Thread by @paulkrugman

Absolutely. As someone who began my academic career in the late 70s, as equilibrium macro was tightening its grip, we all knew that fundamental business cycle issues were a minefield nobody with a reality sense would enter 1/

https://twitter.com/Claudia_Sahm/status/1472549628235206659

Try to publish anything in which monetary policy — let alone fiscal policy — did what it clearly did in the real world, and you would be blockaded from the journals and frozen out of appointment committees. You had to keep yr views private and build your reputation elsewhere 2/

International macro was a bit better because Rudi Dornbusch's work kept sticky-price macro respectable. But even so you had to frame your work as being abt exchange rates or financial crises and hope people didn't notice the Keynesian core 3/ krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/rud…

As I wrote elsewhere, central bank research depts kept the forbidden knowledge alive — "If we’re living in a Dark Age of macroeconomics,central banks have been its monasteries, hoarding and studying the ancient texts lost to the rest of
the world." 4/ princeton.edu/~pkrugman/keyn…

Truly a sad story all around. And still not over 5/