Conservatives Want Paul Krugman To Be Less Polemical

Some people don't like Paul Krugman's polemical style of blogging. Conservative economists like Tyler Cowen, who works at a College whose economic department is supported by the Koch brothers, is especially displeased. He advices Krugman to tone things done in order that his commentary might be more effective. This article explains why Krugman does what he does, and it gives examples of where his commentary has been effective.

I think that Krugman has been doing just what an intellectual should be doing in this intellectual climate. There is no way that macroeconomics can be separated from politics. Therefore, it is bound to be polemical if it is done right. Conservative economists have had a monopoly on political economy for too long. Krugman, and a handful of other economists, are doing just what they should be doing to expose the other side.

In conclusion, I think that Tyler Cowen's criticism of Krugman's polemical style proves that Krugman has been effective. Conservatives don't bother attacking those who have not been effective. We can use criticisms of Krugman as a measure of how effective he really has become. There is no middle ground in American intellectual debate anymore. The dialogue has been between the far right and the center right. Most of what Krugman advocates is a restoration of intellectual debate to where it was in previous generations. His positions would have been regarded as moderately liberal in the 1960's and early 1970's. The far right was not part of the debate. It has invested a lot of resources to shift the balance in its direction. We need more Paul Krugman's and fewer academics and intellectuals who curry the favor of those in a position to reward them.