Great Heroes of Four Great Economic Theories

There are a lot of heroes out there on the field of economics but personally I found these five who had contributed to economics and humanity actually by the real means as well. Modern economics with their heroes’ superpower can only teach you how to survive your life, but hell nah these heroes can teach you how to spend the life. There is a great difference between how to survive and to spend life both lies between life and death but one way may lead us to some possible extent of life and the other can take us to the great extent of the productivity of life. Modern economics might let you know that think about what is life and its purpose but classic economics with heroes like these may teach you something very different regardless of your existential struggle in the realm of life. We might say that history is the matter of ideological interplay and intellectual analysis but considering someone’s view is not a bad idea at all, if philosopher can say that, so of course they can also consider this is a discourse, meanwhile, in perspective philosophy everything matters and here I come with the words which matters.

World is run by madmen but the role of science is very different, one may suffer and will come back unrecognizable but elements of cultural inheritance which might be the scars on ones face which can be felt and touched. This might be the power of darkness that’s why you would be considering the hero. I just considered five which doesn’t meant that they were the only having the power of darkness everyone has their own powers and opinions in discourse philosophy so as I. let’s dive into the wisdoms of great heroes with a great extent of accumulation.

Marx the Great Sociologist and Economist 

Marx was the great sociologist of the era; he had a passionate experience in philosophy. Loving his youth was starting point of his life in social life. The only question we should consider that whether his work is original or not regardless his greatness in the area of sociology and how far the Germans and French had a contribution in his work and ideology as well. It might be merely considered a religion as the socialist are considered the fundamental pillars to the fundamental concepts of theology because it represents the ultimate end of the life and are absolute standards by which it judge events and actions regardless the economic interpretations of history where men acted consciously or unconsciously by the economic motives. Even Marx himself doesn’t hold any kind of Religion, School of art, Meta physics or Ethical Ideas which were either reducible to economic motives or of no importance.  He only tried to unveil the economics conditions which shape them in account for their rise and fall.

Marx illustrated that the “Hand-Mills” creates feudal societies and “Steam-Mils” creates capital societies. This stresses the technological elements to a dangerous extent. Breed attitudes, actions and civilization are the fundamental concepts of social structures. To illustrate by the same Marxian as we stated above it creates such economic situations and social structures in which the adaptation of the mechanical necessity that individual or groups are powerless to alter. To outgrow one’s own frames Marx thought that the rise and working of steam mill creates new social functions, locations and groups which develop their interest in such way.

Therefore Marx philosophy about the capitalism was that capitalist in such way destroy their own property by their own created means. Capitalist borrow savings from the banks which belongs to social classes for execution of their ideas which was saved for looking around something different that of bread by social classes. However Marx had a very different vision towards both social class and economic interpretation of history. For him both were independent doctrines of the civilization. By the other hand Marx tended to define the capitalism by the same trait which also defined his division of classes. His class division was simple, the Bourgeoisie Class and the Proletariat Class, in simple terms the capitalist class who owns the capital resources and the social class who support the capital resources in exchange of wages, respectively.  The capitalist and social class was suppressed by the antagonism between them therefore their relation must be drawn by pathological cases for verification; however class struggle is the subject matter of history if Marx would have lost it he would have probably lost the force in his system of social dynamics for the mere reason of antagonism. Consequently Marx capitalism sociologically that how the sociological data embodied in such conceptions as class, class interest, class behaviors and the exchange of every single material value which eventually break its own institutional and framework and at the same time creates the condition for the emergence of new social world.  It is therefore not simply a theory but an organic function to the Marxism than the measure of success which immediately solve its immediate problems.

