>>21534018What I've cited are mainly books about economics though some may have implications for politics and a couple may be more about ethics. In that regard mises is most pertinent.
If one wishes to know how society ought to be organized (politics), one must first know what he wishes to obtain. Economics then is the tool through which society is organized.
I might say for example that socialism is the best system if it is my objective to achieve something over something else, and it may be true.
To study economics is simply to know the tools by which some objective can be achieved, but it is you who decide the objective.
It is not clear what you even wish to obtain, you seem too much gone into holistic ideas without clear structure.
An 'improvement of society'? What even is that? By whose standard?
Regardless, even if your objective was simply to sit around all day in your room being a neet, this still has political implications and conditions which ought to be fulfilled. It may not require fierce political activism given the current arrangement and it likely won't in the forseeable future give how our society is currently organized.
"Larger" objectives, that is, objectives which require/involve the efforts of a much larger quantity of peoples/productive facotrs/etc may have larger political implications which may require changes to the current structure.
I didn't even think you'd care about the wellbeing of society, whatever that means in the first place. Nobody really does. Everyone cares exclusively about satisfying their own needs, and that may entail caring about the ideal type that society is in their heads.
I dont care about society. I care only about my own needs and some entail I make sure society is organized in some way rather than another.
And one may learn these things firstly to understand how things work, and consequently to form an opinion on how things should ideally be given these tools of understanding.
