The Alternative Austrian Economists: A Brief History

ian principles, such as Kenneth Arrow and Amartya Sen. Alternatively, Rogan should focus on some institutionalist, post-Keynesian, and Marxian scholars who are working in the areas of technological change, unemployment, environment, unions, social movements, gender, etc. (3) The assertion that economic crises and the wave of new social movements that occurred in the 1960s did not cause a resurgence of moral economic thinking afterwards is rather misleading. Methodological individualism has never been theoretically superior to any heterodox approaches. Methodological individualism is taught in universities and applied by many policy-makers because it is consistent with the political status quo. (4) A wider discussion about the nation-state should be carried out since, for example, Polanyi (2001) mentions that social change is built by a coalition of classes and groups. A state can make decisions, and these decisions can be for good or for ill (as has been attested to during the COVID-19 pandemic). Finally, (5) a further new consideration concerning the question of material improvement versus moral improvement is needed. Rogan claims in the Introduction that more attention is paid to income distribution than to moral values, but these aspects in a capitalist society must be positively related. In a capitalist society, it is difficult to argue for only moral change while material wealth is abundant, and inequalities are blatant. A fairer distribution of income may indicate better societal values, and a better society will suppose a fairer distribution of income, better international cooperation, more acute protection of the environment, and so forth.