Abstract
The text contributes to the largely uncharted terrain of performativity and macroeconomics. What are the gains and limitations of the performativity perspective when the field of interest is not a single market or trading technique, but a vast, complex and occasionally diffuse field, consisting of various macroeconomic forces as well as competing political players? First, we analyze how the complex and multilayered narratives of Keynes’s General Theory were transformed into the epochal IS–LM model and how this mathematically formalized and visually appealing tool served as an organizing cognitive landscape for the emerging field of (Keynesian) macroeconomics. In an ensuing case study, we reconstruct key aspects of the diffusion of this ‘IS-LMised’ version of Keynes’s General Theory into policy circles in West Germany in the 1960s.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The former minister for economic affairs (1966–1972) and finance minister (1971–1972) in Western Germany.
- 2.
Nevertheless, MacKenzie would not go as far as to validate economic actors adjusting to the anthropology of homo economicus (MacKenzie 2006, 263). The performativity of the ‘anthropological program’ of economics is suggested by Callon (2007, 343–344). For a comment from an anthropological perspective, see Miller (2002).
- 3.
A third, more historically oriented argument that is quite simple and striking stipulates that the market existed long before (neoclassical) economics was able to perform it (Slater 2002, 244). According to Callon, an agent other than neoclassical economics must have ruled economic discourse at that time because ‘when economics (or economized) elements are already there it means that economics (at large) has already been that way’ (Callon 2007, 328).
- 4.
- 5.
Keynes used to speak of classical economics in a somewhat idiosyncratic manner, including much of what would be labeled as neoclassical economics today. If regarded from a methodological point of view, one would probably stress the differences between classical economics, based more or less strictly on a labor theory of value, and neoclassical economics, referring to marginalism. Keynes, however, was more interested in the political positions of traditional economics, a perspective that downplays the conceptual/methodological differences between the two branches.
- 6.
Fourcade (2009, 160) resumes the events in the following manner: ‘Keynes’s economics was exported from Britain to the United States in the 1930s, it was then marketed back to Europe as “Keynesian economics” in the 1940s and 1950s’. Solow (1984, 14) asserts that ‘to a large extent, the IS-LM model for almost 50 years has been Keynesian economics’.
- 7.
With L denoting the aggregate demand for money (which is, in equilibrium, identical to M, the aggregate supply of money), i being the nominal rate of interest, I designating aggregate investment, and Y aggregate income. The variables refer to nominal quantities, but, due to the assumption of fixed prices, also relate to changes in real variables (Vercelli 1999, 4–5).
- 8.
- 9.
Morgan and Rutherford (1998, 15–16) point to some important social aspects of a more formalized macroeconomics: ‘Although Keynesianism might have been thought dangerously close to Marxism, an IS–LM diagram probably looked innocuous to an outsider, and statistical numbers such as those of Mitchell had long held their own neutral status as data. ‘Economics expressed in geometry, algebra, or numbers could be a good self-defense in the cold war days and pass muster in the classroom as well as in the government.’
- 10.
See Bordo and Schwartz (2003) on the use of the IS–LM model in the monetarist discourse.
- 11.
Even the most distinguished critiques of Keynesian economics at least appreciate the turn to a more model-based science that resulted from deploying the IS–LM model, as, for instance, Lucas and Sargent’s (1997 [1979], 271) statement shows appreciating: ‘the econometric framework by means of which Keynesian theory evolved from disconnected qualitative ‘talk’ about economic activity into a system of equations which could be compared to data in a systematic way, and provide an operational guide in the necessarily quantitative task of formulating monetary and fiscal policy.’
- 12.
Speich (2011) draws a connection between the process of decolonization and the decline of the French and British empires to explain why national accounting gained momentum after World War II and highlights the role played by international organizations like the UN.
- 13.
Richter (1999, 9) mentions some earlier German policy-documents bearing the hallmarks of the IS–LM model, for instance, a report (published in 1949) by the Wissenschaftlicher Beirat bei der Verwaltung für Wirtschaft (Academic Advisory Council of the Administration of Economic Affairs).
