This interview took place in Budapest, Hungary on 30 July, 2008 What is your overall reaction to this project? I was happy to hear about the project and to read parts of the first volume (Colander et al., 2004a) and portions of this one. I welcome your enthusiastic efforts to give an overview of heterodoxy out of mainstream, and to try and structure the ideas. There are certain characteristic elements of your project where I share your views, and we are in complete agreement, some on which I have no view, and then there are other issues where I believe you are leaving out certain aspects of contemporary economics, which I find important. The fact that you don’t discuss them can be a sign that you don’t find them important. There is little sense in discussing issues where I have no view or those issues where we agree. Thus, I hope we will spend much of the discussion on the disagreements, especially regarding matters you have left out of your presentation. Where I agree is in your description of the American economics profession. There, I’m both an insider and an outsider. I spent 18 years teaching at Harvard in the United States – from 1986 to 2002. I had taught at Princeton, Stanford and Yale before that. I agree with your description of the self-perpetuating, oligopolistic mechanism that reproduces itself. The world of ideas in American economics is not a monopoly, but there is a very powerful core that does not...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.