Ritwik, in a fairly idiotic post, essentially blames an idiot for his growing up. If a blog continues to be interesting for more than a six months, the problem is with the reader — not the author. Anyway, that is not the point of this post.
The problem he alludes to is probably very old and yet interesting. Amit Varma’s understanding of political economy is at odds with Ritwik’s and possibly that of Aristotle. DG Boland explains that better than I can in a 1997 write-up,
We should avoid, then, such expressions as “managing” the economy when we mean the political economy. The civil community is not a household “run” by the government. The relationship between the Government (the State in the narrow sense) and the community (the State in the widest sense) is of a kind altogether different from that between the head of the household (or other analogous organisation) and the household itself. The head of the body politic has much less control over how the community (and therefore its economy) is “run”. The communism of modern times makes the same mistake in this regard as Plato did. But all forms of socialism and theories of economic “management” (macro-economics) do the same to a greater or lesser degree.
Anyway, since the MBA types like to bandy serious work and not random mentions of Aristotle, Hannah Arendt deserves mention. Since I am not avataram to write an entire book in two paragraphs, I will link to her personal library which may help you resolve the essential questions on the nature of revolution, freedom, authority, tradition and the modern age. The elegance of much of her work exists in the fact that one gets the feeling of it being obvious after having read it — unlike a certain Taleb.