- 14.
The legislative text is available at: http://www.sachverstaendigenrat-wirtschaft.de/fileadmin/dateiablage/Sonstiges/Gesetz_SRW.pdf. All quotes from German documents are translated by us.
- 15.
In the 1970s, the discussion about adaptive versus rational expectations resulted in modifications of the Phillips curve, which, combined with the ‘natural rate of unemployment’ hypothesis and the ‘acceleration’-hypothesis, led to a significantly altered ‘menu’ of policy-implications: The options of adjustment of the parameters in the long term are thereby notably reduced (Humphrey 1985, 13–14). Eventually, under the influence of the disputed policy ineffectiveness hypothesis, stabilization attempts were rendered useless.
- 16.
This might be different with reference to the US case. As we said, the heyday of Keynesianism in Germany and its subsequent influence was a rather short episode. Drawing on literature that deals with policy effects of Keynesianism in the US (see for instance DeLong (1997) or Hetzel (2013)), one might argue that the successful implementation of Keynesianism-inspired policies in the 1950s and early 1960s ultimately led to undermining their preconditions (a case that might be framed as a shift from effective performativity to counter-performativity).
- 17.
See also Schneider’s own statement: ‘What Keynes really meant first became obvious due to two articles by Hicks and O. Lange in which the mathematical framework of the Keynesian construction has been revealed’ (1959, 208, own translation). His Hicksian reinterpretation has been proliferated by his voluminous and widely read textbook (Richter 1998, 1).
- 18.
A quite similar critique had already been given in Robert Clower’s (1965) The Keynesian Counter-Revolution: A Theoretical Appraisal. Some years later, both economists co-authored the paper The Coordination of Economic Activities: A Keynesian Perspective (Clower and Leijonhufvud 1975), further elaborating a line of thought that was later referred to as disequilibrium economics.
- 19.
That is one reason why Minsky (1975, 55) declared: ‘Keynes without uncertainty is something like Hamlet without the prince’.
- 20.
It is no wonder that with Leijonhufvud’s intervention, the above-mentioned question of general and special theories took another turn: ‘Keynesian economics was not […] concerned with the special case of when there was some barrier to the adjustment of wages so that markets cleared within a socially acceptable period: it was classical economics, with its assumption of an auctioneer who could ensure that markets were always in equilibrium, that was the special case’ (Backhouse and Boianovsky 2013, 46).
- 21.
This is also true for his followers. Even Hicks (1980, 152) himself became pretty skeptical about his model over the years, famously designating it as a ‘classroom gadget’.
- 22.
Of course, the ideas outlined by Leijonhufvud did not disappear completely. Today, complexity visions can be found in various (more or less) prominent approaches that radically abandon the Walrasian auctioneer—ranging from Akerlof and Shiller’s (2009) Animal Spirits to agent based macro-models (Tesfatsion 2006).
- 23.
See Düppe (2012) for a lengthy account on Arrow and Debreu’s central paper. The same could probably be said of Walras, for even his original account differs significantly from the discursive artifact of the same name that was generated in the course of the mathematization of economics in the second half of the 20th century (as Walker 2006 has shown in some detail).
References
Akerlof, George A., and Robert J. Shiller. 2009. Animal Spirits. How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Backhouse, Roger E. 1997. The Rhetoric and Methodology of Modern Macroeconomics. In Reflections on the Development of Modern Macroeconomics, edited by Brian Snowdon and Howard R. Vane, 31–54. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Backhouse, Roger, and Mauro Boianovsky. 2013. Transforming Modern Macroeconomics. Exploring Disequilibrium Microfoundations, 1956–2003. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Boldyrev, Ivan 2013. Ökonomische Maschinen: Zur Performativität der Gleichgewichtstheorie. In Wirtschaftswissenschaft als Oikodizee? Diskussionen im Anschluss an Joseph Vogls Das Gespenst des Kapitals, edited by Hanno Pahl and Jan Sparsam, 77–90. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Booth, Alan. 1983. The ‘Keynesian Revolution’ in Economic Policy-Making. The Economic History Review, New Series 36(1): 103–123.