Carl Menger the Great Free Man and Economist

His era was 1840-1921, his name forever linked with a new explanatory theory which had revolutionized the whole field of economics. His work was a part of our history in science, since sixteenth century the questions of monetary and commercial policies arose. A small fund of knowledge which was in the exchange of the classicism upon the modern economy began slowly in the direction individualism and individualized economics with the company of free trade. His work stand with the autonomy of scientific greatness which standout in a sharp relief against multiple backgrounds, I think he born as a theorist foe new principle of knowledge and for new tools of marshaling the facts. It might be awkward to formulate the fundamental principle of a theory for a wider circle but not for formation of somewhat which is obvious. His fundamental idea of theory is that people value goods because they need them but we must understand this that it doesn’t impress lay man. His main critics was about the subjective value in which he stated that no one could ever have been unaware of the fact of subjective valuation and nothing could be more unfair then fact forwarded to the classics. In the capitalist economics subjective valuation is lost its function as engine in the vehicle. His school of economics has marginal utility concept where they can easily declare that subjective theory of value can explain the price of the stock of consumption goods but nothing else. Consumer price formation is specific economic factor as distinct from the other characteristics such as social, historical and technical characteristics. From the out stands of pure economics prices are merely dependent term of economic systems. His essential aim was to discover the law of price formation. Meneger reformed a science in which rigidly exact thought was much more recent and impact than in the science which other scientists put as new foundation. Therefore his theory is completely considered scientific and purely analytical.  To compare the school of Meneger to Marxist theory his school soon came to be considered as the only serious competitor of Marxist theory  the sociologist but he only competed with only sector of Marxist theory. To avoid any kind of misunderstand no economic sociology or not any kind of sociology can be derived from the Meneger’s work. Therefore anyone who understands the inner history of scientific progress will be aware of all the tactics employed in small circles in order to gain acceptance for new ideas but in the case of Meneger, the concentration of his intellectual work led directly to concentration on proclaiming his results. Although if the one achievement were less great, there would be other things yet to mention above all his theory we must consider him as a teacher, which is unforgettably stamped upon the memory of the older among us, far beyond the narrow circle of specialists and also the amazing range of his interests. But all this counts for little beside his theory of value and price which is to speak is the expression of his real personality.

Frank William Taussig the Unionist

Taussig was the asset of his family. In 1865 the strong Unionist and Anti-Slavery man accepted his first position as District Federal Taxes under the revenue act, economic heroic life was started since the day he joined the federal office, and he worked as banking officer as well being a Vice President of the St. Louis. He took every kind of course at Harvard Economics School, specifically Political Economy, when he returned to Harvard, in September 1880, he did so in order to enter Law School as he had not definitely committed himself  to economics a  profession. Being an American Economist he reiterated in 1896 at mature age of seventy, but this was not an obstacle for him to stop his work. He contributed to international trade, synthesis of classic material, competitive cost and non-competitive cost more specifically to the tariff policies and lived until 1913.

No doubt Taussig was an eminent theorist and a very great teacher of theory to him economics always remained political economy. His early training and his general equipment were not only as much as historical ad they were theoretical; they were primarily historical. Before to his coffin corner at forty he never felt old enough to stop, there was not a word of hectic in his life. But in spite of all these being a mortal human being he found himself unable to work. Thus he took a leave and went to Switzerland for his vacation. By the end of 1905 he was his old self again, at least as a teacher and a scholar. After all in his research, he went on with his work in the field of his first choice, international trade, and most of the papers that he wrote during those year belong to that field. The fruit of this was later on published in book form in 1915 “Some Aspects of the Tariff Question”. But before this from 1905 to 1911, the bulk of his energies went into the composition of his Principle of Economics, in the result of many years of teaching. He took it upon himself to teach more than facts and methods. He taught attitude and Spirit. Because he fully accepted for himself a tradition which at least some of us have become disposed to question of traditionalist that attributes to the economist’s duty to shape and to judge public policies which lead public opinion, to define the desirable ends. But this was not all. Rightly or wrongly, because a textbook is generally thought of as a conveyor of material not one’s own.

