[PEN-L:6865] Re: Re: RE: Old "foggies"/"fogeys"

[S Pawlett <epawlett@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Peter Dorman wrote:

> I don't think this is a useful analysis, for two reasons.
>
> 1. It assumes a stark opposition between neoclassical economics and
> Marxism, with neither overlap nor third alternatives.  This doesn't
> describe the actual political/ideological/methodological situation
> within economics, either now or in the past.  (It sure doesn't describe
> me.)
>
> 2. It's use of ideology critique (explanation of the hegemony of certain
> ideas according to the interests they reflect) is too abstract.  The
> economics profession is an institution with its own internal structures
> of power and influence.  True, it is connected to the outside world of
> "real" economic and political domination -- but in specific ways that
> intersect with its own institutions.  One has to look at the role of
> soft money, the NBER, the agendas set by government, and so on.  Even
> so, I'm not sure we have a good explanation for the sheer intellectual
> arrogance displayed by mainstream economics.  It is more intense than
> one finds in other fields, and academics who are not economists
> generally find it objectionable.
>
> Incidentally, the fetishism of technique that so many on this list
> complain about is not specific to economics.

It seemed to me when  studying undergraduate economics that many economists were
just looking for an excuse to do mathematics. That's cool if that's what you want
to do, but why not just walk over to the Math Dpt. and do the real thing? Why
waste the time of young undergrads enrolled in Econ courses who want to learn how
actual economies work in the real world? The Micro courses I took were basically a
repetition of the calculus courses.   The hegemonic discourse in Economics like
other disciplines has a lot to do with the state of the class struggle in the real
world.You know, the ruling ideas of any age are the ideas of the ruling class.
When Capital was on the defensive, there were a lot more rads teaching,  more job
opportunity's for them and more opportunity's to teach the really interesting
stuff like classical political economy and economic history.


Sam Pawlett