Consciously or not, the impression of the American held by most
people in the postwar period was moulded or affected in some way or
other by the Texas economist and philosopher, Clarence E. Ayres. While
Mitchell waded through neutral statistics and Clark and Commons sought
conciliation, it was perhaps Clarence Ayres alone who kept the
distinct and confrontational character of American Institutionalism
intact.
Many have claimed that Ayres's famous "Institutionalist Dualism",
as laid out in, e.g. 1944, 1951, lies at the root of the
Institutionalist approach. Ayres's "Dualism" stresses the
division and coexistence of "technological" and "ceremonial"
behavior, terms derived from Veblen to separate, roughly, the
inventive from the inherited aspects of economic structure
respectively. Ayres propounded a theory of "institutional lag"
whereby technological changes inevitably kept economic technology one
step ahead of inherited socio-cultural institutions. The process of
Veblenian "evolution" Ayres envisaged was that technological
changes were generated by spurts of instinctive inventive activity to
innovate in technological processes but that the relatively slow,
inherited socio-economic structures would be maladapted to these
changes. With glacier-like gradualness, institutions would eventually
respond to the new technology, but by the time they adjusted, the next
round of inventive activity would have been skipping along further
ahead, thus maintaining a permanent lag and thus incogruity between
social structures and economic technology.
Ayres's interpretations of Veblen's work have been seen variously as
both advancing and stifling the Institutionalist programme. On the one
hand, it take a relatively malign view of social institutions as both
hopelessly incompetent and regressive, a point irksome to
Institutionalists of a "progressive" vein (e.g.Commons).
Furthermore, Ayres's insistence on a "technological" -
deterministic interpretation of Veblen's evolutionary theory brought
him into confrontation with the more subjectivist members (or
associates) of American Institutionalism - particularly the
belligerent Chicago economist, Frank H.Knight.
However, Ayres himself did not necessarily think progressive policy
inherently pointless. For instance, he was himself an avid proponent
of "guaranteed income" (i.e. negative income tax, e.g. 1967)
and although, quite early on, he identified and denounced the
socio-cultural and ideological biases of economic theory (e.g. 1918,
1934), he did not himself argue that it was not capable of assisting
both understanding and transformation.