceive of “truth and value” as objective entities: they represent therefore not only the ultimate de-monstration of the “un-reality” of “truth and values”, their conventionality ; but also and most terrifying of all the possibility of turning human conventions and arbitrariness into science and logic through their hypothetical application as calculating tools.