Bordo, Michael D., and Anna J. Schwartz. 2003. IS-LM and Monetarism (NBER Working Paper Series, 9713). http://www.nber.org/papers/w9713.pdf.
Bos, Frits. 2007. Use, Misuse and Proper Use of National Accounts Statistics. National Accounts Occasional Paper, NA-096.
Boumans, Marcel. 2005. How Economists Model the World into Numbers. New York: Routledge.
Braun, Benjamin. 2014. Why Models Matter: The Making and Unmaking of Governability in Macroeconomic Discourse. Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies 7: 48–79.
Çalışkan, Koray, and Michel Callon. 2009. Economization, Part 1: Shifting Attention from the Economy Towards Processes of Economization. Economy and Society 38(3): 369–398.
Callon, Michel. 1998. The Embeddedness of Economic Markets in Economics. In The Laws of the Markets, edited by Michel Callon, 1–58. Oxford: Blackwell.
Callon, Michel. 2007. What Does It Mean to Say that Economics is Performative? In Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics, edited by Donald MacKenzie, Fabian Muniesa, and Lucia Siu, 311–357. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Clower, Robert W. 1965. The Keynesian Counter-Revolution: A Theoretical Appraisal. In The Theory of Interest Rates. Proceedings of a Conference Held by the International Economic Association, edited by Frank H. Hahn and Frank Brechling, 103–125. London: Macmillan.
Clower, Robert W., and Axel Leijonhufvud. 1975. The Coordination of Economic Activities: A Keynesian Perspective. American Economic Review 65(2): 182–188.
Coddington, Alan. 1976. Keynesian Economics. The Search for First Principles. Journal of Economic Literature 14: 1258–1273.
Colander, David C., Richard P.F. Holt, and John B. Rosser. 2004. The Changing Face of Economics. Conversations with Cutting Edge Economists. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
De Grauwe, Paul. 2010. Top-Down Versus Bottom-Up Macroeconomics. CESifo Economic Studies 56(4): 465–497.
De Vroey, Michel, and Pierre Malgrange. 2011. The History of Macroeconomics from Keynes’s General Theory to the Present. Institut de Recherches Economiqueset Sociales de l’Universitecatholique de Louvain Discussion Paper, 2011-28. Accessed November 2, 2015. http://sites.uclouvain.be/econ/DP/IRES/2011028.pdf.
DeLong, J. Bradford. 1997. America’s Peacetime Inflation: The 1970s. In Reducing Inflation. Motivation and Strategy, edited by Christina Romer and David Romer, 247–280. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dillard, Dudley. 1985. The Influence of Keynesian Thought on German Economic Policy. In The Policy Consequences of John Maynard Keynes, edited by Harold L. Wattel, 116–127. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Düppe, Till. 2012. Arrow and Debreu De-Homogenized. Journal of the History of Economic Thought 34(4): 491–514.
Eicker-Wolf, Kai. 2003. Vom Hydraulischen Keynesianismus Zur Radikalen Politischen Ökonomie (RPÖ). Keynesianische Wirtschaftspolitische Konzeptionen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland Nach dem Scheitern der Globalsteuerung. Metropolis: Marburg.
Feiwel, George R. 1987. Oral History II: An Interview with Gerard Debreu. In Arrow and the Ascent of Modern Economic Theory, edited by George R. Feiwel, 243–257. New York: New York University Press.
Fine, Ben. 2005. From Actor-Network Theory to Political Economy. Capitalism Nature Socialism 16(4): 91–108.
Fleming, Marcus J. 1962. Domestic Financial Policies Under Fixed and Under Floating Exchange Rates. IMF Staff Papers, 9.
Foucault, Michel. 1972. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Translated by A. M. Sheridan Smith. New York: Pantheon.
