DISQUS

Will Wilkinson: Clark on Polanyi (the Bad One)

  • bachwards · 1 year ago
    I fear Clark glosses over why other social scientists actually enjoy the book. Even if you disagree about the consequences of laissez-faire or Polanyi's anthropological claims, I think his point about the embeddedness of markets in society is still worth considering and is probably the main reason sociologists and others still recommend the book. I think Clark's general aversion to institutional explanations for economic outcomes (see also his negative review of Avner Greif's book) precludes him from giving this full consideration.

    Santhi Hejeebu and Deirdre McCloskey had a really interesting piece on Polanyi a few years ago in Critical Review. I cannot find a non-gated link online, but here is a response they wrote to a critic of their original essay.
  • berger · 1 year ago
    If you can't draw a distinction between market economies and free market ones you really aren't qualified to review Polanyi.
  • Matt · 1 year ago
    The review might be "fun" but it's not very accurate at summarizing Polanyi and so not very good at critiquing him, either. It's bad enough to make me wonder if he'd really read the book or just was going on what he'd read elsewhere. The claim that Polanyi is ignored by economists is also very odd- I was turned on to the book by my first econ professor in college who was a big fan. Brad Delong assigns him, Stilglitz wrote the introduction to the new version, etc. It's a weird review, based much more on a particular ideological take than a real effort to look at the book. I guess that can be "fun" but it's not very enlightening.
  • UOJim · 1 year ago
    My big concern is the redundancy of "from whence."
  • Will Wilkinson · 1 year ago
    My big concern is Jim's obnoxious pedantry.
  • UOJim · 1 year ago
    I think of it as adorable pedantry. Hm. Must rethink.