Prospects for a neutral ‘science’ of materialism are opposed in that economics cannot be interpreted except as to provide support for some material interest or another. Material interests can be trusted to support those arbiters of opinion who uphold their own empowerment; and the most effective defenders of private interests are usually the second and third generation heirs to great industrial and banking fortunes.

Consider the families currently purchasing acclaim from the Public Broadcasting System for their stewardship of our Western scientific tradition, and pair their names with the scientific institutions most identified with these great family names:

Each of these institutions is highly placed among those most strongly identified with the categorical impossibility of understanding macroeconomic causality in terms of a mathematically determined system.

People have a way of believing whatever it is in their interest to believe; and those finding themselves with fabulous stores of private property awaiting their personal disposition are easily persuaded that the self-interested disposition of property is the only possible guarantor of economic order. Powerful people have ways of inculcating their belief that the public's prosperity and safety remain critically dependent on the unimpeded global laissez-faire of Libertarianism.

The Rockefeller Foundation paid Friedrich Hayek, Wilhelm Röpke, and Ludwig von Mises to write books promoting a globalist outlook on international trade. It is well-known that the Rockefellers also underwrote the migrations of Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, George Lukács, Herbert Marcuse, et al from Goethe(!) University in Frankfort to Columbia during the interwar period. Less well-known is their simultaneous support for Mises to be transplanted from the University of Vienna to NYU, and for his continued support at that institution.

International free trade is now infamous for its effects on the savings, equities, and retirement provisions accumulated by the middle class. Destruction of the middle class would be a world historical event in that its creation is one of Western civility's great accomplishments: providing security and a modicum of leisure for large segment of the European people has greatly expanded the pool of humanity that might be cultivated for the sake of developing an elite of talent; and, while this talent was allowed to rise, it created the means for the middle class to continue its ascent.

The Frankfort School's Critical Theory has successfully recast bourgeois mores as a pathology, thereby further demoralizing the middle class in its efforts to resist economic appropriation from above. Observing that those diagnosing the illness are of one cultural lineage, while those stigmatized by the illness are of another, it is possible to recognize these ‘pathologies’ as nothing more than the dissonance created by too close a proximity between any two culturally distinct populations.

Comprehending such natural antipathies in terms of a pathology tells us more about the would-be physician than it does about his presumed-to-be patient. To the healthy European volk-mind, social science is nothing more than a golem used to incubate a sense of infirmity and doubt in what would otherwise be a sound and wholesome systems of arts, manners, and science. If Frankfort’s undermining of Western civility bears comparison with the Austrian School's rejection of Western science via its indissoluble Vienna problem, then Libertarianism's economics can be said to have originated on an eastern satellite campus of the Frankfort School.

With certain self-selected representatives of international Jewry having projected their intra-ethnic concerns into ill-tempered discussions of our arithmetic, we are roused to an admittedly unpleasant chain of observations:

Throughout much of European history Jews have been the mediators between established fortunes and those who must be exploited in keeping those fortunes established. Medieval aristocrats often employed Jewish overseers to oppress their serfs because the Jew, having no ethnic connection with the oppressed, could perform his duties without compunction.

As much can now be said for our contemporary moneyed elites in regard to the mavens of truth they set forth to inform the public. In this age of the internet, we may be sure that the professional foes of economic calculation have, for some decades now, been fully aware of the evidence contradicting their public pronouncements.

And we may be equally sure that this advice has been passed, sotto voce, up the food chain to their benefactors. The economics profession, as created through shrewd application of its benefactors' inheritances, exists to propagate a falsehood that is beneficial to one class at the expense of another.

If this undeclared class war is to be aborted without further damage to the realm, it will happen when our ruling elites discover a Solon among their number who can convince his class that they must voluntarily accept a diminution in their circumstances. Hopefully, the exact proportions of this diminution will be calculated to everyone’s satisfaction by neutral application of the available (Western) science. Failing such an intervention, that same science will be waiting to structure a recovery from the chaos that will follow our elites’ downfall owing to their greed, ignorance, and pride.