Foucault, Michel. 2008. The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the College de France, 1978–1979. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fourcade, Marion. 2009. Economists and Societies. Discipline and Profession in the United States, Britain, and France, 1890s to 1990s. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gordon, Robert J. 1990. What is New-Keynesian Economics? Journal of Economic Literature 28(3): 1115–1171.
Hagemann, Harald. 2009. Zur frühen Rezeption der General Theory durch deutschsprachige Wirtschaftswissenschaftler. In Aus gesamtwirtschaftlicher Sicht. Festschrift für Jürgen Kromphardt, edited by Harald Hagemann, Gustav Horn, and Hans-Jürgen Krupp, 71–104. Marburg: Metropolis.
Hall, Peter A. 1989. The Political Power of Economic Ideas, Keynesianism Across Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Heilemann, Ullrich. 1981. Zur Prognoseleistung ökonometrischer Konjunkturmodelle für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Heise, Arne. 2007. Karl Schillers ‘verspäteter Keynesianismus’. Zur politischen Ökonomie des Stabilitäts- und Wachstumsgesetzes von 1967. Berliner Debatte Initial 18(6): 92–105.
Henriksen, Lasse F. 2013. Economic Models as Devices of Policy Change: Policy Paradigms, Paradigm Shift, and Performativity. Regulation & Governance 7(4): 481–495.
Hetzel, Robert L. 2013. The Monetarist-Keynesian Debate and the Phillips Curve: Lessons from the Great Inflation. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Economic Quarterly 99(2): 83–116.
Hicks, John R. 1937. Mr. Keynes and the Classics: A Suggested Interpretation. Econometrica 5(2): 147–159.
Hicks, John R. 1980. ‘IS-LM’: An Explanation. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 3(2): 139–154.
Hoover, Kevin D. 1988. The New Classical Macroeconomics. A Sceptical Inquiry. Oxford: Blackwell.
Howitt, Peter. 2002. A Dictionary Article on Axel Leijonhufvud’s On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes: A Study in Monetary Theory. (Draft of an article to be translated into French and published in the Dictionnaire des grandesœuvreséconomiques, edited by Xavier Greffe, Jérôme Lallement, and Michel deVroey, to be published by Éditions Dalloz). http://www.econ.brown.edu/fac/Peter_Howitt/publication/Dalloz.pdf
Humphrey, Thomas M. 1985. The Evolution and Policy Implications of Phillips Curve Analysis. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Economic Review. Accessed November1, 2015. https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/economic_review/1985/pdf/er71020.pdf
Kaboub, Fadhel. 2010. IS-LM Model. In 21st Century Economics. A Reference Handbook, edited by Rhona C. Free, 341–347. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Keynes, John M. 1920. The Economic Consequences of the Peace. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Howe.
Keynes, John M. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan.
Klein, Lawrence R. 1966. The Keynesian Revolution. New York: Macmillan.
Klein, Lawrence R., and Arthur Goldberger. 1955. An Econometric Model of the United States, 1929–1952. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Kriesler, Peter, and John Nevile. 2002. IS-LM and Macroeconomics after Keynes. In Money, Macroeconomics and Keynes. Essays in Honour of Victoria Chick, Volume 1, edited by Philip Arestis, Meghnad Desai, and Sheila Dow, 103–114. London: Routledge.
Laidler, David E. 1999. Fabricating the Keynesian Revolution, Studies of the Inter-war Literature on Money, the Cycle, and Unemployment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Latour, Bruno. 1986. Visualization and Cognition: Thinking with Eyes and Hands. Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Culture Past and Present 6: 1–40.
Leijonhufvud, Axel. 1968. On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes. A Study in Monetary Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lucas, Robert E., and Thomas J. Sargent. 1997. After Keynesian macroeconomics. In A Macroeconomics Reader, edited by Brian Snowdon and Howard R. Vane, 270–294. London: Routledge.
