Keynes’ denial of conflict: A reply to Professor Heise’s critique

Thomas Palley

Japanese Economy, 2024, vol. 50, issue 1, 63-65

Abstract: This note responds to Arne Heise’s critque of my article on Keynes’s denial of conflict in The General Theory. Heise’s response fails to show Keynes addressed conflict and makes several meritless criticisms regarding my treatment of Keynes and Keynesianism. It also fails to recognize the purpose of my article which was to show conflict is an essential part of capitalism; conflict is absent in Keynes’ magnum opus; conflict is absent in Neo- and New Keynesianism; though Kalecki introduced conflict in Keynesianism, much more remains to be done about recognizing its implications; and calling for revival of the economics of Keynes in bad times keeps policy locked in the orbit of stimulus and blocks recognition of need for policies addressing the economic consequences of conflict.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/2329194X.2024.2342516 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mes:jpneco:v:50:y:2024:i:1:p:63-65

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/MJES19

DOI: 10.1080/2329194X.2024.2342516

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Japanese Economy from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().