He was one of the first who realized the economics theory, like the theoretical part of any other subject, is not a storehouse of recipes or a philosophy, but a tool with which to analyze the economic patterns of real life. First, we may be credited to him from nineteen twenty to nineteen thirty-four, the great majority pertained to problems of international trade. His book of collected essays, Free Trade, the tariff and Reciprocity, appeared in 1920 on his Farwell to teaching. Second he set up another landmark by his work on the Origin of American Business Leader Published in 1932. In sum up his personality is the combination of several stories, which cannot be discussed here, but mainly with unsurpassable clarity his most of work was in teaching field. In order to appreciate his work at its proper value the imposing fabric of that work it is first of all necessary to reduce, to its true dimensions, the importance of what to the modern theorist always proves a stumbling block.

To the end, however, he was free from the common discomforts of old age to a quite unusual degree.

Maynard Keynes the Great Mathematician and Economist

Keynes’ first step on the earth was in June 1883 eldest son of his family. His theory was about the importance of hereditary ability, of great truth to use Karl Pearson’s phrase that ability runs in the stock. His successful scholastic career started in 1905 as President of the Cambridge Union. We must recognize his mathematical quality of mind that underlies the purely scientific part of the Keynes’s work, perhaps also the traces in it of half-forgotten training. He was much too cultivated and too intelligent to despise logical niceties. To some extent he enjoyed them but he also bored them although behind the boundary which did not take him long to reach, he lost patience with them. He was not progressive in the analytic method regardless of wherever else. He was more apolitical of men nobody would have talked to him about an hour to discover his political appearance. Party meant little or nothing to him. He was ready to cooperate with anyone who offered support for a recommendation of his and to forget any past passage of arms. His loyalties were loyalties to measures, not loyalties to individuals or groups. He had no taste of politics, but he had less than no taste for patient work and for breaking in, by gentle arts, that refractory wild beast, the politician. Whatever we may think but he never departed throughout his life from the wild beast role, we may also think of the Psychological laws which he was to formulate, we cannot but feel that, from an early age, he thoroughly understood his own. He joined the Indian office but after two years he went to his university, accepting fellowship at King’s, and quickly established him in the circle of Cambridge fellow economists and beyond. The work at the Indian office was not more than apprenticeship that would have left few traces in a less fertile mind. It is highly reveling not only of the vigor but also of the type of Keynes’s talent. His Macroeconomic thought with ground breaking work on different areas such as General theory of employment, a treatise on money, a tract on monetary reform, the economics consequences of the peace and especially the Indian currency and finance. The Indian currency and finance is a detailed analysis of India’s currency system, Keynes argued that India had unintentionally adapted the gold-exchange standard, where gold is used for foreign trade but not in domestic circulation. He explained the India’s currency system was based on the token silver rupees coin, while adhering to an international gold standard for trade and exchange. He also discussed the importance of managing reserves, including the Gold Standard Reserve and the Paper Currency Reserve, to maintain the stability of the currency. His main arguments were based on the monetary progress and future implications both considered as part of regional and international economics mainly in the macroeconomics.                                                                                                    In conclusion, John Maynard Keynes emerged not only as a brilliant economist but also as a sharp observer of political and economic realities. His early academic achievements, deep analytical mind, and unique independence from party politics allowed him to approach economics with both scientific rigor and practical insight. His work on India’s currency system, along with his foundational contributions to macroeconomic theory, reflects his ability to merge detailed regional analysis with broader global implications. Keynes’s legacy lies in his forward-thinking ideas, his commitment to monetary reform, and his lasting impact on the structure of modern economic policy.

Click here for supportive article, “Why Classic Economic Theories Still Matter”

Classic Economics

Economics is more than numbers—it's about people, choices, and society. This supportive blog dives into the human side of four major economists: Karl Marx, Carl Menger, Frank Taussig, and John Maynard Keynes. Discover why understanding their theories is still essential for shaping modern economics, decision-making, and ethical leadership. A journey through history that reveals timeless lessons for today’s world.

5

This article explores why learning about the great economic theorists—Marx, Menger, Taussig, and Keynes—remains crucial today. These thinkers did more than shape policies; they offered ways to understand life, society, and the decisions that drive economies. The article explains why their ideas matter and how they continue to guide modern economic thinking.