The genesis of the Cambridge Economics Faculty

Great piece on the evolution of the Cambridge Economics Faculty. The insight gained from the article is great because you get to know how some strands of economics developed with respect to the context back then (more so compared to today's context).

What I think was left out in the article is that the London School of Economics was a great rival of Cambridge back then. To say that debate has transformed from ideologies to methodologies is not quite true because the debate over ideologies is still alive, even so after the beat down from the Great Recession of 2008.

The shift in the centre of economics gravity from Cambridge (UK) to Cambridge (Massachusetts) is ironic to say the list.

Thought categorisations

Do one really have to identify oneself with any one of the various economic ideologies around for one to be considered a serious economist? Really! There is a tendency for professional economists (academics included) and enthusiasts alike to being identified with being 'keynesian' 'austrian' 'neoclassical' etc. But is it necessary or good for the advancement of the discipline of economics?

I don't think so because by being identified in one category you end up defending something you are not interested about for the sake of being a keynesian for an example. Of course, such categorizations won't stop but people must not be put in a corner by such practices. The development of one's thinking should not be restricted.

Anyway these classifications, as they exist, are similar to projecting the world politically in a left and right spectrum, which is quite wrong to say the least. Our attempts to describe the current thinking should not limit the freedom of thought. At the same time people should free themselves from intellectual imperialism which they obiquitously find comfort in.