[3]James K. Galbraith, reviewing the second edition (2006), described the argument: In The Corruption of Economics, Gaffney and fellow Georgist Fred Harrison begin their inquiry with the observation that America’s nineteenth-century universities, like its railroads, were land-grant institutions, vested with warrants to vast acreages under the 1862 Morrill Act.
These were the founders of modern American economics, and Gaffney and Harrison document their words, commitments, careerism, and venality in rich detail, leaving no doubt about their true characters and beliefs.
[4]Gaffney's essay in the book, Neo-Classical Economics as a Stratagem against Henry George, gave as examples of Georgists who lost university positions Scott Nearing and Allen H.
[1] A negative review by Herbert Gintis, in which he wrote that "It is not plausible that the neoclassical dog is wagged by the Georgian stump of a tail", had a reply in the form of an animadversion by Edward J. Dobson of the School of Cooperative Individualism.
[7] In reviewing The Corruption of Economics and A Philosophy for a Fair Society, with Land and Taxation (1995) by Nicolaus Tideman, all three works being published in the "Georgist Paradigm Series" by Harrison as director of the Centre for Incentive Taxation, Mark Blaug wrote: There is no doubt that the emergence of the marginal productivity theory in the 1880s was stimulated by the need to find an answer to Henry George's indictment of the prevailing distribution of income, but that is not to say that the whole of the rise of neoclassical economics can be explained as a defence against Georgism[...][8]He finds that Gaffney's essay essentially argues in that way; and cites Critics of Henry George.