Elite economists were to serve patrons, not students, peers, or truth

Evidence

Well in advance of these developments, Stigler had provided a blueprint for the emerging epistemic regime. A market-governed science should utilize contract research and be conducted outside the structure of academic departments, under close supervision of one empowered to deliver on promises made to patrons. The purpose was not merely to produce “more” science, and certainly not to ensure the freedom of the individual scientist to pursue independent inquiry. Far from it. Instead, it was to free elite scientists from the need to satisfy their students and fellow faculty. If it worked to plan, it would free them from the need to persuade most anyone of anything. Anyone, that is, apart from their patrons, who demanded they produce the “right” kind of knowledge, and justifiably so. Stigler’s vision, although ahead of its time, anticipated the private funding of economics imperialism and neoliberal governmentality that has transformed the academy and science in the four decades since. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 158

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to Mirowski’s broader thesis about Cold War economics patronage and the contracting model of science it spawned. — connects to: Mainstream economics gives patrons the knowledge they pay for rather than objective truth. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 806; Economists present their discipline as value-free truths above class interests — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 51; Patronage, not analysis, explains academic economists’ crisis positions. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 874 (+3 more)
  • QUESTION: Stigler’s blueprint reverses the familiar narrative of science as freedom-loving curiosity; worth checking how consciously this became the think-tank model.

Broader Connections