1950s development economics featured real debates, not a single orthodoxy

Evidence

Ascher (1996, 314) recognizes the early pluralism when he refers to Hirschman, who argued in 1981 that in the early (and formative) period of the field “neoclassical economics was competing with Marxism, neo-Marxism, and a distinctive development economics,” although neither Ascher nor Hirschman recognized the distinctiveness of the neoliberal participants in the debate. Meier and Seers (1984, 22) came somewhat closer in their effort to describe Western mainstream pluralism of the early days: “Some may choose to summarize the mainstream development economics of the 1950s as being structural, shaped by trade pessimism… . But there were crosscurrents, and the period was characterized by vigorous debate over some leading issues. Especially notable were controversies over balanced growth versus unbalanced growth, industrialization versus agriculture, import substitution versus export promotion, planning versus reliance on the market price system. The debates of some of these issues are still unresolved.” — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1335

Categorization

• XREF: The balanced vs unbalanced growth and planning vs market debates echo the core ideological fault lines the reader is mapping in neoliberal origins. — connects to: 1950s development consensus focused on output growth without prescribing method. — Quinn Slobodian, Globalists: The End of Empire and the…, 526; Development scholars by the late 1950s saw capital and technology as insufficient for growth. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 336; Neoliberal development economics emerged parallel to, not after, mainstream development theory — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 1269 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Neoliberalism originated in contested debate, not a pure doctrine #corroborates (0.84) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 405
• Neoliberal development economics emerged parallel to, not after, mainstream development theory #corroborates (0.82) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1269
• Neoliberal development thought predated and coexisted with left-wing theories rather than countering them #expands (0.80) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1266
• Mont Pèlerin Society members disagreed sharply over development policy in the 1950s #exemplifies (0.78) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1261
• Development debates forced neoliberals to confront state character, trade, and socialism together #expands (0.75) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1273
• Development economics emerged as a heterodox discipline that traditional neoclassical economists opposed #corroborates (0.72) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1262