Thursday, 31 July 2014



A blog contribution that showcases my mental anguish and anger at the world at the time...


The fact that 'homeless' now means not having a technological place to live points to the uprooted and degenerate character of modern thinking and the devastation it creates. The earth itself is a home. Ideals of development and construction by definition create homelessness. Modern technological civilisation uproots human beings, reduces them to a mass, destroys all that is world spiritual, all rank, portrays these as a lie, and prevents the resurgence of traditions of genuine homecoming, νόστος by and through which human beings can dwell in what is essential and most ancient.

The return to the Greeks as the highest form of humanity ever attained, in both Nietzsche and Heidegger as well as Arendt, is not some capricious aesthetic fancy but part of a deliberate attempt to salvage the authentic tradition of the West so that human beings may feel at home everywhere - which is the real task of philosophy according to German poet Novalis - enabling them to feel rooted in the earth, whether it be in an over-developed city, in a town or in the countryside. 

In fact human beings who are not thoughtful and still operate among conventional, that is, technological, that is thoughtless, lines of petty calculation are homeless by definition and are liable to and in fact do live their whole lives never encountering themselves in their essence, that is, in what is most ancient and thought-provoking. Instead, they are constantly distracted by the degenerate production of techno-social-totalitarian self-representation which French author Guy Debord conceptualised as 'spectacle'.

In this respect, somebody living in a country mansion can be just as homeless in the authentic sense as a beggar on a street of Birmingham. The whole pecuniary divide between rich and poor is a false one. A genuinely rich person is someone who has a rich heart, a rich spirit. I understand the Modern World as the result of the absolutely bankrupt and mendacious Christian Weltanshaung and it is not hard to see that Disneyland, Harry Potter land, Bowling Alleys, fancy restaurants, giant shopping centres, cinemas, entertainment parks, fast foods, Business, celebrity culture, football and sports stadiums, gyms, Hollywood are all intrinsically part of the dystopian Kingdom of Heaven of the poor-in-spirit.

People maliciously and resentfully labelled as 'intellectuals' and 'anti-social' - in truth, thoughtful, serious, self-respecting, decent, noble people - are rich-in-spirit and masters of the world (see post How to Become Master of the World) in the genuine sense, i.e. they are freemen and free-women, who do not let themselves be calculated by the constant manipulations of developed capital and technological forms of control, who refuse to capitulate to the degeneration and uprootedness intrinsic to this 'Kingdom of Heaven' and its dystopian agenda, who remain true to the earth. 

I consider all attempts to flee the earth and populate other planets - including the whole programme of space conquest - as utterly degenerate since human beings are earth creatures by nature, as the Latin humus (earth) which is a cognate of homo (man) indicates.

As Hölderlin noted, only time will lead human beings, that is, authentic human beings, human beings who are thoughtful, as opposed to the sub-apes who constitute the technocratic elite of the social engineers - who, in any event, have time against them - to more primal ways of seeing the world and the earth.

In addition, as the excellent historian of science Alexandre Koyré concluded, the triumphs (which are just as equally ecological and human disasters) of modern science are not hardly as great as all that. Modern skyscrapers or bridges devoted to the false idols of money and progress do not compare favourably with the Romanesque churches devoted to the Christian God, nor to Greek temples devoted to the gods which were built without the methods of modern mathematical science and engineering, than you very much.

This is part of the incredible decline the West has undergone in the past 3000 years; how from devotions (i.e. votive offerings) to the gods, and then to a single God, we are constructing monstrosities devoted to the false deity of money - the obsession with money itself being a function of modern man's calculating way of seeing the world which is also a consequence of the belief in the Christian God (it has been reported that corrupt, i.e. denatured, bankers behind the 2008 crash believed they were doing 'God's work'), that is, pure uprooted number, which has no earthly meaning as such.

As long as modern man thinks in money, that is, calculates, that is, flees from earthly reality, that is, has lost all his instincts, he will grow smaller and smaller in stature and, as Hölderlin pointed out in his Prayer for the Incurable, will be forced to endure the stench of putrefied decay inherent in the catastrophic consequences of calculating, controlling, totalitarian, technological ways of representation.

