A question of terminology: "Mainstream" vs. "Interventionist" economics.

Economics Economics Questions
1

I have been using the term “interventionist” in place of the term “mainstream” in reference to said economists or said branch of economics, ie, “interventionist economics” or “interventionist economist”.

Am I off base using this terminology? Does it sound foolish? Is it inflammatory? It’s not meant to be, I’m just trying to describe what I see.

It seems to me that referring to them as “interventionist” more accurately describes what they adhere to regarding economics, “policy”, etc. It is simply more descriptive. “Mainstream” does not contain any information about what they adhere to. If anything, the implication is that “mainstream” is somehow taken to mean “correct”.

The reason it’s important to me is that the interventionists have caused and are causing irreparable damage to the economy, and it is intensifying daily. It is important to refer to them as what they really are.

2

It’s a case-by-case question. If you judge that the person you’re talking to would shut down if you used “interventionist economics”, then don’t use it. If he’s a cool-enough cucumber to hear what you are trying to say by using the word, then use it. Unfortunately, more often then not, it will be a case of the former, and not the latter.