From the Chronicle of Higher Education "Footnoted" blog (Heterodox Economics Redux):
Like Christopher Hayes's article in The Nation back in May, The New York Times' exploration of "heterodox economics" this morning has stirred up a hornet's nest.
Eric Nilsson, of California State University at San Bernardino, complains that the Times spoke only with scholars "who have taken the most timid of steps outside the orthodox framework."
As if to prove Nilsson's point, John Whitehead, of Appalachian State University, praises the Times article in a post titled, "I'm heterodox, but not too heterodox."
From the opposite corner, Patrick Hynes, of Ankle Biting Pundits, takes the article as evidence that "command and control is back." He adds, "I just hope it won’t require another communist empire to rise up and enslave hundreds of millions of people and kill about fifty million more just to prove that the free market is the best economic system available to us." (Is there a Soviet Union-invoking corollary to Godwin's Law?)
On the other hand, I've been called timid a number of times.
