I'm a liberal?, A collection of essays dell'Adelphi
widely recognized genius Keynesian economist. Forgotten, just as similar to the technocratic hangover of the last thirty years, is its intellectual dimension. A serious limitation, since the two souls entwine into one of the exceptional and its inextricable source of the originality of Keynesian thought. Keynes was even aesthetic, tied to the Bloomsbury Group, was mistress of the painter Duncan Grant, a friend of the writer and critic Lytton Strachey and Virginia Woolf. So much so that before the summa of his economic thought, The General Theory of Interest, and Money 1936, his works were for the most nimble of thought or essays in acute polemical pamphlet that now the Adelphi back to the library by Giorgio La Malfa. I'm a liberal? is the title of the collection contains works at the time known as The end of laissez-faire or the writings dedicated to Newton and Malthus. Keynes, who lived between the wars, in the sunset of his illusions and nineteenth-century Europe, was a spectator of the unexpected leading role of the masses and had plenty of material to turn the page with a mechanistic view of economic relations established with the Enlightenment el ' industrialization. the eyes of a keen analyst as he, in fact, the pettiness and myopia of the ruling class European or irrational forces unleashed by the story could only lead to a profound critique of utopian concepts classical economics that saw human societies as a perfect set "mechanical clock" where the divine law and to replace its natural order had reached the "invisible hand", the discrete mathematical balance of bourgeois economics. How to justify, in fact, the political and economic crises of that terrible three decades, the succession of speculative and failures, the rigid ideological stupidity with which the political class had reiterated the laissez-faire, by refusing to remedy the manifest inability of self-regulation of the market?
The answer lay in pettiness, fear structural nature of human beings dominated by illusions as fatuous as psychologically necessary or likely to place their perspective in the short and medium term. A reversal of anthropology, in short, to Keynes, that would translate into macro-economic revolution, which gives a very penetrating essay in the Council of Four, chapter at the economic consequences of peace, where he tells the match between the winners of the First World War. The Italian Vittorio Emanuele Orlando, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, Britain's David Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau tired all involved because Germany lost the advantage gained from 1870, returning to the French leadership in continental Europe. A small theater that narcissistic tic of a class policy unable to see beyond your nose, and narrow-minded nationalistic reflexes unrealistic prejudices Keynes captures in full, foreshadowing the dramatic consequences. We
in 1919 and a sentence may be enough for all of Keynes: "You can not restore Central Europe to 1870 without creating these tensions in the European structure, and unleash those forces to overwhelm the human and spiritual, transcending borders and races, not only we and our "guarantees" but our institutions and order in our society. " Dramatic global consequences of the closures that allow national English economist to notice the arrival of fascism and a new, more devastating conflict, and review by the deep economic theories based on models refractory to the discoveries of the century: the irrational and the psychological dimensions as decisive as the rational calculation in the conduct of individuals. Those animal spirits (the title of a book by George Akerlof and Robert Shiller) rediscovered the crisis of 2008 after they were again denied by the dominant economic theory, all focused on closed systems and mathematical models, which were nothing if not refined justifications a jungle where the strong dominate. Anchored
this skeptical faith, economic theory of Keynes would have established the need for corrective able to meet the limits of individual action, by definition unstable and contingent. Which meant to revolutionize economic theory, beginning with the questioning of classical theories and marginality, convinced of the ability of individuals to self, to open a model that, taking the limits of the individual, did rely on the ability to reform states. First, to prevent a lag in demand, natural or tilting of the men prevented saving investment, hampering the full expression of the productive capacity of the economic system and penalizing employment. A real change of perspective, as he himself says in the end of laissez-faire, would transform the market utopia based on the natural liberty of the eighteenth century bourgeois human institution that works if the rules which govern it are appropriate and virtuous.
0 comments:
Post a Comment