Economists’ ineffectual model disputes distract the public from threatening crisis explanations

Evidence

The most plausible answer lies instead in the passive recruitment of the profession for agnotological purposes. Whether they realize it or not, the kabuki of ineffectual disputations over irrelevant models is one of the more effective interventions in the public sphere, because it distracts attention from far more threatening prospective explanations. These include: the possibility that the financial sector has evolved to the point of cannibalization of the rest of the economy; or that the economics profession played an enabling role in inventing and justifying the most Rube Goldberg of securitizations and alterations of regulations; that neoliberal agnotology has filtered down to the very statistics everyone consults in order to make sense of economic events; that there is no such thing as the market, but only an array of different markets of varying capacities; that this ecology of markets bears inherent tendencies toward niche collapse that undermine system operation; and that ā€œfree tradeā€ is the cover story for the policies of a class of the cosmopolitan rich who believe they can evade all local consequences of system breakdown. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 840

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the reader’s broader ā€˜thought collective’ interest and late-2000s critiques of the market concept (e.g., Mirowski’s own work, Callon). — connects to: Treating economic shocks as blameworthy endogenous outcomes justifies removing policy tools from elected officials — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 253; Economists’ self-denying neutrality limited their influence on popular political debate — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free…, 125; Economists serve the financial sector by muddying public debate to block political action. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 623 (+6 more)

Broader Connections