Modern economics replaced the class-conflict lens of classical political economy with individualist harmony

Evidence

Today’s dominant theories are the result of academic and political battles that have lasted hundreds of years, with the aim of expelling the economic paradigm of the founding fathers of political economy. Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and Karl Marx studied capitalism through the lens of class and class conflict. Over the last century, this lens has been replaced by a gaze that substitutes classes with individuals and conflict with harmony. — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism, 30

Categorization

• XREF: Directly parallels the arc the reader knows from Schumpeter and from the earlier Milgrom readings on market institutions — the same erasure of class conflict in economic theorizing. — connects to: Elite-rule theories recast class conflict as non-public elite bargaining — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2374; Neoclassical economics replaced class analysis with individualistic merit narratives — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism: An Intervention, 30; Pollock’s state capitalism theory erased class antagonisms in favor of purely political rulers — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 599 (+8 more)
• DEFINE: Clarifies the foundational definitional contrast between classical political economy (Smith, Ricardo, Marx) and neoclassical economics.

Broader Connections

• Neoclassical economics replaced class analysis with individualistic merit narratives #corroborates (0.95) — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism, 30
• State-capitalism theory downgrades the economic base in favor of direct political domination #corroborates (0.75) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 600
• Pollock’s state capitalism theory erased class antagonisms in favor of purely political rulers #corroborates (0.72) — Dirk Braunstein, Adorno’s Critique of Political Economy, 599