MacKenzie, Donald. 2006. An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial Models Shape Markets. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MacKenzie, D. 2007. Is Economics Performative? Option Theory and the Construction of Derivatives Markets. In Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics, edited by D. MacKenzie, F. Muniesa, and L. Siu, 54–86. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mäki, Uskali. 2013. Performativity: Saving Austin from MacKenzie. In Perspectives and Foundational Problems in Philosophy of Science, The European Philosophy of Science Association Proceedings, edited by Vassilios Karakostas and Dennis Dieks, 443–453. Berlin: Springer.
Mariano, Roberto S. 2008. Klein, Lawrence R. (born 1920). In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, edited by Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume, 2nd ed. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mehrling, Perry. 1998. The Money Muddle: The Transformation of American Monetary Thought, 1920–1970. History of Political Economy 30(Suppl.): 293–396.
Mehrling, Perry. 2006. The Evolution of Macroeconomics: The Origins of Post Walrasian Macroeconomics. In Beyond Microfoundation: Post Walrasian Macroeconomics, edited by David C. Colander, 71–86. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Michaelis, Jochen. 2013. Und Dann Werfen Wir den Computer An—Anmerkungen Zur Methodik der DSGE-Modelle. MAGKS Joint Discussion Paper Series in Economics, 23-2013. Accessed November 1, 2015. http://www.uni-marburg.de/fb02/makro/forschung/magkspapers/23-2013_michaelis.pdf
Miller, Daniel. 2002. Turning Callon the Right Way Up. Economy and Society 31(2): 218–233.
Minsky, Hyman P. 1975. John Maynard Keynes. New York: Columbia University Press.
Mirowski, Philip, and Edward Nik-Khah. 2008. Command Performance: Exploring What STS Thinks It Takes to Build a Market. In Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies, edited by Trevor Pinch and Richard Swedberg, 89–128. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mirowski, Philip. 2013. “Facebook Teaches You How To Be a Neoliberal Agent.” An interview with Philip Mirowski (by Tomas Undurraga). https://estudiosdelaeconomia.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/facebook-teaches-you-how-to-be-a-neoliberal-agent-an-interview-with-philip-mirowski/.
Modigliani, Franco. 1944. Liquidity Preference and the Theory of Interest and Money. Econometrica 12(1): 45–88.
Morgan, Mary S., and Malcolm Rutherford. 1998. From Interwar Pluralism to Postwar Neoclassicism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Mundell, Robert A. 1963. Capital Mobility and Stabilization Policy under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates. The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 29(4): 475–485.
Nik-Khah, Edward. 2006. What the FCC Auctions Can Tell Us About the Performativity Thesis. Economic Sociology European Electronic Newsletter 7(2): 15–21.
Nützenadel, Alexander. 2005. Stunde der Ökonomen. Wissenschaft, Politik und Expertenkultur in der Bundesrepublik 1949–1974. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Pernecky, Mark. 1992. The Keynesian Revolution from a Philosophy of Science Perspective: Revolutionary or Evolutionary? Methodus June: 126–134.
Phillips, Alban William Housego. 1958. The Relationship between Unemployment and the Rate of Change of Money Wages in the United Kingdom 1861–1957. Economica 25(100): 283–299.
Richter, Rudolf. 1998. Zur Entwicklung der Makroökonomik in den vergangenen 50 Jahren (1947 – 1997). RWI-Mitteilungen. 49 (1/2): 1–37.
Richter, Rudolf. 1999. Deutsche Geldpolitik 1948–1998. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Robinson, Joan. 1975. What has Become of the Keynesian Revolution? In Essays on John Maynard Keynes, edited by Milo Keynes, 123–131. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. 1967. Sondergutachten März 1967: Zur Konjunkturlage im Frühjahr 1967. http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/75392/1/749940727.pdf
Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. 1968. Sondergutachten vom Juli 1968. dem Herrn Bundeskanzler am 3. Juli 1968 mündlich vorgetragen. http://www.sachverstaendigenrat-wirtschaft.de/fileadmin/dateiablage/download/sondergutachten/sg7-1968.pdf
Samuelson, Paul A., and Robert M. Solow. 1960. Analytical Aspects of Anti-Inflation Policy. The American Economic Review 50(2): 177–194.
