Thomas Palley

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.

Keywords: conflict, Keynes, The General Theory, Kalecki, Neo-Keynesianism, New Keynesianism.

This paper presents a new formulation of conflict inflation labeled the “pass-through” approach, which contrasts with the existing “pressure balance” approach. The model generates Phillips styled inflation – unemployment dynamics that are a hybrid of Keynesian and NAIRU dynamics. Conflict inflation arises when economic activity rises above the consistent claims activity level, and it is subject to self-propelled conflict accelerationism. Immediately below that level, inflation holds constant at the expected rate. At low activity, accelerating disinflation can develop. Worker militancy, corporate aggressiveness, negative supply shocks, and upward commodity price shocks all contribute to conflict inflation. They do so via two channels. First, they increase the intensity of conflict by increasing the degree of income claims inconsistency. Second, they lower the activity level at which conflict inflation kicks in. Policy can affect the consistent claims economic activity threshold at which conflict inflation kicks in. However, there may be adverse interaction effects with aggregate demand. Conflict inflation is best addressed by unconventional policies, such as incomes policy. Institutional developments in the Neoliberal era have likely reduced the relevance of conflict inflation.

READ THE PAPER

This paper introduces the notion of monetary disorder. The underlying theory rests on a twin circuits view of the macro economy. The idea of monetary disorder has relevance for understanding the experience and consequences of the recent decade-long period of monetized large budget deficits and ultra-easy monetary policy. Current policy rests on Keynesian logic whereby a large fall in aggregate demand warrants robust offsetting monetary and fiscal policy actions. That logic neglects potential monetary disorder being bred within the financial circuit in the form of inflated asset prices and leveraged balance sheets. That disorder is likely to develop long before inflation accelerates so that inflation targeting fails to protect against it. Political factors increase the policy danger as the benefits of disorder are front-loaded and the costs backloaded. The paper concludes with a policy discussion regarding how to prevent Keynesian goods market counter-cyclical stabilization policy from causing monetary disorder.

READ THE PAPER

This paper argues for broadening the application of hysteresis to institutions, policy lock-in, psychology, identity, and economic ideas. Hysteresis is an element of historical processes, and the real world is historical. That explains why hysteresis is pervasive and important. Hysteresis should be a fundamental building block of political economy. Expanding its application in economics is both an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity is that it provides a means for incorporating political, sociological, and psychological forces which economics tends to neglect. That will enrich economics and can also provide a mutually enriching bridge to other social sciences. The challenge is introducing such concerns raises questions about the character of economics’ knowledge claims, which is likely to trigger resistance from economists.

READ THE PAPER

Keynes’ General Theory was a huge step forward relative to classical economics, but it was also a step backward in its denial of the conflictual nature of capitalism. There is need to understand Keynes’ technical contributions regarding the workings of monetary economies, but also need to understand the flaws within his thinking and the consequences thereof. Keynes made a fundamental contribution elucidating the mechanism of effective demand, and he also has claim to be the preeminent monetary theorist. However, his critique of classical economics was technocratic and focused on the interest rate mechanism. Reflecting his own liberal political economic disposition, he denied the conflictual nature of capitalism. That is the “original sin” in Keynesian economics, and it has far-reaching implications. It explains why establishment Keynesian economics struggles to explain the current tendency to stagnation. Even more importantly, it has kept economics locked into a false conception of capitalism that undermines the case for Social Democracy.

READ THE PAPER

LINK TO PUBLISHED ARTICLE