ABSTRACT
The methodological rigidity of the Walrasian system was in part responsible for its demise and the same may well apply to its radical critics, should they fail to adopt more flexible methods. Practically-minded economists know in their hearts why the Walrasian system was held so dear for so long. The extensions of the Walrasian system to time, space, state, and risk left uncertainty lacking and it is this feature that is exploited essentially by the Post Walrasian synthesis. The antithesis was supplied by what are called heterodox economists but were in the past known as radical economists. Class clearly mattered to radicals. Most radicals thought that workers were different people than nonworkers, or capitalists. The classical theory of imperialism, advanced by radicals, does not appear to have had lasting traction. Countries may well be better off as result of colonization, to the extent that some residual infrastructure is left in place and a democratic foundation is laid.
