Funny thing is, if you read the General Theory you'd realize that Keynes is more attracted to capitalism, and was much more inclined to free markets than he was either fascism or communism.This is a pretty drastic misquote. Has Rothbard read Keynes?
Mr. Wenzel, this is a pretty irresponsible post, its a pretty big misquote and an argument with a pretty big bias.
Has Rothbard read Keynes? LOL!
Rothbard QUOTES Keynes as saying that his theory is much better suited for totalitarian than for capitalist government, if you did not notice. that's much more solid evidence than your vague impressions about the book.
No, Rothbard quotes part of an introduction to Keynes, and then takes selective passages from his numerous writings. And offers them up with terrible bias. Either Rothbard hasn't actually read the General Theory, or he just didn't understand it.Because you clearly haven't I'd suggest that you read Ch. 24 at the very least, although you'd skip over some of the great achievements of the earlier chapters. You should also realize that Keynes was arguing for a limited government intervention at a time when many wanted to see the government completely take over the economy. Throughout his life, he also made a fortune on the stock market, lost it, then made it again. He was much more of a capitalist than you accuse him of being. And he certainly was no communist, and Rothbards "conclusion" that he was a fascist is so spurious it is laughable.Maybe I'm not to one with the vague impressions. If you'd like, I'll lend you my copy. Krugman wrote the intro, I'm sure you'd love to read that.Apology accepted.
Fuck your apology bullshit. If you actually spent any time on this site other than coming over as an apologist for Keynes you'd already have an understanding that Keynes' "genius" regarding his investment is a bunch of nonsense.He was a crony capitalist that got inside information from the government, access to the FDR administration in particular, regarding what was planned for devaluing the dollar. So he did what all good crony insiders do, front run the government. Profit. So to give you the short history of Keynes genius trading stocks: he lost a ton of money in the bull run of the late 1920s and then made a lot of money front running the US government's gold confiscation/devalue from $20.67 to $35.00. Where can I get in on that trade?Don't believe me? Start digging then:http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=1879#more-1879
Yeah. Keynes was a genius alright:"The right remedy for the trade cycle is not to be found in abolishing booms and thus keeping us permanently in a semi-slump; but in abolishing slumps and thus keeping us permanently in a quasi-boom."This muddled thinking, combined with his eugenics background, makes him a perfect candidate for Sainthood in the Church of the State.
Given, as you admit there where plenty of people urging the complete take over of the economy, Keynes suggesting a 'limited' intervention is completely underhanded as he knew full well that politicians would seek opportunities in the crisis so he could pose as a moderate. as for him being a great capitalist.... from this very website.
whoops needs the link... http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/03/super-myth-of-keynes-as-great-stock.html
Oh - did I hurt your feelings 12:53? Terribly sorry (see, apologies aren't that difficult)If you perhaps would look beyond random internet sites (totally credible I am sure) you'll see that Keynes had been arguing for nations to go off gold since his first book, in 1913. And he continued it in the 20s, arguing about unsustainable reparations payments and how ridiculous the gold standard was. So it really is very unsurprising that he made a lot of money by correctly betting on a devaluation. Sort of like Soros when he took on the BoE.And by the way, the argument that "he made a lot of money therefore he must of cheated" - not a very strong one eh? You say because he made a correct bet he's a crony, but don't offer up any proof. Seems like a very socialist argument no? Perhaps even a communist one.... oh my.12:59 - not sure if your the same as 12:53, but yes, Keynes must have been a terrible person for thinking that the Great Depression was a terrible thing. Good for you junior.Heath - I'm thinking that this post might be slightly biased, maybe because it refers to Keynes as a 'bastard'? Probably not the best source to get good information.Reading on, yes, it is incredibly biased. It makes the whole of monetary policy during the Great Depression look like it was Roosevelt trying to boost Keynes portfolio.Obviously this isn't the case.Believe it or not, there was a macro story going on here as well. Keynes encouraged capital controls because the dollar was still semi linked to gold, and the only alternative to stem the capital flight that was going on at the time was to jack up interest rates, which would've killed any recovery. And yes, Keynes did write numerous letters to various officials throughout the Great Depression, as well as before. If you would read his writings, instead of relying on some bush league skewing of them, you'd see that.Hey, if I really wanted to, I'm sure I could misquote this site enough to make Wenzel look like a socialist. Or a baby-eating necrophiliac. Its really not hard to slander if you have no integrity.And 12:53, try to ease up on the profanity. Relax, take a breath, think it through. Atta boy (or girl).Anyways I'm gone until next week. Looking forward to seeing what is here when I get back.Happy Year of the Snake.
By the way - none of the above has anything to do with the original argument - that Keynes wasn't a fascist or a communist. So I guess if you aren't able to show otherwise, you must agree?Cool.
Why did he have a different introduction for the German edition than the other ones?