After Ricardo – after Marx – after Keynes: comparative advantage, mutual advantage and implications for global governance

This paper submits that one of the most fallacious paradigms in economic thought and policy, stemming from Ricardo, has been that of comparative advantage, as it has assumed no capital mobility whereas it has been mainly foreign direct investment that has driven global trade since World War II and has confirmed Marx's claims for uneven development. The paper outlines that this has meant asymmetric outcomes compromising the post-war Bretton Woods system and suggests that this needs both a post-Ricardian and a post-Keynesian conceptual framework for global governance.