Note. A more originary understanding of the word 'homeless' can be found, inter alia, in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, where that prophet utters the following to his animals

"When will I have a home again, when will I not have to bow before the small men?"
A similar understanding of the word home (die Heimat in German) is on display too in Hölderlin's oeuvre  who penned a poem called Homecoming as well as in Heidegger's Spiegel magazine interview (as opposed to Spiegel magazine's Heidegger interview since Heidegger had control not only of the interview dialectic itself but also of the interview's posthumous time of publication) where he asserted that for anything great (i.e. of long duration) to arise a people needs both a tradition (i.e. a culture of cross-generational transmission from the Latin tradido, to transmit, to hand down) and a home - understood in the wide sense of the spiritual belonging to a historical people, i.e. a people rooted in time who conceives itself as living once from birth until death.

Wednesday, 30 July 2014

Batman and Joker

Joker: uncivilised, happy, free, artistic, anarchic, creative, honest, playful, violent, mad, poor, improvises - Good from an aristocratic, cultural, affirmative point of view; Evil from an exploited, fearful, civilised point of view

Batman: civilized, moral, vengeful, uptight, corporate, controlling, technological, rational, rich, calculating - Bad, that is, second rate, from an aristocratic, cultural point of view; Good from a civilised, police and crime fighting point of view

Monday, 28 July 2014

Alien Films

All four Alien films (discarding the unfortunate Prometheus film which, despite its flaws, does shed a nice light on the Alien mythology) work in their own way. As an imdb reviewer put it: 
If one appreciates the qualities of the films for what they are, then it is possible to enjoy the entire series as opposed to merely the first two films which, of course, deserve their classic status.

University of Life

University. In the main: a fraud. As my grandmother used to say in her thick Spanish accent: "life itself is a university."

Sunday, 27 July 2014

Philosophy and Danger


Like almost all of my blog posts from this period I was thinking from an emotional place of anger, inner conflict and irresolution rather than one of temperance and serenity. This reflects in the rather high-handed and haughty manner in which I expressed and presented my 'ideas' with which I largely disagree now. 

Philosophy and Danger

As I pointed out earlier, Lucifer The Light-Bearer, Rank Ordering, Five Sentences from The Thinker as Poet, Factual Truth, good philosophising, quality thinking, is by nature dangerous. The greatest thinkers of the tradition, including the philosophers behind the scientific revolution of over three centuries ago, almost without exception fought long and hard for their insights against overwhelming odds (namely their time). They were heroes, albeit not popular heroes. And again, to use a hackneyed example, Socrates was put to death, Aristotle met with the persecution of the powers of his time
"I won't let them sin twice against philosophy."
Noam Chomsky for his part - despite his obvious vengeful social liberalism - has battled long and hard for many decades the cynical will-to-power of the 'elites' of his homeland and has thereby achieved greatness - and recognises greatness in others such as the great spirit behind the enigma code who was persecuted for his homosexuality. 

Michel Foucault, a very different spirit from Chomsky, also fought his whole life long for his insights (which, unlike mine, are thoroughly researched histories). Wittgenstein, the same. Heidegger, the same. Derrida, the same. Arendt, the same. Benjamin, the same. Spinoza, the same. The list is long.

Countless other spirits as well on the internet: James Corbett from, Paul Craig Roberts from, Scriptonite Daily from, Alain Soral in France and the comedian Dieudonné and many, many spirits unknown to most fighting their own battles, helping to dis-close the constant manipulations and calculations of the global technocratic order. It would be unnecessarily defeatist to claim that they are not having an effect, even if it be a mute and quiet one.

Ditto the greatest film-makers, story-tellers, artists: they systematically show truth in various ways. The film The Shining is a severe indictment of American civilisation and contains many layers; not least the fact that the haunted hotel is built on a Native American burial ground and that the cut ending of The Shining (I owe this insight to an actor friend, Paul Clemens, who saw these very last minutes of the film) shows the hotel manager to have known all along what would happen to Jack, Danny and Wendy Torrence; there is also a toy axe on the hotel manager's desk in the scene of the interview - there is, in this regard, an excellent documentary on The Shining called Room 237 (see also blog post Note on the Shining).

Ditto, the film Eyes Wide Shut is a hilarious satire of American bourgeois life cut off from reality; Tom Cruise - well cast in the role, it has to be said - as the ultimate naive medical doctor whose world shatters the moment his bourgeois-darwinist-hobbesian worldview is challenged by his wife, who then, following this dissolution, discovers the strange (i.e. real) world of secret societies, drugs, sex, of both the powerful and the not so powerful. Every layer of civilisation laid bare, so to speak.

A film by Kubrick is worth more than a 1000 years of academic classes and mere theory.

