Alt title: 3 Old White Men Discover Colonialsm Bad

      • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        …consisting of guys born to a fantastic level of wealth who all have to pretend inequality doesn’t exist in any capacity what so ever in order to make any of their theories work.

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            How is the culture minister the “same people” as the Royal Academy of Sciences?

            Did you also teach your students about ethnic prejudice?

            • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              Sorry about that, I mistook you for someone else. The Royal Academy of Sciences doesn’t administer the Nobel Prize for Economics, which isn’t one of the five official Nobel Prizes and thus overseen by a complex mix of the Swedish government–including the Academy of Sciences–and the Sveringes Riksbank.

              Oh boy, ethnic prejudice: my own academic researched focused on borders and migration in colonial and post-colonial states and I taught US and World History on both the high school and college level. Race, racism, the Atlantic Slave Trade, and colonialism/post-colonialism pervade all of those subjects and were constants throughout my curriculum.

              • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                The economics prize is funded by Sveringes Riksbank but they are not involved in selecting a winner. Neither is the government. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences is solely responsible for selecting the winner, and it is not part of government.

                Here’s the thing about economics: the “dismal science” is often trying to prove - or disprove - what appears to be common sense.

                For instance, to some it’s common sense that minimum wage increases cause more unemployment. To others, it’s common sense that they don’t. Eventually economists will reach a consensus, and it will be “not news” to half the population.

                Since you’ve done research in this field, you must be aware that Acemoglu and Robinson have been publishing on this topic for ~20 years. Is there some earlier economist who was not properly given credit for their results?

                • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  My dude, generations historians, economists, and social critics from India and across sub-Saharan Africa have discussed these issues at length. There are libraries full of diverse works on the subject. The erasure of all that is on-brand for the Nobel Prize in Economics (which even Hayek said shouldn’t exist in his own acceptance speech) and frankly on-brand for the Western academy as a whole.

                • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  As a quick semi-aside: 20 years isn’t that long in academic research, and it’s especially not that long when we’re talking about colonialism/post-colonialism. It’s a tremendous amount of time in the hard sciences I’m told but it’s a mistake to apply that lens here.

                • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Here’s the thing: Economics is not a science.

                  For instance, there’s no scientific “answer” to whether minimum wage causes more unemployment because it’s not a simplistic, binary question. It depends on a wide variety of social factors that are largely untestable, unfalsifiable, etc. The question itself is based on deep ideological assumptions (eg. it’s desirable for people to be even more used/employed).

                  The issue of living wages is a social issue around basic human needs. Many and maybe most economists are paid precisely to justify the denial of human needs. That’s what econ is really about. So there will never be any consensus on this phony “issue”.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      First of all, I assume it was news to them when they got it and now it’s news to the rest of us.

      Secondly, I’m guessing what you taught did not include the research and the mathematics necessary in order for them to get the hard evidence to prove the thing you taught to high school sophomores.

      I’m picturing a math or a science teacher saying something like this and it makes me laugh.

      • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well no, but what I taught to high school sophomore is–believe it or not–based on the research that academics and specialists have been doing for generations. The same is true for high school science and math teachers, by the way.

        Thankfully your attempt to look sophisticated allows me to reiterate my point: this has been heavily researched, documented, and explored for several generations now. It’s only news to people who have had the privilege of ignoring colonialism; many of them are in positions of authority or prestige. I’d recommend taking a look at the work of Franz Fanon or Aimee Cesaire to get a sense of how far back this line of thinking and research goes. Read that and I’ll pass you some more global academic research on the topic.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Yes, and I’m sure people who taught children that 1+1=2 thought that Newton wasted a whole lot of time getting to what every small child knows in the Principia Mathematica.

          (Do you think that possibly the claim that, as a history teacher, you know what these people in an entirely different field knew before they did, so their work is pointless, is a bit silly?)

          • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            That’s not what Newton did with the Principia. You can read it for free online to confirm this.

            I teach a course on the history of science if you’re interested.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              Yes, I know that’s not what he did with the Principia. I was simplifying something very complicated because it’s not in my field of expertise as if I was an expert on it.

              This should sound familiar to you.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I guess the same reason acting like you’re smarter than Nobel prizewinners is important to you.

                  (Oh wait, neither of us are doing that? Huh.)

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      The Nobel Prize is awarded after a lifetime of work, not the latest news.

      The 2022 Nobel Prize in physics was awarded for describing the violation of Bell inequalities. The initial experiments were performed in the 80s and the results are “not news” to many current high school physics teachers.

          • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I think the important bit is getting lost in the shuffle over particulars: This research and the conclusion it presents are not original to three Western men from a first-world university. They’ve been discussed and explored at length by the academies of the post-colonial states who are dealing with the aftereffects of their own colonial experiences. This is a Eurocentric/Western-centric move on the part of, frankly, a bunch of privileged and insulated people.

          • Hugohase@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Some critics argue that the prestige of the Prize in Economic Sciences derives in part from its association with the Nobel Prizes, an association that has often been a source of controversy. Among them is the Swedish human rights lawyer Peter Nobel, a great-grandnephew of Alfred Nobel.[40]

            Nobel accuses the awarding institution of misusing his family’s name, and states that no member of the Nobel family has ever had the intention of establishing a prize in economics.[41] He explained that “Nobel despised people who cared more about profits than society’s well-being”, saying that “There is nothing to indicate that he would have wanted such a prize”, and that the association with the Nobel prizes is “a PR coup by economists to improve their reputation”.[40]

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s kind of nice to see formal studies on it though - it might help with aide advocacy.

      • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’d like that to be true but the reality is the folks in charge will self-congratulate for a moment and then move on to the next “raising awareness” du jour.

  • marcos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    Has anybody actually looked at the paper instead of reacting to The Guardian’s reaction?

    Because as bad as the Nobel Prize Committee is at their job, that doesn’t look like something you would find in one.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Thank you.

      That was my point to the person above criticizing this.

      I don’t have the skills to review their work so I’m not going to say it’s undeserved. And so far, I don’t think anyone else commenting does either.

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Quick reminder that the “Nobel prize in economics” is not actually a Nobel Prize.

    (I didn’t know this for a very long time, so this may be news to some people reading this.)

    • geissi@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      That is interesting to know but I feel that Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is a bit long and the distinction is not really that meaningful.

      Either the research is good or it isn’t.
      People keep attacking the price simply because it was not sponsored by Nobel himself as if only that direct connection to him transferred some sense of divine truthfulness to the other Nobel prizes that this one lacks.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      The prize wasn’t included in Alfred Nobel’s will and the funding for it doesn’t come from Nobel’s estate (it’s funded by the central bank of Sweden). However, the prize is administered by the Nobel Foundation and announced on their website.

      The official name of the prize is THE SVERIGES RIKSBANK PRIZE IN ECONOMIC SCIENCES IN MEMORY OF ALFRED NOBEL which makes the distinction a bit more clear.

    • Michael H. Jenkins@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think that comment was aimed more at the Nobel Prize in Economics committee–administered and funded by Sweden’s Riksbank–but your point does stand.

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago
    The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for The Guardian:

    MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
    Wikipedia about this source

    Search topics on Ground.News

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/14/three-us-based-professors-win-nobel-prize-in-economics-daron-acemoglu-simon-johnson-james-robinson-

    Media Bias Fact Check | bot support