SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:26 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (60 lines)
=================== HES POSTING ==================== 
 
Apropos the comments of McCloskey and Leeson on Keynes and history. 
 
perhaps Leeson is being too kind to Keynes 
 
one could take the quotes lightly if Keynes had demonstrated more 
familiarity  
with history.  he didn't. 
 
Jim Crotty (JEI, 1990) has argued that Keynes marshalled some impressive  
'stylised facts', but the stylised variety is about as far as he got. 
 
One can use Keynes for his seminal contribution, but when the attraction 
turns  
to idolatry, we run into trouble. 
 
The trouble becomes systemic if one sees the spectrum of opinion in  
economics as running from the neoclassics to Keynes (as many are wont to  
do, not least from those who want to resurrect Keynes as providing all the  
answers to current intellectual and policy impasses).  
 
There's no interest in history across the spectrum.   
 
Marshall and his "privat docent" Pigou had already put paid to the 
English historical 'school' by the time Keynes came to join the team.   
 
And that's where history stayed for future generations, who got, at best, 
an  
apologetic single course in 'economic history', marginally tacked onto an  
uncompromising theoreticist core syllabus. 
 
As for Pigou, I quite like his disarming candour in the preface to his 'The 
Veil of  
Money' (1949).  I quote: 
 
" ... the book is general and academic in character.  It is not a 
discussion of  
current problems.  Some readers confronted with it can hardly fail to 
'regret that  
the writer has thrown little light, or at all events little direct light, 
on the grave  
economic difficulties with which our country is at present confronted' - or 
some  
other such cliche.  Alas, I must leave them to their regret.  An author is 
entitled  
to choose in (sic) his own topics, and potential readers who prefer other 
topics  
have a very simple remedy." 
 
Precisely.  Which is why I'm presently reading Thorold Rogers, and not  
Pigou or Keynes, as TR knew a good deal more about history, his knowledge  
at present mostly gathering dust in second hand book stores. 
 
Evan Jones 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2