A big slap for Caribbean economists?

I am always on the look out for ways in which economists hit the news. They often get slammed when economic performance goes badly, whether or not they were really part of the problem. They sometimes get praised for economic successes. As advisors rather than implementers they have to deal with two types of "downside risks" (economic talk for ways you are going to look bad): either getting the assessment wrong and leading people down blind alleys, or they have the assessment right but find that their advice goes largely ignored or are found unpalatable.

An interesting editorial in today's Jamaica Observer caught my eye. I'm interested to see what follow up there is to these views. Read them and digest (see article). I will be especially interested in reactions to several statements:

"Foreigners are ridiculed as incapable of understanding our circumstances or our "plantation" experience, having not been born here or lived here. All paradigms other than those of native origin are automatically dismissed as irrelevant and/or harmful."

"Ironically, those countries where the ideas of this much vaunted group of indigenous economists have informed policy, eg Guyana, Jamaica and Grenada, have the worst economic records in the Caribbean."

"Their policy recommendations include a lead role for the state, nationalisation of the local operations of multinational corporations, trade liberalisation is always harmful, unilateral rescheduling of external debt, inappropriateness of IMF policy advice, foreign investment results in exploitation, regional economic integration culminating in political federation, national markets do not work, the world market operates to the benefit of the rich, globalisation perpetuates the development-underdevelopment duality, developed countries have neo-colonial motives when engaging the Caribbean, foreign capital is a vehicle for corporate imperialism, and national self-reliance is best achieved by production planning."

"Continued dependency on this paradigm does not change the world, instead it perpetuates the development of underdevelopment and persistent poverty in the Caribbean."

Oddly, the condemned economists are so prominent that they need not be named. Also, Caribbean politicians get off scot-free in this assessment as they are the elected ones who actually put economic policy in place, but I will perhaps deal with that another day.