Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology: Including a Selection of Papers Presented at the 2019 ALAHPE Conference: Volume 39A

Paul Samuelson was attracted to the irregular economic development pattern of some South American countries because of the links between economic performance and political factors. He discussed the influence of “populist democracy” on Argentina’s relative economic stagnation, which, he argued in the 1970s and early 1980s, served as a dangerous paradigm for the American economy under stagflation. Stagflation phenomena marked the end of Samuelson’s “neoclassical synthesis.” Moreover, he applied his concept of “capitalist fascism” to deal with military dictatorships in Brazil and (especially) in Chile. The Brazilian translation of his Economics in 1973 brought about a correspondence with Brazilian economists about the “fascist” features of the regime. The main variable behind the South American economic and politically unstable processes discussed by Samuelson was economic inequality, which became also a conspicuous feature of the American economy since the adoption of market-based policies in the 1980s and after.

This chapter examines the relationship between finance capital and the transformation of the state in Rudolf Hilferding’s thought. Hilferding defines finance capital as the fusion of banking and industry, a situation that presupposes a high degree of development of capitalist relations. Finance capital prompts a transformation of the state economic functions. This chapter considers the transfor­mation of the state and its consequent ability to deal with crises of finance capital era. It also highlights Hilferding’s pioneering contribution in sketching the bases for the great contemporary theories of State intervention in crises regulation.

The Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC) was created in the post-war, when Latin-American countries were facing disequilibrium in international trade, capital shortage and rising inflation. The ECLAC intended to aid in the definition of a development strategy that could deal with these issues. Between the first ECLAC publications, three of them are considered to be “the trilogy that founds the structuralist theory” (Bielschowsky, 2011, p. 8): the Latin-American Manifesto, the Economic Survey of Latin America-1949, and Theoretical and Practical Problems of Economic Growth. These documents set the center-periphery relation as a conditioning feature for the behavior of national economies, and describe the trajectory of terms of trade deterioration and its consequences to peripheral nations. The objective here is to argue that this trilogy contains an analysis of inflation in underdevelopment, and anticipates the main elements of what would later be called the structuralist theory of inflation. The introduction depicts the context that originated the ECLAC and the debates on how to foster post-war Latin-American development. The second section analyzes the Singer Report and the Latin-American Manifesto with regard to the causes of inflation in peripheral nations. The third section discusses the Economic Survey of Latin America – 1949, with a focus on the consequences of technology incorporation in underdeveloped structures. Section four explores “Theoretical and Practical Problems of Economic Growth” and the issue of inelastic production. Section five surveys the incorporation of Prebisch’s approach into the Brazilian debate. The conclusion sets Prebisch’s contribution in perspective with other structuralist authors.

This chapter provides an alternative interpretation of the emergence of the “Ramsey-Cass-Koopmans” growth model, a framework which, alongside the overlapping generation model, is the dominant approach in today’s macroeconomics. By focusing on the role Paul Samuelson played through the works he developed in the turnpike literature, the author’s goal is to provide a more accurate history of growth theory of the 1940–1960s, one which started before Solow (1956) but never had him as a central reference. Inspired by John von Neumann’s famous 1945 article, Samuelson wrote his first turnpike paper by trying to conjecture an alternative optimal growth path (Samuelson, 1949 [1966]). In the 1960s, after reformulating the intertemporal utility model presented in Ramsey (1928), Samuelson began to propound it as a representative agent model. Through Samuelson’s interactions with colleagues and PhD students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and given his standing in the profession, he encouraged a broader use of that device in macroeconomics, particularly, in growth theory. With the publication of Samuelson (1965), Tjalling Koopmans and Lionel McKenzie rewrote their own articles in order to account for the new approach. This work complements a recently written account on growth theory by Assaf and Duarte (2018).

The chapter aims to enhance the understanding of the development of Kirzner’s theory of entrepreneurship. To do so, elements in Kirzner’s works published up until 1973 that enclose the central points of this theory are studied. The chapter has four sections, in addition to the introduction and conclusion, that highlight the arguments that relate to Kirzner’s theory of entrepreneurship: (i) before the publication of his 1967 paper that presents the entrepreneurial function in the market process (1960–1967); between the 1967 paper and the publication of his most important book, Competition and Entrepreneurship, in 1973 (1967–1973); (iii) in Kirzner’s latest version of entrepreneurship theory as presented in his 1973 book; and (iv) the evolution of Kirzner’s thinking. The evolution of the author’s thinking regarding equilibrium and the entrepreneur is highlighted by presenting the different stages of his theory of entrepreneurship between 1960 and 1973.

This chapter intends to make an extended periodization of economic discussions that have taken place in Latin America throughout its history. The task is ambitious; we begin, however, with the periodization elaborated by Oreste Popescu, which we then expand and modify. As educators, we still have to work on the training of Latin American economists, due to the lack of knowledge they have not only about the region as a whole, but also of the economic debates that took place within it. This work is a first approximation and provocation aimed to jumpstart a discussion on these issues.

In 1969, Warren Nutter left the University of Virginia Department of Economics to serve as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs in the Nixon administration. During his time in the Defense Department, Nutter was deeply involved in laying the groundwork for a military coup against the democratically elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende. Although Nutter left the Pentagon several months before the successful 1973 coup, his role in Chile was far more direct than the better-known cases of Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, and Arnold Harberger. This chapter describes Nutter’s role in Chile policymaking in the Nixon administration. It shows how Nutter’s criticisms of Henry Kissinger are grounded in his economics, and compares and contrasts Nutter with other economists who have been connected to Pinochet’s dictatorship.