{"id":529261,"date":"2025-10-09T06:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-10-09T04:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/leregardlibre.com\/?p=529261"},"modified":"2025-10-08T21:19:26","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T19:19:26","slug":"heterodox-left-right","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/leregardlibre.com\/en\/economy\/heterodox-left-right\/","title":{"rendered":"Who's afraid of the heterodox?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Economics is a language of models and equations. Yet its foundations are philosophical. Giving heterodox currents back their rightful place means restoring the vitality and pluralism of this discipline - and thus its link with liberalism.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Despite their sometimes sharp differences, liberals share a common conviction: pluralism is necessary. Pluralism is the foundation of liberal democracy, with party competition, the circulation of ideas and the confrontation of opinions. Pluralism prevents politics from becoming dogmatic, and gives it vitality. In economics, however, this pluralism is discreet. For several decades now, the neoclassical trend<\/a>[1]<\/a> has become the dominant framework. It inspires major international institutions, university teaching and public policy alike.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Measuring a country's economic dynamism by its GDP, explaining unemployment by labor market rigidities... This language has become that of the obvious, and likes to present itself as the very form of scientific rigor, giving its postulates an almost dogmatic status. This ambition can be explained at least in part by the origins of economic liberalism. Born between the 17th and 18th centuries, in a context marked by the scientific revolution, it sought to establish itself as a kind of science, capable of describing the laws of economics as Newton had described those of the physical world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n