{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016146788990825688, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0011009174311926607, 'mean_word_length': 4.926086956521739, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Crisis of Canadian Political Economy: Dependency Theory Versus The New Orthodoxy

Canadian political economy is in danger of losing the vitality, originality and critical spirit of inquiry which was much in evidence during the seventies . , This is the result of two unhappy developments, leading away from heterodoxy to orthodoxy . First, an important number of political economists are no longer interested in addressing the issues and concerns identified with liberal political economy. On the left, there is a widely held belief that liberal and Marxist traditions of political economy are incompatible and that it is necessary to purify Canadian political economy of original sin, its liberal origins and the "heretical" views of Innis and the Innis tradition, on the grounds that Innis wasn't a Marxist and the questions he addressed are largely unimportant .2 The second danger rises from a misplaced idealization of Marxism a naive belief in Marxism as a science a tout faire . Here I am going to suggest that much of the current debate in political economy is unproductive and misdirected because Marxism is treated as a dogma to be defended rather than as a methodology and a mode of inquiry in constant flux and need of restatement and refinement . In Canada, Marxism encounters particular problems and it is no exaggeration to say that the Marxist paradigm, as it has been applied by many Canadian political economists, has not proven as fruitful as in other contexts . At the very least, Marxism as a mode of analysis has to be reformulated to allow for the particular nature of the semiperipheral social and economic formation here as well as in other cases such as Australia and New Zealand . This is the essence of my reflection . In the first part, I am going to defend not Innis but Innisian-based Marxism as it relates to the current debate on Canadian capitalist development. In second part, I am going to argue the importance of maintaining an open paradigm in political economy. What is happening in Canadian political economy? Canadian political economy is being torn by diverging tendencies . Ray Morrow's provocative and thorough analysis warns that Canadian political economy cannot afford to ignore the importanttheoretical work being done elsewhere on the relationship between culture and economics.3 But from another perspective a different danger is imminent . The Canadian political economy paradigm is in the process of closing . The current debates, which surface in the special issue of Studies in Political Economy entitled "Rethinking Canadian Political Economy", reveal a series of limitations which must be confronted4 : . the disastrously oversimplified belief in "class analysis" ;