Academic philosophy is all fine and well but it remains mere scholarship - it is not questioning nor is it running the danger of termination by the powers that should not be, nor does it redeem the questionable aspects of existence including what is ugly and base in human nature. Nietzsche in The Will to Power. 

"Truth is ugly."
Also in Beyond Good and Evil 
"Truth is hard."
Bad philosophy is philosophy which flees from reality into idealistic-moral value judgements; for this reason Nietzsche ranked Thucydides higher than Plato in Ecce Homo on the basis that Thucydides resisted and faced up to reality - in his case, the Peloponnesian War - without fleeing into a redeeming ideal (since, for Nietzsche, moral judgements always betray a baser instinct, namely revenge, which diminishes, denies the greatness in others, and are predominantly a function of what he calls ressentiment, frustrated instinct - which is why in The Anti-Christ he attacks Judaism and Christianity for being religions of revenge, of punishment, of malignant ressentiment).

Thus, in the simplest terms, bad philosophy (which includes all 'theory') is un-endangered, comfortable, does not risk itself and thus necessarily flees into vacuous non-entities, illusions, ideals, empty linguistic diarrhoea - into theory, into reason, in short, into nihilism

Good philosophy confronts and resists reality without passing easy value judgments but acknowledges the complexity of the human condition. 

Saturday, 26 July 2014

Christian Moraline


This blog post showcases a certain poisoned state of mind. But it makes the basic point that Christianity wasn't adequate for my needs as a thinker. 

Christian Moraline

... systematically corrupts and attacks noble souls and in doing so allows the coming to power of the mob (the rabble).

Note. J.K. Rowling's work is an interesting example. While her Harry Potter series superficially fits the Disney-like mold in its conception of evil, it is in fact far more nuanced than that and its depiction of evil is far more subtle that any Disney production could ever hope to be; evil springs not just from the Machiavellian Lord Voldemort (which means will-of-death, i.e. Lord Voldemort is, in Nietzsche's language, a preacher of death) but, quite the contrary, his rise to absolute power is assured in advance by the weakness and fear of many sub-characters who have a vicious desire for power, i.e. they need somebody powerful - evil - to guide and rule over them. We also have petty-stupid evil portrayed very well in the shape of Harry Potter's Daily Mail reading foster family, the Vernons.

Fanatics of Harry Potter will know the names of the power-lustful weaklings who support and ensure the rise and triumph of Lord Voldemort by heart no doubt - Professor Quirrell, Wormtail, Dolores Umbridge, Draco Malfoy, Lucius Malfoy but also the feeble and hopeless members of the Ministry of Magic who constantly set traps for the heroes of the seven volume story. Better still, the long supposed evil character of Professor Snape turns out to be the bravest, most courageous, noble man of the lot, more so even than Albus Dumbledore who, as is apparent in the last volume, The Deathly Hallows, has a history of dubious power machinations.

Professor Snape has to play the thankless and bad role in order to save Wizarding land and in this respect it is noteworthy that he is a formidably gifted wizard and was bullied in Hogwarts by Harry Potter's father (as evidenced in The Half-Blood Prince)... Professor Heidegger as a real life Professor Snape? 

It would be worth asking the extent to which the likes of Adolf Hitler and our modern 'democratic leaders' were/are not allowed to come to power because of fear mongering which forces feebler spirits to desire a supposed strong man (i.e wrongly perceived to be strong) to come to power. 

The undervalued The Casual Vacancy  - undervalued no doubt because it is a grimly real and everyday indictment of British society, the reality of which feebler spirits find hard to admit to themselves - also shows in all-too-glaring clarity the observation of Hannah Arendt in The Human Condition 
"The will to power, far from being a characteristic of the strong is, among envy and greed, one of the vices of the weak and possibly even their most dangerous one."
The will-to-power is more than traditional snobbery - it is malignant and malicious such as the everyday propaganda machine of the Daily Fail. As with J.K Rowling (a Christian who does doubt her faith - in any case, a noble soul, trained in the Classics and French) and Hannah Arendt, the same holds for Martin Heidegger (even a cursory glance at his biography would suggest this) that they were noble souls who rebelled against the Christian moral worldview as the Christian moral Weltanshaung has ceased to shed light on phenomenological, i.e. everyday, reality.

