Post by Don on Apr 27, 2017 7:07:56 GMT -5
Anybody who's seen my signature knows where I stand on the question.
Here's a fun article that posits a ruling we'll never see in 2021, during the (Elizabeth) Warren administration.
My favorite part is this. (Bolding mine.)
The author failed to mention Marxism's reliance on the Labor Theory of Value, which was destroyed during the Marginal Revolution, so that's one place I think the article fell short.
Is Economic Design the new Intelligent Design? If not, how do they differ?
Here's a fun article that posits a ruling we'll never see in 2021, during the (Elizabeth) Warren administration.
Court Rules Economic Design Is Religion; can't be taught in public schools.
U.S. District Judge John Jones has ruled that Economic Design, called ED by its supporters, is not a science since it has not survived scientific testing and is instead faith-based. Accordingly, the ED curriculum recently approved by the Washington D.C. School Board can no longer be taught in social studies classes since this would violate the constitutional separation of church and state. The Court left open the question of whether ED could remain in philosophy and religion elective courses.
Economic Design is a politically acceptable term for traditional Marxist theory. In a highly detailed, 149-page opinion with more than four hundred footnotes from Economics journals, Judge Jones explicitly detailed links between the two. Jones further documented that all factually verifiable Marxist predictions failed to come true; thus Economic Design is “a faith like Catholicism or Hinduism, rather than a science like Economics or Physics.”
Jones pointed out that Marx and Lenin predicted that socialist regimes would be humane, whereas, in reality, they murdered more than 80 million of their own citizens and waged wars of expansion abroad. Marx and Lenin, as well as former President Donald Trump and current President Elizabeth Warren, predicted that nations dependent on trade would suffer exploitation when, in fact, economic analyses find that trade-dependent nations like the U.S. and Japan are far wealthier and freer than self-sufficient nations like North Korea and Cuba.
U.S. District Judge John Jones has ruled that Economic Design, called ED by its supporters, is not a science since it has not survived scientific testing and is instead faith-based. Accordingly, the ED curriculum recently approved by the Washington D.C. School Board can no longer be taught in social studies classes since this would violate the constitutional separation of church and state. The Court left open the question of whether ED could remain in philosophy and religion elective courses.
Economic Design is a politically acceptable term for traditional Marxist theory. In a highly detailed, 149-page opinion with more than four hundred footnotes from Economics journals, Judge Jones explicitly detailed links between the two. Jones further documented that all factually verifiable Marxist predictions failed to come true; thus Economic Design is “a faith like Catholicism or Hinduism, rather than a science like Economics or Physics.”
Jones pointed out that Marx and Lenin predicted that socialist regimes would be humane, whereas, in reality, they murdered more than 80 million of their own citizens and waged wars of expansion abroad. Marx and Lenin, as well as former President Donald Trump and current President Elizabeth Warren, predicted that nations dependent on trade would suffer exploitation when, in fact, economic analyses find that trade-dependent nations like the U.S. and Japan are far wealthier and freer than self-sufficient nations like North Korea and Cuba.
Warren administration Attorney General Harris sided with the Washington D.C. school board, maintaining that prosperity cannot exist without a supreme intelligence distributing and redistributing resources. “How could the automobile headlight have evolved without an intelligent Economic Designer planning and bringing together the individual components?” Harris asked. “Free markets could not do that, so we need to teach our children to revere the Public Economic Designer, who may or may not be a deity.”
Is Economic Design the new Intelligent Design? If not, how do they differ?
