Econ Textbooks as Propaganda

[JazzRemington]

My assertion is thus: economic textbooks are written using propaganda techniques.

Basically, it is my belief that most economic textbooks are written using propaganda techniques, such as jumping on the bandwagon and whatnot. I wish to study a few econ texts to see if this is the case. My research will have three basic phases: 1) I will brush up on my critical thinking skills by reading a text or two on the matter, 2) I will obtain as many current econ texts as I can get my hands on (at least ones written within the last 6-7 years), 3) I will research any published articles on the subject to see how they went about it and if they went about it.

Strangely, I will begin with the third phase. Does anyone know of any other work like the one I am proposing to do? Note: I do not want critiques of mainstream economic texts (i.e. I do not want things like Debunking Economics). I am wondering if anyone else has taken the same approach I have, basically.

I am thinking about just using introductory level econ works, as I think these be "propagandaistic" than others. I may also use a few websites, if they seem to be written with enough authority.

[ComradeRed]

Originally posted by JazzRemington@December 13, 2007 08:30 am
My assertion is thus: economic textbooks are written using propaganda techniques.

Basically, it is my belief that most economic textbooks are written using propaganda techniques, such as jumping on the bandwagon and whatnot. I wish to study a few econ texts to see if this is the case. My research will have three basic phases: 1) I will brush up on my critical thinking skills by reading a text or two on the matter, 2) I will obtain as many current econ texts as I can get my hands on (at least ones written within the last 6-7 years), 3) I will research any published articles on the subject to see how they went about it and if they went about it.

Well, there are some "classic" introductory textbooks written for the undergraduate level. You might want to note that they never claim there is a problem with the methods and theories they present

Varian's Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach is "the" textbook for Microeconomics. Sameulson's Principles of Economics is still used at the macro level.

Strangely, I will begin with the third phase. Does anyone know of any other work like the one I am proposing to do? Note: I do not want critiques of mainstream economic texts (i.e. I do not want things like Debunking Economics). I am wondering if anyone else has taken the same approach I have, basically.

No, because scholars that did this would lose their jobs.

I found this paper which may be of assistance.

As well as this, but there's really not much out there available on this subject

[JazzRemington]

Thanks for the assistance. I hope to begin a good search for resources sometime next week, as this week is pretty much nothing but finals. Maybe by the end of next week I'll have a good bibliography ready.

[ComradeRed]

You would need a good criteria for propaganda though.

It would be trivial to demonstrate that the textbooks are unscientific. But to demonstrate that they tacitly have an agenda would be more difficult.

Not impossible, but something I wouldn't have the patience for.

Any microeconomics or macroeconomics introductory textbooks are good examples though. Just my two cents.

[JazzRemington]

I recall reading a critical thinking book in my undergrad work and it had a few propaganda techniques that people use to sway people to their line of thinking. One was Jumping on the Bandwagon (i.e. we do it so you should to), another was Appeal to Emotion, etc.

I think the criteria I'd use would be something like stating "propaganda is a set of messages with the attempt to change the opinions and behavior of a large group of people by presenting information that is biased toward said goals." I would then provide a quick overview of a few popular techniques. I think "large group of people" is good enough to include Econ students. But perhaps I should wait until I read through a few texts on critical thinking (or even propaganda), as I think they will provide a good criteria for propaganda that I could use.

[ComradeRed]

One last thought that came to mind: economists tend to trumpet their work as "positive economics" (i.e. what is rather than what should be).

But then discuss the "optimal conditions" for "maximum allocation of resources" and so forth. They kinda contradict that "positivism" they brag about.