Classical Education

My mid-twenties decision to study Classics and, specifically, the Classical tongues (on my use of the word tongue, see A Brief Anatomy of Perception, Note (2)), Ancient Greek and Latin, may strike common sense as odd - disregarding its lack of immediate technical application - given my philosophical disposition.

The answer is simple. The tongue of the Ancient Greeks is philosophy. All the foundational concepts of Western thought are Greek in origin. For me there is no philosophising possible without, at the very least, a superficial knowledge of Ancient Greek.

The Ancient Greek tongue, rather like modern day German, is a deeply spiritual, i.e. thoughtful language, and ignoring the copious and tediously difficult grammar rules, has deeply therapeutic qualities, esp. in an age such as today where the word, to use Nietzsche's expression, is starting (and not only starting)

"to stink of mob."
Latin is not a particularly philosophical tongue; on the other hand, some of the best poetry ever composed is in Latin. Latin offers a solid, structural foundation to one's Dasein and the tongue of the Romans offers as many possibilities for wisdom and thought as does Ancient Greek. Elite, aristocratic Roman is exceedingly rich and full of political nuance. Moreover, Latin makes strong in its rigour and uncompromising elitism.

Nietzsche, in Ecce Homo I think, claimed that the Greeks were still too foreign for us modern day Europeans. It strikes me as one of Martin Heidegger's supreme achievements to have made the Greeks accessible to us in a creative way. With Heidegger, and Arendt to a lesser extent, Ancient Greek becomes attractive again. 

Modern Continental Philosophy gives rise to polemics in so far as it tends to flout the conventional rules of academic scholarship and precision, including in its free use of etymological arguments, yet this conflict is at the root of the divide between the tasks of scholars, men of knowledge, and creative thinkers, who are more akin to lawgivers who, as rule, and provided they are good, unsettle common understanding and transform concepts creatively. Theirs is a more dangerous task.

I can only refer my readers to the last section of my post Five Sentences from Thinker as Poet to highlight the gap which lies between thinkers and scholars, a gap not watertight since thinkers can be more or less scholarly and scholars more or less thoughtful. 

In summary thinkers are primarily lawgivers. Scholars by contrast are primarily men of knowledge. 

Friday, 25 July 2014

The Great Noontide

What is Nietzsche's "great noontide" also translated as "the great midday", referred to in Thus Spoke Zarathustra on several occasions such as at the end?
"This is my morning, my day is beginning: Rise up now, rise up, you great Midday!
(trans: Graham Parkes)

Is it the point at which the progress of civilisation, namely taming, and the stature of man, his diminution or, conversely, his growing in height, culture, are seen as irreconcilable? 

Sunday, 20 July 2014

War and Peace

War: what preserves the peace (against dangerous extremists, communists, the axis of evil and so on ad nauseam)

Peace: the annihilation of war.

Question (asked by Heidegger in What is Called Thinking?): how can peace be preserved by what it annihilates? Or, put differently, how can war preserve the very thing which is meant to annihilate it?

As he observed, something is deeply amiss here which has its root in the fact that we are still not thinking, i.e. that Being, that which gives to think, that which makes meaning possible, has abandoned beings.

Friday, 18 July 2014

Factual Truth

In her essay Politics and Truth, which can be read in her masterpiece Between Past and Future, Hannah Arendt distinguishes philosophical truth, which for her has no political bearing and is far removed from the affairs of men - ever since Plato's disgust with the Πολιτεία which put his beloved mentor, Socrates, to death - from factual truth which is of greater political import since facts are the raw stuff of politics and, more often than not, a real hindrance to power which is why Cold Monsters (i.e. governments) lie, i.e. conceal, twist, distort, as a matter of course basic everyday facts including by falsifying reality in terms of number (inc. statistics) but also, as has been shown again and again, about historical facts such as Stalin's erasing of Trotsky as a major figure from the history of the Russian Revolution (I specify Russian because there is such a thing as English and American Bolshevism). 

Worse, Cold Monsters routinely invent facts, create facts or, in other words, create perceptions (what is meant by propaganda) which is why only the most bold and courageous of spirits can take it on themselves to unravel, dis-cover, un-conceal those created perceptions with the aid of their conscience, the perception of their perception - see my dialogue Lathoron (in Greek: ἀληθεύειν, to speak truthfully, to wrest with great struggle from hiddenness; truth in Greek, ἀ-λήθεια, meaning, following Heidegger's insight, dis-closure, unconcealment, what is unhidden, the alpha being privative). 

