The End of (Economy) History

Résumé 0

Some papers, for reasons which remain at least partially obscure, leave a persistenttrace in intellectual history. Such is the case with Keynes’ paper “EconomicPossibilities for our Grandchildren”, although it never attracted much attention withinthe economic profession, besides reference here and there to the power of simpleeconomic calculations: A possible explanation is that Keynes, in freeing himself fromeconomic rigor, is attempting to unveil his moral philosophy. Because a greateconomist is not necessarily a great philosopher we should not ab initio expect theresult to be at the level we are accustomed to in reading Keynes. What matters is not somuch the way Keynes answers the questions he poses but the nature of the questionsthemselves. Could the very functioning of the capitalist system lead to the solution ofthe economic problem and hence to the end of capitalism itself?This paper sustains that the answers given by Keynes to these questions are groundedon three elements: arithmetic, the neurosis of capitalism and the communism of theelites. On the first element, Keynes is right; one may even argue that his reasoninganticipates Solow’s growth model. The second element is rooted in the context inwhich Keynes was writing and grounded on a false interpretation of Freud’s workwhich led him to a simplistic analysis of human needs. The third element unveils hisaristocratic view of society. What is remarkable in “the economic possibilities” is thepowerful intuition of Keynes and even more remarkable the nature of the questions heposes. Each and every economist should try to answer the question of the ends of theeconomic system and of its possible end. What is deceptive is the naivety with whichKeynes deals with human needs and even more deceptive his arrogance and thequestionable moral which goes with it.