Abstract
Karl Marx ends the first chapter of Capital with a discussion of “commodity fetishism” or the economic and noneconomic conditions necessary for commodity exchange to occur. In today's most popular mainstream economics textbook, N. Gregory Mankiw outlines the forms, concepts, and methods of “thinking like an economist,” including positive analysis, a focus on efficiency, and a host of assumptions about individual human nature. Comparing the two, we find that the “fetishism of the commodity” parallels the set of conditions described by Mankiw as comprising “thinking like an economist.” However, Mankiw treats these conditions as natural while Marx understands them to be social, historical, and open to change. I argue that numerous possibilities are opened up in economics education by destabilizing the “market fetishism” of mainstream economics and teaching neoclassical theory as a social and historical construction rather than a reflection of economic reality.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
