“The Nobel Prize given to Mike Woodford and Bob Hall will re-trigger discussions about the so-called New Keynesian model. Some will hail it as an unambiguous success, building macro from micro foundations.” (Olivier Blanchard) Olivier Blanchard gets it methodologically wrong: it's not bottom-up, it's top-down; it's not individual-centric, it's system-centric. Economics has been failed/fake science since the Founding Fathers. It has defined itself as a social science and accordingly has been based on subjective/behavioral assumptions/axioms. This is the methodological ur-mistake. The major approaches (Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, and their derivatives) are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, and materially/formally inconsistent. They all got profit wrong. When the subject's foundational concepts are inconsistent, the entire analytical superstructure is scientifically worthless. Actually, economics is about how the economy works. It is a genuine systems science. To finally become a science, economics needs a Paradigm Shift from false behavioral microfoundations and false Keynesian macrofoundations to true macrofoundations. Legacy economics is what Feynman called Cargo Cult Science. The EconNobel positively reinforces failed/fake science. Olivier Blanchard is not only an incompetent scientist, but an #EconBlocker.
— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) October 14, 2026
This blog connects to the AXEC Project which applies a superior method of economic analysis. The following comments have been posted on selected blogs as catalysts for the ongoing Paradigm Shift. The comments are brought together here for information. The full debates are directly accessible via the Blog-References. Scrap the lot and start again―that is what a Paradigm Shift is all about. Time to make economics a science.