As per usual a spot on critique. But we are in the paradigm change phase of the Kuhnian cycle. That is why it’s puzzling that a study of paradigm changes and their signatures is not front and center as that is what is indicated and because even excellent critique generally only takes place within the mental restraints of the current paradigm/pattern.
Trying to reform the study of economics is an admirable and excellent “tilting at windmills” goal, but crafting new paradigm policies that immediately and temporally resolve the two biggest and most chronic problems of modern economies (scarcity of available to spend individual income and price and asset inflation), eliminating the single uneconomic structural barrier to moving forward toward ecological sanity (eliminating private finance and its “common sense” assertion that species and planetary survival is “too expensive”), and beginning a mass movement to get these paradigm changing policies and structural problems implemented seems like a more rational strategy for actual change. To paraphrase an old Buddhist saying: The longest journey begins by actually taking the first temporal universe step.