Read on Twitter
1/N In my article "Identity in Economics or Identity of Economics?" in @miami_institute econ forum, I engage w the issue of identity in econ to argue that while there is a problem of identity in the discipline, the fons et origo of the problem is the identity of the discipline
https://twitter.com/miami_institute/status/1336694369814974471
https://twitter.com/miami_institute/status/1336694369814974471
2/N I unpack how in economics' claim to objectivity, a certain set of principles - those emanating from the Global North-centric mainstream knowledge - 've been privileged, while all other contesting understandings 've been dismissed as being unscientific. http://miamisocialsciences.org/home/4kjktd9cucyr431igamed9xsdz8gfz
3/N "Given its political & economic power in the world, Global North-centric mainstream economic thought & experience have laid out the roadmap of what the Global South ‘needs’ to strive for; how that could be achieved; and, what forms of knowledge are ‘objective’ or ‘scientific"
4/N "On the flip side, the Global South has come to be recognized as the ‘other’ and the ‘deficient’ that ‘needs’ to be molded along the principles laid out by the dominant view in the North"
5/N "This hegemony of the North is function of the development of capitalism. The North represents the essence of capitalism. It was here that capitalism flourished, making Global North the normative rule, while the Global South became the ‘lack’— not adequately capitalist."
6/N Despite a deeply political process of marginalization of the Global South’s ways or non-mainstream ways of organizing and analyzing the economy, it has been largely freed from its political moorings by disparaging all these alternate ways as non-scientific.
7/N Through this, there has been an active de-politicization of the discipline of economics through a deeply political project of the Global North’s dominance.
8/N Given this dominance, the institutions that govern what kinds of knowledge about the ‘economic’ is ordained ‘scientific are embedded in mainstream Global North-centric understandings and are located in these rich advanced capitalist countries. +
9/N...And by virtue of playing the role of upholding the power of this mainstream knowledge, are celebrated as value-neutral ‘top’ institutions.
10/N "These institutions comprise the ‘top’ journals, ‘top’ universities, ‘top’ conferences, and are viewed as the flag bearers of ‘objective’ ‘scientific’ knowledge, and most of what is produced outside these institutions is hardly viewed as knowledge worth engaging with. "
11/N Not only are global Majority, as well as those trained in non-mainstream thoughts, are underrepresented in ‘top’ journals, ‘top’ universities and ‘top’ conferences, any knowledge that questions this mainstream Global North-centric knowledge is deemed as not-objective.
12/N This has important implications: "Global South scholars are under even higher pressure to emulate scholars in the North in order to be able to be recognized as legitimate creators of scientific knowledge.. Such is the hegemony of the GN-centric mainstream of economics"
13/N"Further, the discipline of development economics, which is viewed as dealing with the issues of the Global South, is perceived as a special branch of economics that studies the economies representing an ‘out of ordinary’ phenomenon & where the ‘objective’ rules do not apply"
14/N Implications: "rather than students being taught critical perspectives on the global economic order, students are taught to ‘think like an economists'...- who are supposed to think according to a given set of ‘objective’ principles that are laid out in mainstream economics"
15/N "This results in a censoring and marginalization of the wide range of critical schools of thought in economics. While this process of censoring happens both in the Global North and in the Global South, it takes a sharper form in the South."
16/N "This throttles the possibility of students to develop critical thinking, suppresses the possibility of Global majority scholars to understand the realities from a Global South-centric lens."
17/N "Those few from the Global South who are able to break into the ‘inner circle’ of the ‘top’ Global North institutions that informs and shapes what gets accepted as knowledge, more often than not, are deeply embedded in North-centric mainstream economic thinking."
18/N "These scholars—even if they represent identity-based diversity in these ‘top’ institutions—are unable to challenge the structures that produce these hierarchies, and instead only become exemplars in legitimizing the hegemony of these institutions."
19/N While diversity in representation is important for creating space for Global Majority voices, what we also need is a space for pluralities, a space for distinct meanings of “economic progress” that are outside the narrow echelons of mainstream knowledge.
20/N "The first step towards ensuring this diversity in economics warrants recognizing the politics of knowledge creation in the field. The task, therefore, is a re-politicization of the process of knowledge creation."
21/N While important initiatives are fighting to create a space for diversity in terms of identity & in schools of thought (details in the article), the project of dismantling the power structures embedded in this process of knowledge creation in economics does not end here.
22/N "At a fundamental level, the task is to displace the locus from the GN...the task is for post-colonial GS to assert its intellectual sovereignty. The task is not simply to seek recognition, but to assert oneself as existing and not seeking, as complete and not deficient."
23/N "The task is to rethink the process of knowledge creation including that within the GS; to look beyond the select institutions as loci of knowledge production; to move beyond the narrow conceptions of scientificity; & to redefine the goals as well as the rules of the game. "
24/N The project, therefore, is emancipatory - as going beyond the discursive oppression, is social - as going beyond individual scholars to focus on social transformation, is scientific - as rooted in radical critiques challenging the biased understanding of knowledge.
25/N I am indebted to Snehashish Bhattacharya for several critical conversations on which the article is based. I'm grateful to @ingridharvold @devikadutt @cacrisalves @farwasial and @DivDecEcon for formative engagements.
Thank you @Jayati1609 @MaribelMorey1 & @miami_institute
Thank you @Jayati1609 @MaribelMorey1 & @miami_institute
