In defence of critical realism: a reply to Baxter and Chua and Andrew and Baker

Purpose – This is a reply to the commentaries by Baxter and Chua (2020) and Andrew and Baker (2020) on a paper previously published in this journal.
Design/methodology/approach – This is a conceptual discussion that further clarifies the differences between critical realism (CR), actor-network theory (ANT) and traditional Marxist thought as a basis for critical accounting research.
Findings – The relative merits of CR as a basis for critical accounting research are further elucidated in the light of the criticisms raised in the commentaries. In particular, the discussion of its role as a counterweight to the legacy of empiricism, that hampers the possibilities of advancing radical social critique and emancipation, is further developed.
Research implications/limitations – The paper clarifies what CR can and cannot do for the critical accounting project and how it may be further developed as a vehicle for emancipation.
Originality/value – The paper extends the debate about what critical accounting research is and could be.