Politically speaking, the bravest are those who, as part of a task which by definition is thankless and extremely dangerous, go about un-covering, i.e. wresting out of concealment, hiddenness, the lies of Cold Monsters. 

Philosophical truth, in so far as it remains attached to the ideal, the "pure sky of ideas", which includes the fallacious and un-endangered activity of mathematics which has only a claim to exactitude and a corresponding scientific application in physics (which still interprets beings as constant presence - see Being and Time) and the social sciences, is, today, politically irrelevant - although in the past scientific discoveries such as those made by Galileo embroiled him in seas of polemics and controversy, including and especially arising from the corrupt (i.e. denatured) ecclesiastical order.

Yet philosophy remains eminently political in so far as language itself is political, i.e. belongs to the political nature of man as a being possessed of speech (ζῷον λόγον ἐχῶν) and that language is necessarily a function of power struggles, of πόλεμος, of strife, following the unquestionable insight that λόγος is indeed πόλεμος, warfare. 

My concept of thoughtful habituation is also eminently political in so far as the everyday covering over, ψεύδεσθαι, of what is really going on, not to mention the fact that we are, and are only once, of the powers - media-political-moneyed-religious-scientific-corporate - that, in independent journalist James Corbett's wording, should not be, requires nothing less than to think our habits and process our perception in a radically new way so that we may not be calculated and instantly calculable.

As regards a fact, it has become urgent to ask ourselves what a fact it, i.e. whether it is merely something created for the benefit of those in power or whether it is something which lies before any self-serving manipulating, any self serving ψεύδεσθαι. 

In my Brief Anatomy of Perception I highlighted the possibility that a thing, literally any thing that is not nothing, is fact in so far as it is perceptible, knowable, communicable. As such a lie by a government remains a fact on the very narrow basis that it is perceptible, i.e. liable to be grasped sensorily and perceptually; even if it be a purely fictitious creation (such as the technologically presented version of 9/11 and the whole ensuing 'war on terror'), it nonetheless becomes a fact the moment it is established for all to see, know, communicate. 

What, then, is factual truth? Factual truth, politically speaking, is bringing to light, to perception, the created facts as created facts. The 9/11 truth movement in all its various shapes and sizes, strengths and weaknesses, is doing precisely this: bringing to light the fact of 9/11 as created political fact, that 9/11 as political fact, as something perceptible and knowable, was created (no doubt for unconscionable power purposes which do not concern us here). 

Ditto the burning of the ReichTag by the Nazis who pinned it on the communists is known to be created fact through the labours and struggles of many a spirit whose names are unknown to most. Ditto too with the official narrative of JFK's assassination: pure created political fact.

It could be said that time, in so far as it is a dialectical vying for rank, in the realm of politics as in others, always brings truths to light, i.e created political facts. Whence Heraclitus' timeless insight that
"Justice will catch up with those who invent lies and those who swear to them."
Heraclitus is here merely uttering a law of Being. It is no accident that he be the first thinker of Rank Ordering, of  πόλεμος and, in the light of Heidegger's interpretation, the thinker of λόγος as πόλεμος. 

Justice in the Heraclitean sense means Rank Ordering in so far as those who invent lies, i.e. create political facts, lose rank in the ultimate Rank Order which decides who is free, who is slave, who is god, who is man. 

Today's elite are last in rank in so far as their shallow technological organisation ensures that Being, that which makes meaning possible, withdraws from them. It is in this light that one must interpret the sometimes uttered statement that only beggars know the truth.
"Strife (πόλεμος - λόγος) is father of all and master of all. And some he has shown as gods, others men; some he has made slaves, others free."  
This sentence is still true today, judging by the amount of thoughtless slaves who do not question or critically consider their technological servitude, i.e. realise that indeed they are slaves.
"Not comprehending they hear like the death; the saying is their witness: absent while present." 
Thoughtlessness means not being fully in Being, not fully having come to consciousness, not being fully 'man' as the pointer to that which makes meaning possible and that which withdraws. For, ever since Parmenides
τὸ γὰρ αủτὸ νοεῖν ἐστίν τε καὶ εἶναι
"Thinking and Being are the same." 
or, according to Heidegger's elaboration in Being and Time
"Being is what shows itself in pure, intuitive perception, and only this seeing discovers being."
He goes on
"Primordial and genuine truth lies in pure intuition."
 Heraclitus' statement
"Greater deaths are allotted greater destinies."
is also part of the Rank Ordering. Socrates, Jesus, Spinoza, Oscar Wilde come to mind but so do many magnanimous spirits of the first century ADS.

