Students at the University of Notre Dame are petitioning their administration to hire more economists who will teach about "heterodox theories" and adopt a "plurality of views," along with emphasizing an "overview of the history of economic thought." One can access the petition to read it more thoroughly (and maybe sign it) at http://www.petitiononline.com/econnd.
This is a followup to the scandalous situation at ND where in 2003 the administration took away the graduate program in economics and gave it to a newly formed "Department of Economics and Econometrics," which describes itself as "neoclassical." The administration has been spending huge amounts of money to bring in people as chaired professors who have published articles in the AER, JPE, QJE, and JET. The dean there wanted a department with a high ranking, with such rankings being determined by pubbing articles in such journals. Publishing books do not count. So, Phil Mirowski in the old department, has published books that are far more influential than anything published by any of these new hires, but they do not "count."
Frankly, the ND administration is wasting its money, besides contributing to the narrowing of economic thought and perspectives. They could have spent half as much and gotten themselves the leading heterodox department in the US, maybe even in the world. As it is (and I am not out to insult particularly anybody in this new department), the best they will do is what Robert Solow said when he opposed all this back in 2003, that they will get a "third-rate version of the MIT department." He said that was not what we needed, and I agree.
5 comments:
I'm surprised that the forces that be have managed to constrain economic thought for so long and so successfully.
The emergence of a free-ideas media such as the internet makes it inevitable that a revolution in economic orthodoxy will occur. Perhaps the end of any orthodoxy altogether.
Ordinary folks will find, in the not too distant future, how remarkably easy is will be to point out the obvious flaws in economic thought to our prominent and highly-paid orthodox economic spokespersons.
Brenda,
It's easy to point out the flaws. The difficulty, though, is getting ordinary people to pay attention or care. I hope it's the "not too distant future" I've been at this for 14 years on the Internet. Haven't seen a real breakthrough yet.
"I hope it's the "not too distant future" I've been at this for 14 years on the Internet. Haven't seen a real breakthrough yet..."
Sandwichman, having thought that thought so many times I feel compelled to write something in reply; no matter how inconsequential and unoriginal and unhelpful.
Having just spent the last month looking at brain MRI images (and actually diagnosing a rare syndrome for my friend) the thought struck me that there must be hundreds of millions of people existing on the planet with deformed and malfunctioning heads!
Think of the widespread nature of cerebro-vascular disease. Brains subjected to impaired blood flow that then lose 'executive' functions. Loss of insight, inability to plan appropriately. Poor analysis of problems and situations.
An hypoxia-impaired society reflecting the already disastrous level of pollution in our bodies.
And more and more inappropriate behaviour to come.
I think one should not underestimate the power of orthodox economists to ignore comments, critiques, and alternatives they find inconvenient.
Barkley,
This is entirely off topic and hopefully not impolite but there is a discussion of nonlinear dynamics at Yves Smith's blog, "Naked Capitalism", which seems in need of your (and/or others) expertice.
Guest Post: "Is the Securitization Crisis Driven by Nonlinear Systemic Processes?"
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/05/guest-post-is-securitization-crisis.html
Post a Comment