When Evan Jones wrote
 

>Is the economics profession/discipline monolithic or pluralist?
>This question might sound self-indulgent, but it is well-intentioned. 
>It is a product of some recent media exchanges in Australia/New 
>Zealand. 

I enquired ...

>Which media exchanges about what? 

To which Evan replied ...

>The answer was included in the next paragraph in the original note, 
>to whit:
>The 'quality' press in A/NZ gives much attention to economic issues 
>(in the general part of the paper as well as the business/finance 
>section), and that exposure is near-monolithically given over to 
>the eternal verities of the right libertarian position - 
>deregulate, privatise, everything that moves, 'independent' central 
>bank, etc. It's an ongoing process that covers but transcends 
>particular issues - GATT, public utilities, labour conditions, 
>greenhouse, etc. ANybody who disagrees is ex-communicated either as 
>a populist idiot or representative of a vested interest.
>IN a sense, the right libertarian agenda now hogs the stage as the 
>great cultural unifier (or disunifier), crowding out God, Queen and  
>Country (though it hasn't yet dislodged 'the family', being part of a 
>continuing intra-right dispute).
>The agenda is pushed and defended as the product of 
>a 'truth-possessing economics discipline, in turn rooted in a 
>rigorous corpus of theory.  
>My point is that it appears more politically productive to attack 
>economics per se than to claim that this stuff is the product of one 
>brand of economics. On the contrary, one needs to go for the jugular. 
>It seems to me that the libertarian right is right.  They are 
>economics. We dissenters who hang around the edges are essentially 
>imposters and we do the profession a favour (and the public a 
>disservice) by making the profession look more tolerant than it is. 
>Evan Jones


Maybe you could pick a particular case of a debate in A/NZ the media 
where ...

"exposure is near-monolithically given over to the eternal varities of 
the right libertarian position",

as you say, which might be of interest to people on Pen-L. Then we 
could all discuss what we think the best strategy is to deal with it, 
be it an attack on all economists or something more focused.

Peter Robertson :-).

Reply via email to