Thursday, 17 July 2014

Writing and Rank Order


The order of rank, or rank order, is a central concern of Messieurs Nietzsche and Heidegger and somehow became one of mine too, but with much less elegance. 

Everything under the sun I began to interpret in the light of what may be said when and by whom. Fortunately I have moved on from this manichaean way of seeing the world although I am the first to acknowledge that people differ largely by the levels of mind control under which they think and operate. 


Writing is part of the Rank Ordering, Whence Nietzsche's observation in Beyond Good and Evil that 
"it writes."
Derrida's making a problem out of writing
"il n'y a pas de hors texte."
 is, again, part of the Rank Ordering, of the absolute need for the first men to be the most powerful. See in this regard Zarathustra's shout
"There is no harder fate in all human destiny when the most powerful are not at the same time the first men. Then everything become fake, crooked and monstrous."
The Rank Ordering cannot be stopped. In fact it has already been formulated (see post Rank Ordering). The conflict between good and bad and good and evil or, which is the same, priority for the few versus priority for the majority, as Nietzsche noted in his Genealogy of Morals, has become ever more spiritual.

The fact that great events, for Nietzsche, are the greatest thoughts, in the sense of the stillest and the most delicate, is not some idle fancy but again part of the Rank Ordering which is the same thing as what Hölderlin intends by the words

"the saving power." (das Rettende). 
The planetary technological order itself brings with it the saving power, the centuries-long process of the rank order. Which is why the global technological elite have time against them. Which is also why Nietzsche noted that the rank order would take place outside of any existing social order (see The Will to Power). 

Which is why in Thus Spoke Zarathustra he teaches higher men "love of the most distant."

The superman comes forth not only after the Rank Order has been carried out (see post Rank Ordering) but as part of the very same conditions which have established the total economic exploitation of mankind which, for Nietzsche, is a diminution of the beast of prey man in the grand style (still in The Will to Power).

As Heidegger observed in the Spiegel interview, Only a god can save us, the destruction of the earth will only be able to be brought to a halt when and if 

"thought and poetry come to non-violent power once again."
enabling a free relationship to modern technicity.

With the rank order accomplished, when the first men, the greatest creators, are finally acknowledged as the most authoritative human beings, a new beginning of Western thought and for Western mankind will have come to fruition - and as Heidegger notes in What is Called Thinking? the land of the setting sun (Abendland) will thereby become a Morgenland in another sense, namely the land of a new beginning for mankind.

Monday, 14 July 2014


In her trial report, Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt concluded Eichmann's guilt under the Hitler regime on the basis that
"politics is not like the nursery; in politics obedience and support are the same."
This is a fact one has to keep in mind. Everything we do has political implications. This is why it is a duty to keep abreast of political developments - at least enough to get the general idea - so that one knows where one stands and whether or not obeying, i.e. conforming, is fuelling the unconscionable, totalitarian, slavish, destructive, rabble-rousing, uprooted, thoughtless, calculating, manipulative, glib, psychopathic, phoney, life-denying, cruel, vengeful, cynical, mendacious, hypocritical, greedy, base, vile, degenerate, superficial, unhealthy, resentful, anti-nature, bigoted, low-minded, plebeian, moralistic, death and punishment-orientated, money-grubbing authoritarianism of our modern nation states.

In other words, following orders will make you guilty as you have surrendered your capacity for free will decision to do the bidding of your owners and their dirty work. As Oscar Wilde pointed out in his essay The Soul of Man Under Socialism, humanity has evolved far more through brave disobedience than through slavish obedience to the powers that (shouldn't) be. 

Economics as Domestication

The rise to prominence of economic theory is linked to the process of domestication of mankind: civilisation. οἶκος in Greek, means household. The fact that we all live in houses (or flats which amounts to the same thing) as taxpaying domestic animals necessarily engenders a rise in economic theory. 

Margaret Thatcher appealed to the habits of the 'good' householder in her economic thinking (see John Campbell's excellent two-volume biography of The Iron Lady). Householding is a domestic matter. Domestication and economics go hand in hand.

As for the concept of economic growth it seems to me that it is a self-contradiction. To be economical means to preserve, to be sparing. That the words economics and growth should be linked in this way points to the uprootedness and irresponsibility of modern thinking. Economic growth should really be understood to mean uneconomical waste.