weren& #39;t we celebrating krugman& #39;s newfound radicalism last week and now we& #39;re making fun of him for not getting the cambridge capital controversy https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🤷‍♂️" title="Achselzuckender Mann" aria-label="Emoji: Achselzuckender Mann">

or are his comments on the capital debates proof of his radicalism, since now he& #39;s acknowledging robinson (like when he said he was "rereading" kalecki years ago and PKs everywhere started frothing at the mouth)

i haven& #39;t read the tooze piece so i& #39;m not sure i actually care about the answer to this but it seems like this is just something heterodox economists do from time to time as if krugman is a site of class struggle and we need to instrumentalize his NYT column for socialism