Creative destruction grew from an academic term into an empty truism after 1996

Evidence

For instance, both The Economist and The New York Times featured the term only a handful of times up until 1996, though thereafter its appearance increased exponentially, first in reference to Schumpeter’s concept, but then, by 2002, as its own self-referential truism. — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 433

Categorization

• DEFINE: Documents the semantic career of ‘creative destruction’ from Schumpeter’s concept to self-referential buzzword.
• XREF: connects to: Creative destruction, not peace, causes capitalism’s endemic crises — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 428; The concept of hybridity lost its critical force by becoming academically fashionable — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 3025; Institutionalized discursive practices can lose credibility and collapse — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 53

Broader Connections

• The concept of hybridity lost its critical force by becoming academically fashionable #expands (0.85) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 3025
• Creative destruction, not peace, causes capitalism’s endemic crises #responds-to (0.80) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 428
• Institutionalized discursive practices can lose credibility and collapse #expands (0.80) — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 53