The trouble with most of our social thinking is that, being done in terms of eighteenth century rationalism, it takes dynamism for granted and assumes that the chief social problems are those of knowing what you want and how to get it. The chief social problem is that of generating and unifying the social will that creates activity, change and what we have been wont to call progress.
That is from his 1940 book The Dynamics of War and Revolution, p.53. It’s an ever so slightly fascistic version of a common critique of neoclassical economics. Is it entirely wrong?