Community Service

Read this if you always objected to the world economics is creating,but werent sure why

Stephen Marglin is a very brave man. For years he led glassy-eyed Harvard doctoral students in their only compulsory seminar,encouraging them to question economics basic assumptions. A tough market. Part of why his new book is so good: only the most illustrative stories survived.

Stephen Marglin is also a very worried man. Unlike some colleagues,hes noticed that few other humans think like economists. He realised this when teaching at Delhis Indian Statistical Institute in the 60s; students managed advanced math,but couldnt explain it in real terms. Actually thinking like economists appeared pointless to them but necessary; else you might have to settle for driving a cab. The penalty for failure has certainly changed,but the educational system that produced such beliefs has not. Economics,he decided that Delhi afternoon,was culturally specific. And not just Indians,but most westerners,werent part of the culture that got it.

Stephen Marglin is also a very gloomy man. Market-led growth has,he fears,destroyed something vital: a sense of community. How does he know community is vital? Like a good economist,because people value it. The Amish,a favourite example,are farmers living a 17th century life in 21st century Pennsylvania; he tells the story of how they reject state care for a child with immune-system problems; accepting the help wouldnt be Amish. The child died; thats how much community matters to people,Marglin says. Thinking like an economist traps you into thinking that this was a retrogressive,oppressive social system that needed to be dragged into modernity for the sake of the children,if nothing else. That would apparently be a mistake.

But Stephen Marglin has written a wonderful book. It unselfconsciously takes on Marx,Keynes,Amartya Sen and Milton Friedman. What it wants to articulate is the objection to growth-led development that motivates the incoherent but beautifully written critiques that convince few while winning praise from the writers friends. Such critiques might,out of cowardice or confusion,hide that when you take on the Church of Economics,you are taking on modernity itself. This doesnt: The foundational assumptions of economics are simply the tacit assumptions of modernity. Other critiques,more radical on the surface,might idealise a pre-modern existence or hide the drawbacks of community. Marglin does not,as the Amish example shows. Because Marglin,unlike others,is grounded in the realities of development,especially in India.

Too much is economics fault,though. Were told that When the economist calculates the value of human life,the average inhabitant of Puerto Rico is found to be one-third that of a mainland US resident. But thats not economics fault. Only through economic-style thinking,actually,are you forced to confront those stark untenable differences. Thats a miss. More is missing in the discussion on trade and labour standards. Anti-sweatshop and fair trade movements in the West,for example,are defensible as non-economic ways of creating a community with producers far away. These arent needed within nation-states,as those substitute for community and handle redistribution,Marglin explains. But the idealism of someone capable of imagining Wal-Mart shoppers paying double for coffee for moral reasons cant encompass the idea of redistribution across borders.

Read it if youre an economist: Marglin can deconstruct its foundations as nobody else can. Why should preferences be a given? Sometimes tastes are just wrong,and need to be changed. Read it if you know economists,and thought they think oddly though it might make you want to think like them. And read this if you always objected to the world theyre creating,but werent sure why. Marglin has articulated it for you better than anyone else. Because he thought like an economist.