Santos, Ana C., and João Rodrigues. 2009. Economics as Social Engineering? Questioning the Performativity Thesis. Cambridge Journal of Economics 33(5): 985–1000.
Schneider, Erich. 1959. Fortschritte der ökonomischen Theorie in unserer Zeit. Ekonomisk Tidskrift 61 (4): 201–212.
Sievert, Olaf. 2003. Vom Keynesianismus zur Angebotspolitik. In Vierzig Jahre Sachverständigenrat 1963–2003, edited by Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, 34–46. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt.
Slater, Don. 2002. From Calculation to Alienation: Disentangling Economic Abstractions. Economy and Society 31(2): 234–249.
Snowdon, Brian, and Howard R. Vane. 2005. Modern Macroeconomics. Its Origins, Development and Current State. Cheltenham, UK; Northhampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Solow, Robert M. 1965. Economic Growth and Residential Housing. In. Readings in Financial Institutions, edited by Marshall E. Ketchum und Leon T. Kendall, 142–164. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Solow, Robert M. 1984. Mr. Hicks and the Classics. Oxford Economic Papers 36(2): 13–25.
Speich, Daniel. 2011. The Use of Global Abstractions: National Income Accounting in the Period of Imperial Decline. Journal of Global History 6(1): 7–28.
Takami, Norikazu. 2014. Models and Mathematics: How Pigou Came to Adopt the IS-LM-Model Reasoning. Journal of the History of Economic Thought 36(2): 169–186.
Tesfatsion, Leigh. 2006. Agent-Based Computational Modeling and Macroeconomics. In Post Walrasian Macroeconomics. Beyond the Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Model, edited by David C. Colander, 175–202. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tily, Geoff. 2010. Keynes Betrayed. The General Theory, the Rate of Interest and ‘Keynesian Economics’. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tomlinson, Jim. 1981. Why Was There Never a ‘Keynesian Revolution’ in Economic Policy? Economy and Society 10(1): 72–87.
Turgeon, Lynn. 1996. Bastard Keynesianism. The Evolution of Economic Thinking and Policymaking Since World War II. Westport: Greenwood Press.
Vercelli, Alessandro. 1999. The Evolution of IS-LM Models: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Presuppositions. Working Paper UniversitàdegliStudi di Siena, 246. http://www.econ-pol.unisi.it/quaderni/246.pdf
Vroey, Michel de, and Hoover, Kevin D. 2004. Introduction: Seven Decades of the IS-LM Model. History of Political Economy 36 (Annual Supplement): 1–11.
Vroey, Michel de, and Pierre Malgrange. 2010. From the Keynesian Revolution to the Klein-Goldberger Model: Klein and the Dynamization of Keynesian Theory (Institut de Recherches Économiques et Sociales de l’Université catholique de Louvain Discussion Paper, 2010-19). http://sites.uclouvain.be/econ/DP/IRES/2010019.pdf.
Walker, Donald A. (ed.). 2006. William Jaffe’s Essays on Walras. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wansleben, Leon. 2013. Cultures of Expertise in Global Currency Markets. London: Routledge.
Wattel, Harold L. 1985. The Policy Consequences of John Maynard Keynes. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Woolgar, Steve. 1993. Science. The Very Idea. London: Routledge.
Yonay, Yuval P. 1998. The Struggle Over the Soul of Economics. Institutionalist and Neoclassical Economists in America between the Wars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Young, Warren. 1987. Interpreting Mr Keynes: The IS-LM Enigma. Oxford: Polity-Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pahl, H., Sparsam, J. (2016). The IS–LMization of the General Theory and the Construction of Hydraulic Governability in Postwar Keynesian Macroeconomics. In: Boldyrev, I., Svetlova, E. (eds) Enacting Dismal Science. Perspectives from Social Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48876-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48876-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-49210-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-48876-3
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)