『Invisible Handcuffs: Unchaining Economics』のカバーアート

Invisible Handcuffs: Unchaining Economics

Invisible Handcuffs: Unchaining Economics

著者： Katy Shields
無料で聴く

Invisible Handcuffs is podcast series and documentary-in-the-making, hosted by Katy Shields, about how we can free ourselves from the economic ideology driving our crises. Each week we speak with economists, experts and activists who are working to reclaim economics across education, academia, policy and in their communities. Alongside our weekly episodes we'll also be posting ad-hoc interviews, out takes and reflections from the documentary we are making, planned for release within the next year. To learn more and subscribe go to www.invisiblehandcuffs.com 社会科学 科学
エピソード
  • Episode 04: Building real world economics with Steve Keen

    Episode 04: Building real world economics with Steve Keen
    2026/06/11
    This week we discuss the need to overthrow the current economic paradigm, and what a new one could look like, with Professor Steve Keen. Steve is a prolific writer, teacher, blogger and vlogger, known as one of few economists to have predicted the global financial crash and a thorn in the side of mainstream or neoclassical economics for over 50 years. A former professor of economics at Kingston university in the UK, today you’re most likely to find him on YouTube or one of his weekly online seminars talking about the crisis of capitalism and the various flaws in mainstream thinking that have led us here, as well as the new real world-tethered economics he is trying to build. I first came across his work when researching why the world had ignored the Limits to Growth. Steve had uncovered deep flaws in climate economics, the strand of mainstream economics used by to inform climate policies for governments around the world for decades, including to set spending priorities and carbon pricing. The godfather of climate economics, William Nordhaus, was also one of the core critics of the Limits to Growth. But while that study had warned of a potential collapse in civilisation this century, a trajectory we appear to be on track for, Nordhaus’ own model, developed two decades later model found quite the opposite. And yet it would be his model that would set the template for others, with Steve and I agreeing that this is a core reason for the decades and indeed ongoing delay in tackling the crisis. We talk about why economists in particular prefer the story that capitalism and technology will always save us even as they continue to exclude energy, without which no technology is possible, from their models. Let alone a habitable climate. We also link this to economists' misunderstanding of money creation which leads to chronic underinvestment in public goods, while private money creation (ie credit) stokes bubbles, inflates asset prices and will likely cause the next crisis. A health warning - this interview gets a bit technical in places, with Steve discussing some of the maths behind both mainstream models as well as the alternatives he is building. He even uses a software he’s developed, to explain his approach to real world economics. You can watch the video of this podcast on YouTube @invisible-handcuffs. I also include links to Steve’s Patreon site, his online course and other resources he mentions in the show notes. If this episode leaves you with more questions than answers do leave a comment on which ever platform you are viewing or listening to this episode. You can also subscribe and sign up for updates at invisiblehandcuffs.com. Many thanks to Steve for joining us for this insightful and wide-ranging episode.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1 時間 20 分
  • Episode 03: Why the fight to reclaim economics needs feminist economists with Emma Holten

    Episode 03: Why the fight to reclaim economics needs feminist economists with Emma Holten
    2026/06/04
    My guest this week is Emma Holten. Emma is a feminist economist from Denmark and the author of a best-selling book, Deficit. Feminist economics, as Emma explains, is the study of the unhidden but vital work of ‘reproduction’ - that textured, often unquantifiable work that goes into making everything else in life, including economic life, possible: care, repair, love, friendship, compassion. But, that which doesn’t lend itself to being monetised and moulded into the kinds of models used by economists today, which have to prove their contribution to economic growth, but without which, no economic growth would be possible. Emma was motivated to become a feminist economist after a life-saving stay in hospital made her acutely aware of the value of care that is so fundamental to human survival, let alone economic survival, but often missing from economic models. As she put it, every euro she earned and contributed to economic growth following that week is directly attributed to the care she received, often from nurses on close to minimum wage. In this interview we talk about the ‘origin story’ of modern economics, starting in the enlightenment era and how early (male) economists wanted to be able to make clean and neat rational models just like the Newtonian physics. The messy work of care, mostly done by women, didn’t make the cut. More intriguing - and importantly - though is how this is upheld today, how we have arguably gone backwards in the past decades, as neoliberal ideology has captured mainstream economics. Models like cost-benefit analyses, used across government departments, are predicated on being able to prove the short-term, upfront ‘return on investment’, not the longer-term, often hard-to-measure but crucial benefits of reproduction. Even where care work is paid, thanks further injustices hidden in our economic systems and models, it is often underpaid. This is possible partly because, enabling more (white) women to ‘join the professional workforce’ has required a hidden army of unpaid or underpaid (black, brown, migrant) women taking on the work of care. As such, the very ‘liberal’ movement that was meant also to liberate women and minorities, ends up reinforcing these very injustices. We end by discussing reactions by the economic mainstream. How, thanks to a generation of economists who have been schooled only in the orthodoxy, such economists are not used to have their assumptions challenged - leading to quite wild reactions to Emma’s book. Challenging these assumptions, Emma says, requires all hands on deck - within and outside of the heterodox economics movement. Find out more about Emma’s work here: https://www.emmaholten.com/ You can listen to our first two episodes and find out more about our project here: https://www.invisiblehandcuffs.com/
    続きを読む 一部表示
    47 分
  • Episode 02: Why economists need multiple perspectives with John T Harvey

    Episode 02: Why economists need multiple perspectives with John T Harvey
    2026/05/29
    This podcast is all about freeing ourselves from the chains of economic orthodoxy: the set of ideas that drive most decisions in governments, institutions around the world and thus are also underpin our crises. But where do these ideas come from, and why do they persist? What might alternative schools have to offer? And if such alternative perspectives could offer solutions, why are they not more widely taught? That is the topic of this week’s discussion with Professor John T Harvey of Texas Christian University. Unlike most economics student John was fortunate enough to have been exposed to a range of thought schools in his own economics education, which, as he explains, made him want to be an economics professor. He then went on to write a textbook on the various economic thoughts schools, mainly, as he discovered none existed. In this episode we discuss some key schools and how they compare to the 'neoclassical' school, from Marxisim to (post-)Keynesianism, Institutional, Feminist and Ecological Economics. John makes the point that education, especially in social sciences, should be all about questioning, critiquing, and exploring alternative points of view. Yet in economics, particularly as it is taught in high schools and at undergrad today, there is no such debate. Students are presented with mathematical models and abstract formulae as if they are natural laws and 'assumptions', like individualism and profit-maximisation, are treated as universal even though they may not reflect the values or cultures of much of the human population. John and I discuss some of the outcomes: disengagement, self-selection bias and an economics which is among the least diverse of any discipline. We also get into the history of why this is - why, despite growing critiques, neoclassicism persists; the confluence of historical factors and the ways in which various incentive systems, like journal and university rankings, uphold it today. We end by discussing what can be done, from ensuring that heterodox economists keep fighting to 'keep ideas alive', to the role of student movements, to what we can achieve by engaging directly engaging with decision-makers and the broader public. Find out more about John's book here: https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/contending-perspectives-in-economics-9781789900484.html?srsltid=AfmBOoqCNYwAcSxGx6lwVMmKD6J9fnSmIqB4WmOZ52H_9LVB1czks618
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1 時間 21 分
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません