SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Anthony Waterman)
Date:
Fri Jan 26 13:08:04 2007
Message-ID:
<002f01c7416f$2a4c7ea0$5c0f688e@RedBalloon>
References:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)


In my article '"New Political Economies" Then and Now: Economic Theory and
the Mutation of Political Doctrine', Amer. Journ. of Econ. and Soc. 61.1
(2002): 13-51, I attempted to show how purely internal developments in
economic analysis from c. 1870 - 1930 gradually undermined the theoretical
basis of laissez-faire and predisposed most economists to collectivism by
the Second World War. The article is reprinted as Chap 14 in my recent book
(2004). If I may add a comment to this discussion: I do not think 'ideology'
has very much to do with it. Economists trying to understand how the system
works believed -- during the period I refer to here -- that they were
discovering, by politically neutral scholarly inquiry, that many of the
political-economic doctrines they had assimilated as young men from their
elders were scientifically defective.

Anthony Waterman

ATOM RSS1 RSS2