Home > The Economics Profession > “We would like to be able to bring this disastrous proposal to the attention of heterodox economists”

“We would like to be able to bring this disastrous proposal to the attention of heterodox economists”

The pluralist Economics Program at the University of Western Sydney is about to be shut down by our management over a perceived falloff in student numbers.

We would like to be able to bring this disastrous proposal to the attention of heterodox economists, in the hope that public and international pressure can make the administration reconsider its decision. It is to be decided upon on November 19.
This blog entry on an site run by disaffected UWS staff gives a good overview of the proposal:
The Change Proposal document details the administration’s reasonsl the attached Background Material gives a more accurate picture of why the unit is being disbanded.
Professor Steve Keen
  1. November 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Well, Steve, it goes to show that “rabble rousing” may not provide a lot of financial rewards!
    (Speaking from experience) :)

  2. November 9, 2012 at 5:09 pm

    This will be a really disastrous evolution. Not only because J.M.Keynes lived among us and assured the 30 glorious years, but also beause the dangerous march of the international economy is a proof that modern economies need both main theories: neoclassical and keynesian.

    • November 9, 2012 at 5:32 pm

      how can you have a need forboth nepoclassica theoryl and Keynes — when as Keynes noted the classical theorists invented a world remote from reality and choose to love in it consistently. Keynes was a theory for a reality world monetary economy.

  3. robert r locke
    November 11, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    Universities have to review disciplines offered regularly. In recent years academic managers have eliminated or diminished courses in the classics, romance languages, philosophy, and other humanities, usually on the grounds of declining enrollments. Economics has benefitted from readjustments in humanities, but now for the first time it has come under a similar attack. Students are pragmatic, they want to be employed, which is why they abandoned the humanities. If they stop studying a subject (economics) it means that they think that potential employers no longer see it as useful.
    One blogger, using astronomy as an example, argued that enrollments should not be the basis for the decision to drop. In a research university, not many people study astronomy, but research and teaching of the subject has added immensely to our knowledge of the world, on a theoretical as well as a practical level – hence, despite low enrollments, the subject should be a valued part of university studies.
    Can the same be said for economics? Can its retention be justified in terms of its contribution to our knowledge of the real-world economy? No == most on this blog write. Those neo-classical economists who have successfully ignore this critique are now, in this attack on economics as a university subject, seeing the consequences of their refusal to come to terms with the shortcomings of their subject.
    Neo-classical economics must make the discipline knowledge-creation relevant through a fundamental reappraisal of is assumptions and methods of analysis. All options must be on the table – including the critique of economics presented by non-economists.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s