ABSTRACT
Many academics involved in the post-autistic economics movement probably presume that barriers to delivering the kind of pluralistic teaching and doctoral training advocated by the French students and Cambridge postgraduates reduce to politics and infrastructure. They presume it is a matter of having the numbers to get pluralistic policies through faculty committees and of having the necessary teaching resources; resistance from students is not seen as an issue. Certainly, the student petitioning that started off the movement gives the impression that pluralistic teaching modes will be widely welcomed by students who enroll for courses in economics, because such an approach to teaching has greater scientific integrity than the present approach by which the neoclassical hegemony sweeps alternative perspectives aside regardless of empirical evidence.
