« Great title for a paper: "Conceptualizing Identity as Ideology: A Quantitative Measure of Subcultural Identity" | Main | Some thoughts on social epistemology »

March 07, 2009


Carl Shulman

If you care you could check the political views of the handful of committee members individually:


Hopefully Anonymous

Carl, you're using this blog perfectly (as a data dump, a point of reference, where we can place things that we can use and expand upon later). Like a wiki. TGGP also does this. Note to my regular emailers, I'd rather you use this blog/me in that way.

Douglas Knight

It's kind of a compromise. They could have given him the prize in, say, 2004. Every year, some people have predicted that he would get the prize for purely political reasons. This way he gets rewarded for being politically active, but the timing doesn't make it look like the Swedes are trying to make him more powerful for any particular goal. (note that, per Carl's link, the committee doesn't change much from year to year. it's not like this was a particularly liberal or politically active committee)


Long before the Nobel righty economists were paying compliments to Krugman. Bryan Caplan used him and Alan Blinder as examples in his book of how even lefty economists agree with him. I myself like to link to Ricardo's Difficult Idea whenever I have the opportunity. Even at CafeHayek when they criticize Krugman's columns they often use older Krugman ("back when he was an economist" as some say) to refute it. I think they are interested in the stature of economics as a field (even if the modal economist is a moderate democrat, the right is better represented in it than pretty much any other high status academic field) rather than the Nobel per se.

The John Bates Clark award is considered more prestigious than the Nobel among economists. The list of winners, with dates for when they won the Nobel (for the 12 that later did) is at


Gotta love right wing conspiracy theorists

The comments to this entry are closed.