ABSTRACT
Heterodox economists continue to espouse the importance of pluralist principles being employed in the teaching of economics at the tertiary level. In this chapter there is a warning against tokenistic attempts at the pluralist teaching of macroeconomics, by arguing that there needs to be a rigorous assessment of competing perspectives. These warnings arise from the inability of introductory orthodox macroeconomic textbooks to respond to the fundamental flaws in their understanding of a modern monetary economy that have been exposed by the GFC and its aftermath. The chapter argues that this is a consequence of the failure of orthodoxy to provide a coherent account of Institutional Practice. We make three substantiated claims that highlight the deficiencies in the orthodox accounts of how major institutions, such as the Central Bank, Treasury and banks, operate in a modern monetary economy. Further, key propositions that are derived within a modern monetary theory (MMT) framework are underpinned by Institutional Practice. Consequently, it is argued that within a first-year macroeconomics course, MMT principles should take centre stage and be contrasted with orthodox principles. Whether such a course should be considered pluralist is then a question of semantics.
