John Maynard Keynes — an introduction

11 Apr, 2019 at 18:03 | Posted in Economics | 4 Comments



  1. As usual with Keynes and his past or present followers, their depiction of classical political economy is a fairy tale. There is not a single word about a supposed equilibrium in the labour market in Smith, Ricardo or Marx’s writings. The featured explanation about the causes of unemployment is based on neoclassical economics, and not on classical political economy.

    • A part of the confusion for modern readers of Keynes may be that when Keynes talks about “classical economics” he often refers to what we today call “neoclassical economics” πŸ™‚

      • But how can we ever end this confusion, Lars, if we don’t point it out every single time it comes up?

        In my opinion, the proper distinction between classical and neoclassical economics is of utmost importance for the much-needed overhaul of mainstream economic theory.

        • I agree, but we cannot, unfortunately, rewrite history. We have to live with the sad fact that terms change meaning over time. And make sure that people know which meaning we are referring to. As someone who has written five books on the history of economic thought, I know it can sometimes be difficult. But as the French have it — il faut s’efforcer πŸ™‚

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at
Entries and Comments feeds.