Keynesian "optimism"

[glevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Bernard Kohler wrote that he preferred a "optimistic/Global Keynesian"
approach to current events rather than a "pessimistic/owlish/Marxist"
approach.

The issue, though, isn't optimism vs. pessimism. I think it is just as
unfair to call Keynes a optimist as it is to call Marxists pessimists.
The major issue here is over the effectiveness and limitations of state
intervention. A (not *the*) Keynesian (*not* Keynes) belief is that
the state can ensure stability through "appropriate" use of fiscal and
monetary policies. This understanding emphasizes the ability of the state
to *control* the macroeconomy through "wise" policy-making.

The Marxist tradition (including Kalecki) stresses the inherent
instability of capitalism and the *limitations* of state intervention.
Those limitations, and the inability of the state to *control* the
macroeconomy, rest on different understandings of the state and, more
importantly, the nature of markets and dynamic processes of growth and
accumulation.

There is an uneasy coalition of both of these traditions in PKT. In
general, I would say that Post-Keynesians as a whole have been moving
more towards the Marxist tradition of emphasizing instability and the
limitations of effective macroeconomic state intervention. An example of
this trend can be seen in a collection of articles by PKers and Marxists
in Willi Semmler ed. _Financial Dynamics and Business Cycles_(M.E.
Sharpe, 1989).

Jerry