[발췌] Against Rigid Rules – Keynes’s economic theory

자료: Against Rigid Rules - Keynes's economic theory
지은이: Elke Muchlinski
A discussion paper presented at History of Economic Society, 29th, Annual Meeting 2002, July, 5-8th, University of California, Davis/USA.

* * *


(... ...) Given this statement, one have to ask, why, Keynes, then, refers to gold standard (see, C.W., XXI, p. 368) as the foundation of international monetary relations?[11] In his papaer "The International Note Issue and the Gold Standard", Keynes argued against external restrictions and in favor for discretion. At the same time he voted for defining each currency in relation to gold as "qualified return to the gold standard" (C.W., IX., p. 362). Is this a contradiction? Does this imply the implementation of a rigidly fixed international monetary system? Certainly not! Anticipating the objection Keynes wrote: "It may seem odd that I, who have lately described gold as 'a barbarous  relic', should be discovered as an advocate of such a policy, at a time when the orthodox authorities of this country are laying down conditions for our return to gold which they must know to be impossible of fulfilment It may be that, never having loved gold, I am not so subject to disillusion. But, mainly, it is because I believe that gold has received such a gruelling that conditions might now be laid down for its management, which would not have been acceptable otherwise" (C.W., IX, p. 362).

The return to gold standard was a pragmatic solution, not the acceptance of the "rules of the game" (C.W. XXI, 361). Again, we find textual evidence for this hesitance to define each country in relation to gold as rigid rules. This is because "an unchangeable parity would be unwise until we know much more about the future coure of international prices (...)"(C.W. IX, p. 362). [12]

In a "Tract on Monetary Reform" (1924) he had already explained that neither rigid rules nor faith in a stability of any metallic standard are reasonable methods to succedd. Interpreting his view I would like to add, pure theory is no way to get clarity if its premise are not linked to contemporary world. Pure theory which is constructed for the sake of simplicity or formal aestheticism is a blind concept. "The non-metallic standards, of which we have experience, have been anything rather than scientific experiments coolly carried out" (Keynes 1924, p. 170). This argument is of great importance. The alleged non-active rule of metallic standard "was becoming precarious by reason of artificiality"ㅡa long time before the war(1924, p. 171). The "rules of the game" were a construction, Keynes had already analysed in his book "Indian Currency and Finance" (1913).

(... ...)