1262 Journal of economic literature Accordingly, it sees what Keynes did sponding to full employment as nearly as is constructively as merely a makeshift, an practicable, the classical theory comes into its improvisation, a stop-gap To take the constructive part of Keyness work(in de volume of output to be given, i.e. to be deter mined by forces outside the classical scheme of veloping the consumption is no objection to be raised marginal efficiency of capital schedule against the classical analysis of the manner in tc)as being the substance or result of which private self-interest will determine what the Keynesian Revolution"would there in particular is produced, in what proportions fore betoken a failure of nerve, a betrayal the factors of production will be combined to oduce it, and how the value of th of fundamentalist principles. 3 uct will be distributed between them In order to sustain the fundamentalist interpretation, it is necessary to postulate This is abundantly clear, and in obvious that Keynes himself had occasional lapses. confict with the fundamentalist view of Thus, Joan Robinson (23, 1973, p. 3] Keynes's thought being subversive of the writes: whole classical ("reductionist")scheme there were moments when we had some Accordingly, we find Joan Robinson writ trouble in getting Maynard to see what the ing [21, 1964, p. 92], in connection with point of his revolution really was, but when he this passage, of the"fallacy"that Keynes came to sum it up after the book was published fell into, and remarking sadly that,"He was himself partly to blame for the perver Here she refers, of course, to the JEarti- sion of his eyes him cle of 1937 gan the reconstruction of the orthodox Again, she writes [21, 1964, p. 75 scheme that he had shattered"[22, 1971 The General Theory broke through the unnatu- ral barrier and brought history and theor a further embarrassment for funda- together again. but for theorists mentalists is that Keynes indicated quite into time has not been easy. After twenty years the awakened Princess is still dazed and clearly that he found nothing to object to in Hicks's distillation [8, 1937]of the Gen eral Theory into the IS/LM framework, or Keynes himself was not quite steady on hi what has come to be known as " the in come-expenditure model, " quite devoid She then goes on to refer [21, 1964, p. 75] of any fundamentalist characteristics. to Keynes's(highly suspicious") remark This again must be seen about the timeless multiplier[13, 1936, p. momentary lapse on Keynes's part if the 122] fundamentalist interpretation is to be sus- A major embarrassment for fundamen- tained, at any rate if Keynes himself is to alists is to be found in the final chapter of be allowed to be a fundamentalist Keynes- the General Theory. Here we find Keynes ian arguing as follows [13, 1936, pp. 378-79]: What, then, does fundamentalism add if our central controls succeed in establish. up toP It does not provide any sort of de- ing an aggregate volume of output corre terminate theoy economy functions at the aggregate level An immediate difficulty for fundamentalists is the it does not enable one to make any definite ct that the QJE article of 1937, after having ad- predictions about the likely effects of al anced the arguments already discussed, goes on to ternative policies or circumstances.On stress the importance of the consumption functi hich is then deployed(anticipating terminology will introduce at a later stage)in a thoroughly hy 4 See Keynes's letter of March 31, 1937, to Hicks draulic fashion in Hicks [10, 1973
Coddington on Keynesianism 1263 the contrary, it is a viewing point from inhibiting effects on alternative modes of which such constructions would appear as economic regulation. More broadly, the rather desperate makeshifts of transient comparison also arises among the alterna- applicability. Fundamentalist Keynesian- tive effects of investment decisions taken ism is concerned with the texture rather within alternative institutional frame. than the direction, as it were, of the eco- works(various powers and responsibilities nomic process having been given to agencies of the To stress the basis of all economic ac- State), whose regulative capacities then tivity in more or less uncertain expecta- also become a part of the appropriate tions is precisely to emphasize the open- comparison. ness and incompleteness of economic In summary, we can say that fundamen- theorizing and explanation. It does ne talist Keynesians are united in seeing elf provide any kind of fixed mechanism Keynesian ideas as posing a threat to the according to which the unfolding of whole reductionist program; and that events takes place; but it does show how their primary concern has been to rein one would set about constructing a narra- force this threat with further threats tive of events. It is a view about where the when it comes to providing an alternative gaps are in the causal chains that can be to the reductionist program, however, identified in the economy: the points at matters are less unified. There is a marked hich the economic process is susceptible contrast, for example, between the pro. to influence. We can accordingly begin to spectus offered by Joan Robinson for the appreciate the deep ambivalence of this completion of the Keynesian revolution standpoint towards economic policy On and the insight offered by Shackle into its the one hand, it sees potentiality for enor- integrity and essence. And when we move mous leverage, the whole economic proc. from the critical to the constructive as- ess moving in response to changing states pects of fundamentalism, not only are of mind and consciousness; on the other matters less unified, they are also less def hand, the very precariousness of this vi- nite. In Loasby' s work, this indefiniteness sion leads very naturally to thorough- is transformed into a methodological prin- going scepticism about the predictability ciple [17, 1976, p. 167 of the effects of deliberate attempts to ap- If one ply uit of political obj of employment set forth by Keynes in his tives. The point of view in itself provide IQIE] article of 1937, it is this: unemploy no guidance on whether the precarious- in a market economy is the result of ignoran potential for political leverage. That is to roeconomic models miss the point-which is say: the wayward and unruly character of precisely that no model of this situation can be fully specifi individual choices-and in particular in- vestment decisions---is seen as an imped Ill. Hydraulic Ke ment to economic functioning; but the during the nineteen forties and fifties, question that must be faced from a policy there appeared a number of expositions of point of view is whether it is a greater Keynesian economics, "attempting to impediment to the self-regulation of the make the ideas accessible to students, and economy than it is to the workings of dis- even to intelligent laymen. what these cretionary fiscal and monetary policy. This works had in common, quite apart from matter would involve not just the consid matters of substance, was an unmistakable eration of an impediment to economic enthusiasm for (what were taken to be functioning, but a comparison between its Keyness ideas. This enthusiasm was at