Some Conundrums of Mainstream Economics

Abstract

It is not accurate to accept economics as a science akin to physics, chemistry or mathematics where definite results can be generated. Furthermore, it can be misleading to define it as a social science independent of ideologies that are shaped over current class conflicts or the ascribed set of values of the capitalist society or the set of social values which create alternatives for the capitalist system. The reality is that; the systemic reasons of the fundamental issues such as poverty and hunger which arise from the intense labour exploitation and the income and wealth inequality which has reached to colossal levels in the world, are being ignored. Moreover, realities such as global warming and climate destruction which are thrust upon nature by capitalist production and consumerism or determinations regarding the shaping of individual interests mainly by social relations are rejected reasoning that the contain value judgements therefore are ethical issues. This article therefore,will discuss the following issues; the relationship between metaphysical and historical materialism way of thought, the class interests of the bourgeoisie and the hegemonic ideologies of the system, delusive hypotheses and models and religious beliefs with mainstream economics understanding.

Keywords

• Mainstream Economics
• Ideology
• Value Judgement
• Political Economy

Anaakım İktisadın Bazı Açmazları

Öz

İktisat bilimini fizik ya da kimya gibi fen bilimleri kadar kesin sonuçlar üretebilmemizi sağlayabilecek bir bilim olarak kabul etmek doğru değildir. Ayrıca onun mevcut sınıfsal çatışmaların üzerinde şekillenen ideolojilerden ya da kapitalist toplumun verili değer yargılarından veya kapitalist sisteme karşı alternatifler üreten toplumsal değer yargılarından bağımsız bir sosyal bilim olduğunu ileri sürmek de yanıltıcı olabilir. İşin aslı gerçek dünyadaki yoğun emek sömürüsünden ve devasa boyutlara erişen gelir ve servet eşitsizliğinden kaynaklanan başta yoksulluk ve açlık gibi temel sorunların böyle sistemik nedenleri görmezden gelinmektedir. Keza kapitalist üretim ve tüketim tarzının doğa üzerinde yarattığı başta küresel ısınma ve iklim yıkımı gibi gerçekler veya bireysel çıkarların büyük ölçüde sosyal ilişkilerce belirlendiğine ilişkin saptamalar değer yargısı içerdiği, dolayısıyla da etik ile ilgili konular olduğu gerekçesiyle reddedilmektedir. Bu makalede sırasıyla; anaakım iktisat anlayışının metafizik ve tarihsel maddeci düşünce biçimi, burjuvazinin sınıfsal çıkarları ve sistemin egemen ideolojileri, soyut varsayımlar ve modeller ve dinsel inançlarla ilişkisi ele alınmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anaakım İktisat
• İdeoloji
• Değer Yargısı
• Ekonomi Politik

Kaynakça

1. Amin, S. (1978). The Law Of Worldwide Value (Translated by Brian Pearce and Shane Mage), Monthly Review Press.
2. Amin, S. (2011). Talking About The Market. https://www.pambazuka.org/governance/talking-about-market (10 March 2011)
3. Andrews, A. (2009). Praying for a revolution in economics. www. theguardian.com, (11 July 2009).
4. Barjonet, A. (1962). Ekonomi Politik Nedir? (Çeviren: Erdoğan Başar), Anadolu Yayınları.
5. Blaug, M. (2002). Disturbing currents in modern economics. http://www.autisme-economie.org, May 2002.
6. Chang, H., & Stern-Weiner, J. (2014). Becoming Economic Citizens, Part 1-2. http://www.newleftproject.org, (05 June 2014).
7. Cox, H. (1999). The Market as God, Living in the new dispensation, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/03).
8. Das, R. J. (2012). Why must social science be critical, and why must doing social science be difficult? http://radicalnotes.com (3 November 2012).

9. Davidson, P. (2012). Is economics a science? Should economics be rigorous? Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, USA, real-word economics review issue no. 59, http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue59/Davidson59.pdf, (12 March 2012).
10. Durmuş, M. (2014). Kamu Ekonomisi Teorisi Üzerinden Bir Ana Akım (Neo-klasik) İktisat Eleştirisi, Yrd. Doç. Dr. Nilgün Akça’ya Armağan, Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara, 169- 195.
11. Ghosh, J. (2013). Why Study Economics? http://brechtforum.org. (June 2013).
12. Gutenschwager, G. (2012). Is Economics a Value Free Science? World Economics Association, (WEA), Conferences, 2012, Economics and Society. The Ethical Dimension, (Feb-March 2012).
13. Hill, R., & Myatt, T. (2010). The Economics of Anti-text book, A Critical Thinker’s Guide to Micro-economics, Zed Books.
14. Lipsey R. G. & Steiner, P. O. (1978). Economics, McGraw-Hill Book Company Incorporated.
15. Marx, K. (1859). A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy-Preface, 1859”,Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1977, https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm (17 December 2021).
16. Marx, K. (1994). Economic Manuscript of 1861 – 63 (Conclusion) in Marx and Engels, Collected Works, 34 (New York: International Publishes.
17. Nelson, R. H. (2001). Economics as religion, The Pennsylvania State University Press.
18. Orrell, D. (2010). Economyths, Ten Ways Economics Get It Wrongs, John Wiley and Sons Canada, Ltd.
19. Parker, (2009). A critique of von Mises et al. http://libcom.org (17 August 2009); https://anarchism.pageabode.com/book/c-1-what-is-wrong-with-economics/#secc16 (18 December 2021).
20. Rutherfold, D. (2002). Routledge Dictionary of Economics, second edition.
21. Scott, A. G. (1991). Marxian and radical economics. A Modern Guide to Economic Thought (Edt: Douglas Mair, Anne G. Miller), Edward Elgar Publ., 1991.
22. Seligman, E. R. A. (1903). Economics and Social Progress, Publications of the American Economic Association, 3rd Series, 4(1), (February 1903).
23. Shiller, R. J. (2011). A People’s Economics. http://www.project-syndicate.org, (20 January 2011).
24. Smith, Y. (2010). Death of an economic paradigm. http://brechtforum.org/death-economic-paradigm, from Mint [India], (15 June 2010).
25. Yates, M. D. (2011). The Emperor Has No Clothes, But Still He Rules: Three Critiques of Neoclassical Economics. http://cheapmotelsandahotplate.org, (14 June 2011).