at the end he says he's excluding krugman:
[1] I should be clear from the start, the ‘left’ referred to here excludes the broadly Keynesian supporters ranging from Paul Krugman to Christina Romer to Matthew Yglesias. Instead, the term ‘left’ here indexes a mostly non-Keynesian group of thinkers – typically with Marxist tendencies, but more generally interested in post-capitalism.
^^^^^^^ CB: Why is it important that the Left be deeply involved in "economic" analysis and whence the founding of this importance ? Whence ? Karl Marx and Marxism , of course, which means that the Left is interested in "economics" because it has as its purpose achieving "post-capitalism" ( sometimes termed socialism and communism). How does "post-capitalist" interest give up on "economics" ? "Post-capitalist" interest in economics it the correct interest in economics. There is no left interest in economics that is not "post-capitalist" in purpose. The Left's rationale for focusing on "economics" is that the class struggle is in part the ":economic sphere" , workers vs capitalists.
To the extent Keynesians do not do economic analysis with the purpose of ending capitalism , but preserving it, they are not Leftists in the essential sense.
--
> c b writes:
>
>> This author must not be reading Communist Party literature,
>> lbo-talk, PEN-L and Marxism-Thaxis.
>
> Or even Krugman.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>