Yes, Keynes was British, and no, he didn't personally advocate any of the actions I described. Nor was he the originator of fiat currency. However, his theories were the basis for all of the above actions. Keynes is the father of economics, and governmental economic intervention, in America.
Although Keynes did believe that governments should only run the presses during periods of recession, and slacken the expansion as things picked up again, he should have realized that he was asking an unreasonable amount of self-control from the people running the press. The incentives are all for printing as much money as you can get away with, and Keynes provided a framework and moral justification for it. As for destroying goods, that's directly in line with his ideas about demand being the determining factor in economic health, and -- assuming his demand-side theories are correct -- is an effective way to combat a depression.
I happen to be an advocate of Say's Law, so I disagree with those policies, and Keynes' ideas in general.
Posted on: October 27, 2008, 12:05:42 am
Quote from: soldierjane on October 25, 2008, 12:19:25 PM
Katie:
Interestingly, western political thought has evolved since the 1930s and I don't think anyone that calls themselves a socialist nowadays is interested in achieving a communist state. Those people call themselves 'communists'. A socialist state in the modern sense is a mixed economy, a social democracy for a common good. That socialism implies communism is as wrong as saying that capitalism implies plutocracy.
FDR the fascist:
Hmmm... I don't know that FDR could be called "fascist". It's certainly not fascist in the pro-corporation, autocratic, cult of personality sense of Mussolini which was the original sense (ie before the "death camps"). I think that there's a nationalistic, populist element in 1930s politics that permeated different stripes and different ideologies but that wasn't the province of fascism only.
I'm not sure where I said that socialism = communism. If I didn't, then I'm sorry if I seemed to imply it. It was Marx who believed socialism to be a stage between capitalism and communism, but socialism is older than Marx and most socialists aren't Marxists.
As for FDR... the New Deal was
extremely pro-corporate, in the same sense in which fascism was pro-corporate. The "corporate" part of fascism doesn't refer to business
per se, but to corporations in the strict legal sense. That includes includes unions and many social organizations, in addition to businesses. We tend to think of fascism as being "pro-business" but that's not actually part of the philosophy. As envisioned by Mussolini, it was about building unity and power by co-opting all existing groups, economic and social, into the state.