In The role of literary fiction in perpetuating neo-liberal economic myths – Part 1, I noted introduced the idea that fictional literature plays a significant role in framing false economic concepts and, thus, can promotes neo-liberal biases among the readership, even when the plot of the narrative is ostensibly about something other than economics. In other words, what parades as fiction becomes a powerful tool for spreading ideological propaganda, often in a very subliminal or subtle way. In Part 2, I demonstrate that further and provide correct Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) interpretations of popularised economic statements that the characters in the book in focus (The Mandibles) weave into their conversation as if they are accepted facts. The lesson is clear. To further advance Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) ideas, novelists who are sympathetic to the cause should construct their narratives consistent with the MMT principles, where economic matters are touched upon in their work. This will help to counter the misconceptions that arise in literary fiction when authors engage with flawed neo-liberal arguments about the monetary system. It might also help educate book reviewers who often, knowingly or unknowingly, reinforce the myths in the main text.…
How about a novel or film in which understanding of MMT saves the world? It doesn't seem difficult to construct a highly plausible scenario, e.g., along the lines of
Being There, where someone very unlikely schools "the experts" in the obvious, or along the lines of
The Matrix or
The Wizard of Oz, where the illusory consensus view is created by perpetration of financial and economic myths by those behind the veil. Or maybe a sequel to
The Grapes of Wrath.
BTW, Thomas Piketty weaves literature skillfully into his narrative in
Capital, in a way that is much more powerful than he use of neoclassical economics.
There is precedent for this on the left in addition to the right, where Ayn Rand's novels stand out. The enduring popularity
The Wizard of Oz may be based on the fascinating story, but it was originally conceived as
Populist persuasion.
Then there is the still hugely popular board game, Monopoly, the idea for which was originally conceived to bolster the message of Henry George.
The history of Monopoly can be traced back to 1903,[1][4] when American anti-monopolist Elizabeth Magie created a game through which she hoped to be able to explain the single tax theory of Henry George. It was intended as an educational tool to illustrate the negative aspects of concentrating land in private monopolies. Magie took out a patent in 1904. Her game, The Landlord's Game, was self-published, beginning in 1906.[5]
A series of variant board games based on her concept was developed from 1906 through the 1930s that involved the buying and selling of land and the development of that land. Cardboard houses were added and rents were increased as they were added. Magie again patented the game in 1923.[6]
According to an advertisement placed in The Christian Science Monitor, Charles Todd of Philadelphia recalled the day in 1932 when his childhood friend, Esther Jones and her husband Charles Darrow, came to their house for dinner. After the meal, the Darrows played The Landlord's Game several times with them, a game that was entirely new to the Darrows, and before he left, Darrow asked for a written set of the rules. After Darrow distributed the game himself as Monopoly, the Todds never spoke to the Darrows again.[7]
After Darrow had excellent sales during the Christmas season of 1934, the Parker Brothers bought the game's copyrights from Darrow.[8] After finding Darrow was not the sole inventor of the game, Parker bought the rights to Magie's patent.[9] — Wikipedia
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
The role of literary fiction in perpetuating neo-liberal economic myths – Part 2Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia
