Economics remains pre-scientific because, while Planck said "science advances one funeral at a time", for economics, funerals alone aren't enough.Building a New Economics is a reader-supported publication.
I wouldn't disagree with your history and certainly not your opinion of neo-classical macro. I would however point out that Copernicus, Gallileo and Minsky did not have the advantage of our present technology of mass communication in order to enlighten the general populace about the benefits and problem resolving capabilities of the new paradigm. Of course we first have to think paradigmatically in order to discover the new paradigm. By that I mean we have to think in terms of single concepts as that is what a paradigm is. Its helio-centrism, agriculture, homesteading and urbanization or mechanical moveable press. You and every other cutting edge reformer including MMTers, David Graeber, advocates of UBI, Ellen Brown's Public Banking and Michael Hudson's financial parasitism have the area of the present problematic paradigm well surrounded, that is "money, debt and banks". Now all we need to do is find the specific single operant concept that applied does what all new paradigms do which is to change the character of an entire pattern by resolving the problems that have grown up around the old/present paradigm. My favorite candidate for such effect is a 50% Discount/Rebate policy at retail sale. #1 retail sale is universally participated in making its effect macro-economic. #2 it mathematically doubles everyone's purchasing power and hence potentially the demand for every good and service so its integrative of the self interests of the traditionally opposed constituencies of consumer and merchant. #3 it mathematically ends inflation by implementing non-painful and beneficial price and asset deflation and in so doing accomplishes two of the signatures of historical paradigm changes, namely complete conceptual opposition to the present paradigm concept and complete inversion of the present paradigm's problematic temporal universe reality.
I wouldn't disagree with your history and certainly not your opinion of neo-classical macro. I would however point out that Copernicus, Gallileo and Minsky did not have the advantage of our present technology of mass communication in order to enlighten the general populace about the benefits and problem resolving capabilities of the new paradigm. Of course we first have to think paradigmatically in order to discover the new paradigm. By that I mean we have to think in terms of single concepts as that is what a paradigm is. Its helio-centrism, agriculture, homesteading and urbanization or mechanical moveable press. You and every other cutting edge reformer including MMTers, David Graeber, advocates of UBI, Ellen Brown's Public Banking and Michael Hudson's financial parasitism have the area of the present problematic paradigm well surrounded, that is "money, debt and banks". Now all we need to do is find the specific single operant concept that applied does what all new paradigms do which is to change the character of an entire pattern by resolving the problems that have grown up around the old/present paradigm. My favorite candidate for such effect is a 50% Discount/Rebate policy at retail sale. #1 retail sale is universally participated in making its effect macro-economic. #2 it mathematically doubles everyone's purchasing power and hence potentially the demand for every good and service so its integrative of the self interests of the traditionally opposed constituencies of consumer and merchant. #3 it mathematically ends inflation by implementing non-painful and beneficial price and asset deflation and in so doing accomplishes two of the signatures of historical paradigm changes, namely complete conceptual opposition to the present paradigm concept and complete inversion of the present paradigm's problematic temporal universe reality.