Who is an Economist? (2)

Why do some economists only focus on figures, but lack the words that are more relevant to the affairs of human beings? We are not machines are we? And finally how did we ever forget to be ‘as incorruptible and as pure as an artist’?

The study of economics does not seem to require any specialized gifts of an unusually high order. Is it not, intellectually regarded, a very easy subject compared with the higher branches of philosophy or pure science? An easy subject at which few excel! The paradox finds its explanation, perhaps, in that the master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts. He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher-in some degree. He must understand symbols and speak in words. He must contemplate the particular in terms of the general and touch abstract and concrete in the same flight of thought. He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man’s nature or his institutions must lie entirely outside his regard. He must be purposeful and disinterested in a simultaneous mood; as aloof and incorruptible as an artist, yet sometimes as near to earth as a politician.”

Anyone who understands the responsibilities that Keynes heaped on economists with his above definition (which I have repeated for full effect), will understand that our job never ends. Any such person will know better than to conclude on anything too soon. There is however a brand of African economists who violently resist new thought, who parade themselves as defenders of textbook ideas which were written without the African context in mind. When people challenge what they have been taught especially at Masters and PhD levels - they laugh, scoff, snigger or even insult. They are the brand that has sold Africa down the river into perpetual economic slavery. When I say African context, I don’t mean that we should formulate theories that keep Africa in the Anyone who understands the responsibilities that Keynes heaped on economists with his above definition (which I have repeated for full effect), will understand that our job never ends. Any such person will know better than to conclude on anything too soon dark, but such that recognize our peculiar advantages but remind us that we have not yet arrived. When we gather at our seminars and symposia at expensive hotels around the country, we often invite foreigners and forget that the policies we discuss are meant for people who eke out a sorry existence and live in despicable conditions. We cannot expect them to react to policies the same way as people from developed nations, so many economic theories we bandy around are contextually flawed.

An Economist must never forget that he is not only a mathematician or statistician, but that he must consider the history of his context? Is that not the basis of autocorrelation and autoregression, of lag effects and lag variables? Then how can a historian forget that he is also a philosopher, that he should study the logicality of situations, and not be afraid to posit theories that don’t even exist but which have truth in them? Why do some economists only focus on figures, but lack the words that are more relevant to the affairs of human beings? We are not machines are we? And finally how did we ever forget to be ‘as incorruptible and as pure as an artist’? How have we allowed ourselves to be influenced by the forces of money, and ideology, and allegiances? And how did those who sit in their ivory towers forget, that economics is about the people; and that they must develop the deft skills of a politician, to look into the eyes of the people and ask the relevant questions, not to throw theories arrogantly from the top stories which never work?

Luckily even in developed countries Economics is changing. We can see that the old Chicagoans are silent. Thaler is even in University of Chicago now, talking Behavioral Economics. One of the most famous Economists today is Stephen Levitt. He is also in Chicago pushing Freakonomics a brand of Economics which forces us to look through the minds of people. Eugene Fama is still there though, arrogantly holding on to his Efficient Market Hypothesis even though the work of George Akerlof and Robert Shiller (Animal Spirits), disproved any efficiency in any market - and Shiller got a Nobel Prize in Economics for his work on market boom and busts in 2013; Akerlof having obtained his own in 2001 alongside Joseph Stiglitz, and Michael Spence for their work which proved that market information is never perfect but asymmetric. Akerlof is presently married to Janet Yellen, the Chairman of the US Federal Reserve Bank by the way. So, we can hardly say we don’t have enough models among the world’s most-hardworking Economists and those thinking differently for their countries. But here in Nigeria especially, our government consults people with out-dated ideas, who only push Nigeria into more debt, call for foreign intervention, pass off unworkable economic theories, and are pimps for crass pecuniary ideas, such as the setting up of AMCON 2 so that banks will create more bad loans to be underwritten and absorbed by poor taxpayers. Are those ones economists?

I always say that Economists can be extremely dangerous people because they have been seen to bring ideas that will hold generations down. But they should ordinarily be the most valiant warriors for their societies because they should be the first line of defense in warding off fraudulent ideas. As a matter of fact, you don’t need a degree to show you are an economist. It will show itself in the way you think, and act. People like Richard Posner (Chicago Law School), and our own Kingsley Moghalu (Tufts) are lawyers who have taken keen interest in Economics, and have excelled perhaps because they took that logicality of their legal mind into the economic sphere and refused to buy the dogma. Today they make a lot more sense than those who try to sell us snake oil ideologies. The dogmatic economists are those who have chosen to be fooled by randomness, because they got things right a couple of times and believe human beings are totally predictable, markets are perfect, and all information available can be accessed by everyone. Nothing could be further from the truth, especially in a society such as ours.

Thank you Keynes. You are the only one I know for now, who has defined who an Economist is. Maybe other people should try and define their own economist. For me, an Economist is someone who never stops asking questions, prying for the truth, and standing up for what truly works.