Calling in the loons

Doug Henwood dhenwood at panix.com
Tue Aug 27 10:18:09 PDT 2002


Michael Perelman wrote:


>I don't think that theory is paramount, but business has spent hundreds of
>millions of dollars to deform the study of economics. The main thrust of
>economics in the US during the early 20th C. was relatively progressive.
>Many economists were fired. Ford and Rockefeller gave many millions to
>elite departments to change what they taught.
>
>Why bother if the stakes were nil?

I never said the stakes were nil. Just because I said NCE was mostly "ideology" doesn't mean I don't think it's important. I wouldn't be president of the Zizek fan club if I didn't take ideology seriously. It'd be like saying religion was unimportant just because it's a crock.

You've given a historical, materialist explanation of how NCE became the dominant paradigm. Now, of course, the disicpline is largely self-reproducing; you can hardly get a job or an article published if you don't profess the faith. But as a way of understanding the world or as a guide to policy, neoclassical econ is less useful than the Bible, which at least contains some good stories, not to mention some admirable ethical guidelines.

Doug



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list