Abstract
Most of the textbooks in the realm of macroeconomics are mostly micro in their outlook. This has primarily been because of the nature of everyday economics that we all have become familiar with. This, in other words, can also be called the economics of the 21st century and it has its roots resting in what can be called the ‘beggar thy neighbor policy’ or ‘how to rule over “the other”’. Such particular tendency gets successfully materialised through efficient macro-economic models and equations that have a macro ability to grip the economic needs and wants of the public. Alex Thomas’ book on macroeconomics, recently published by Cambridge University Press, in this regard comes at that point of intersection, going against the above type of textbook, in a radical sense by putting forth discussions, imaginations and most importantly provocations, instead of economic models, figures and equations. Such an alternative approach is also carried forward with utmost precision in a very lucid way through employing a strategy that seems to have its resting in history. In other words, this textbook is not a book of economic models or formulas; rather, this is a textbook of provocations that are in keeping with the everyday life of society, facilitating discussions and conversations that are too often ignored.
Students of economics today have been victims of a model of theory and practicality that has failed to take account of everyday life. This seems to be primarily because of a lack of understanding of the unfolding of economic history. That is, rather than knowing figures and their contributions such as that of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, J.M Keynes, Karl Marx or be it any contributors in the field of economics for that matter, the ‘epistemic departure’ (Varma 2022). among students seems to arise primarily because of a continuing exercise of a rigid methodological and theoretical structure that creates an inability among students to critically think about the contributions made by the broad history of economic thoughts made by varied thinkers. That is, for the students of a macroeconomics course what is learned is a course syllabi that has been forced upon them in order for them to successfully gain a degree after clearing an exam. Such terrible underpinning undermines students’ ability to think from a theoretical or a practical aspect of everyday life. This lack of sync between the students and the subject of enquiry seems to occur primarily because students have become victims of a syllabus that requires them to learn something and write for the exam and then forget it immediately. Rather than having an interest to learn macroeconomics as an essential part of understanding the material outside as well as the inside of a moving economic reality, students today study macroeconomics as a system imposed burden, just for the sake of getting good marks for writing an examination and for subsequently getting a degree in hand. In other words, the syllabus in this regard can be seen as a material fetish for the students to regurgitate what they have learned in an exam or competition in order to subsequently just forget. Such gruesome underpinning seems to emanate primarily because of a lack of pluralistic sense of history, as well as a pluralistic way of thinking when it comes to questioning and conceptualising what a macro economy is. It is in contrast to such typical way of teaching macroeconomics that this textbook – Macroeconomics: An Introduction by Alex M. Thomas – provides a seminal alternative type of tpedagogy that is pluralistic and not typified- something that proves essential for the economics students of the 21st century post-truth world.
In a chapter titled ‘Conceptualising the Macro Economy’, the author starts by asking certain questions such as
What do you think are the relevant aspects of a macroeconomy that can be utilised in the first stage of theorising? Should we try to classify households as rich and poor or treat them as if they are a single homogenous unit? Should we distinguish between local governments and the central government? Should we begin with a classification of firms as capital intensive and labour intensive? Or should we distinguish firms that cater primarily to the rest of the world from those that cater to the domestic economy? (Thomas 2021)
All these posed questions are those that have been conveniently waylaid in macroeconomics as a subject of enquiry. This hence naturally brings us to a point of understanding that macroeconomics was never really a conceptualised enquiry within the field of economics. This confirmation has been also arrived at because economics has positioned itself in so far as a depoliticised subject of money-making and has been just bothered about the ends and not necessarily the means to the end. So, basically, economics as a science gave answers and has not allowed people to raise questions.
The epistemic position mentioned above hence needs to be seen also as an artefact of a neoliberal time period, which has swallowed the mindsets of the people by and large with or without themselves realising that they have been actually swallowed. It is the unfolding of this weird, and at the same time wired, epistemic macro-economic reality that Alex Thomas attempts to uncover through this intriguing text.
An immediate example that comes from the book in this regard is the essential involvement of Baba Saheb Ambedkar in the field of macroeconomics. An important point also to be noted is that the majority of the authors in their academic endeavours (be it in India or elsewhere) have not really involved or have paid sufficient homage to the radical figure B.R. Ambedkar for his unparalleled contributions in the field of macro economy. The inimical nature of caste inherent within the contours of macroeconomics also has been not talked much either. Although there might be people who talk about caste and how much it matters, never really, so far, has there been a textbook on macroeconomics that identifies social issues more so than economic models. It is this kind of writing and understanding that can be seen manifesting throughout Macroeconomics: An Introduction. This therefore makes the reading of this textbook a unique and intellectual journey of varied ‘being and becoming’. Also because of the above, this book comes as an exception to the mainstream understanding of macroeconomics. It is this understanding which is precisely what is needed to be called for in this 21st century too – a brushing away from mainstream economic science, to a pluralistic macro way of understanding economics. This is precisely what makes this textbook more social and not really a textbook for anybody to just study and get good marks. Such particular characteristic hence also naturally make this book worthwhile in considering for inclusion in university syllabi, without any geographical boundaries established. Hence, this perfection of antagonism well mastered is what makes this textbook a lively read, as it allows one to learn and unlearn the mythical and normative establishments that have been injected on to us from time immemorial.