Histotically "The Professions" have tended to be conservative. I remember back in '70 in the MLA Delegate Assembly this woman complaining piteously that her training was in Renaissance literature, not the politics of bombing (or something like that). And at ISU many of the English Department faculty got all hot and bothered by political posts on the departmental e-mail list.
BUT it seems from everything I've heard about economists over the years that this is something diffrent. They are't reactionary pigs; they are an organized criminal conspiracy. Carrol [email protected] wrote: > > worth noting (and apologies if someone already has), that Krugman has > recently more or less admitted that about half of US universities did > actually semi-officially censor the *Keynesians*, making it rather more > credible that smaller and weaker tendencies got even worse treatment: > > http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/equilibrium-decadence-wonkish/ > > What does interest me is - how can these people ever be polite to each other > again? Presumably there will be some day in the future on which Krugman, > Prescott, Mankiw, Feldstein, DeLong and all sit down on some committee of the > AEA together or review papers for one another's journals. But how do you do > this after the kind of battle that we've seen over the effectiveness of > fiscal policy? And you think that people have had their papers in the AEA > despite being actually dishonest, how can you justify turning down the merely > mediocre? > > best > dd > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
