Actually the paper I just read is called “The Superiority of Economists”. It’s another analysis of thee economics profession by Marion Fourcade, this time in association with Etienne Ollion and Yann Algan. It is well worth reading and fits neatly in the same analytical tradition as Fourcade’s 2009 book “Economists and Societies”.
The problem is that none of it is particularly surprising. The point being that economists, by asserting their superiority vis other social sciences have exposed themselves to greater scrutiny and criticism than their peers. This has, apparently, induced more soul-searching within economics than in those other social sciences. Along with the air of superiority that economists exude due to their self-proclaimed intellectualism, comes a big dollop of insecurity.…
Buried right at the end, in the concluding paragraph, is this statement:“Most modern economists have a strong practical bent. They believe in the ideal of an expert-advised democracy, in which their competence would be utilized and on display in high profile, non-elective positions in government and other institutions.”
I don’t agree. Economists don’t want an “expert led democracy” at all. They want a society led by Platonic philosopher kings, with economists being those very folk. Economists, those on the right anyway, don’t have time for democracy.
As you know, I have been on quite a kick lately [here, here, here, and here] criticizing mainstream economics as being fundamentally anti-democratic. I base this assertion on the utopian thrust in economics to describe an apolitical method of resource distribution – one in which politics, as expressed through government action, can only make things worse. As I see it the the centrality of markets in economic theorizing is an attempt to eliminate politics. And, since the emergence of democracy as our standard way of expressing politics institutionally, this implies at least a disdain for said democracy, if not an outright contempt.
The Radford Free Press
Superior EconomistsPeter Radford
Superior EconomistsPeter Radford
"Of the tendencies that are harmful to sound economics, the most seductive and, in my opinion the most poisonous, is to focus on questions of distribution." — Robert Lucas Jr. (See here , Last paragraph).
"Political Economy you [Malthus] think is an Enquiry into the Causes and nature of Wealth; I think it rather Should be Called an Enquiry into the Laws Which Determine the Division of the Produce of Industry amongst the classes who concur in its formation. " — — David Ricardo (See here ).
Both CAN not be right.Naked Keynesianism
Quotes
Matias Vernengo | Associate Professor of Economics, University of Utah
1 comment:
"Of the tendencies that are harmful to sound economics, the most seductive, and in my opinion the most poisonous, is to focus on questions of distribution. In this very minute, a child is being born to an American family and another child, equally valued by God, is being born to a family in India."
Robert Lucas
I love Lucas's mention of God and I assume that when religionists tell us that we must follow God's will they fail to understand that God's will is What "We" Want since this God created us with a duality of nature which we can only reconcile through the mechanisms of political equality and the democratic process.
https://www.academia.edu/3648469/The_Dualism_of_Human_Nature_and_its_Social_Conditions_by_%C3%89mile_Durkheim_with_a_translators_note
Post a Comment