Where is the nostalgic empiricism of the new new institutionalists leading economics?

The article provides a critical analysis of the main cliches and stereotypes surrounding modern economics. Using the work of the 2024 Nobel laureates D. Acemoglu, S. Johnson, and J. Robinson (AJR) as a case study, it is demonstrated that the modern mainstream economics does not conform to the numerous caricatures still drawn of it by critics. It is argued that the popularity of these economists is due not so much to the originality of their approaches, but rather to their excellent command of rhetorical techniques, which allows them to successfully communicate with different audiences and create compelling narratives for them. The authors highlight three contentious features of AJR’s research style:(1) compensating for a lack of theoretical novelty through empirical testing of already known historical “cases”; (2) offering an excessively liberal interpretation of the works of their predecessors; (3) suppressing research results from other scholars that are inconvenient for their interpretations. It is shown that the narrative of empirical rigor in their ideas, skillfully promoted by AJR, is, on the one hand, in tune with the challenges of the time, and on the other hand, deprives the subject area of economics of its distinctiveness, making it hardly distinguishable from other disciplines.