The authors note that the instability leading to crisis is assumed away by the models which assume inherent stability. Economists are confined to models of stable states that are perturbed by limited external shocks. Economists failed to incorporate the intrinsic recurrent boom-and-bust dynamics characteristic of a complex economic system. Consequently, ‘systemic crisis’ is treated as an ‘otherworldly event’ absent from theoretical frameworks.
Prof. Keen shows the unscientific nature of economics by looking at the notion of diminishing marginal costs required to produce a downward slopping supply curve. He presents a summary of the empirical evidence which contradicts this key assumption of economics. How has economics handled this consistent evidence accumulated over many decades? By ignoring it. This speaks volumes for the way that economics handles contrary evidence to accepted beliefs. Not that this should come as a surprise, given that the notion was originally invented to ensure that neoclassical economics did not suggest that the economy would become dominated by big business (that this was precisely what was happening in the real economy at the time was considered irrelevant). The book also analyses a mathematical flaw in the standard argument against monopolies (often used to justify opposition to large firms). The book questions the conventional theory of the firm, arguing that monopolies can play a beneficial role in the economy.
The authors highlight the negative effect of colonialism and double standards of Europe to keep the Muslim lands under colonial and imperial rule. They awakened the Muslims to avoid becoming laggards, isolated and mere consumers. Rather, they should also advance knowledge and sciences and do not feel shy in learning from the Western development experience. However, in doing that, they should not be uncritical to take everything European as acceptable, especially when it comes to interest based banking. Given that, there is much to take from socio-economic innovations such as the joint stock companies, mutual insurance, bank-based payment systems. The authors provided positivist explanations of how these institutions and structure avoid the problem of moral hazard, information asymmetry and achieve pooling of funds, risk diversification and efficiency.
Islamic Economics Project 