Skip to main content
Donate to the 95 years appeal
The twin roots of our discontent
ALEX HALL welcomes an accessible examination of the two strands of pro-capitalist thought which have defined the post-war economic policies of the West
(L) Friedrich August von Hayek, 1981; (R) John Maynard Keynes, 1934

Hayek vs Keynes: A Battle of Ideas
Hoerber Thomas, Reaktion Books, £10.99

 

NEITHER John Maynard Keynes nor Friedrich von Hayek wanted to see the devastation of the Great Depression or the second world war again. Both understood how economics and politics could tear societies apart. 

Both wanted societies which would encourage harmony and efficiency. But they came up with very different solutions, Keynes focusing on the role of government in creating the right environment for markets and controlling their worst excesses, and Hayek on the role of maximising individual freedom and free markets. 

Keynes’ General Theory was published in 1936 and was the ascendant working theory in the 1940s and ’50s. Its greatest expression was as a keystone of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal policies and was part of common-sense policies in the West until the 1970s. 

Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, however, was written during the second world war and published in 1944, where it landed in the hands of an 18-year-old Margaret Thatcher and had a lasting influence. Since then, Hayek’s theories have become the orthodoxy, the theory to which “there is no alternative,” which in practice have brought us privatisation and the market as the solution to all ills. 

Thomas Hoerber’s book charts this as a two-horse race in the history of economic ideas. For Keynes, unemployment was the great evil which required government intervention. For Hayek, collectivism would crush the human spirit. While he pays attention to the role of socialism, in this work it is something rejected by both economists and only has a side role in economic history, although clearly Keynes felt government intervention was a vital tool in saving capitalism. For Hayek that same tool was a step towards tyranny. 

Hayek was clearly more ideologically motivated. His view of maximising freedom rejected out of hand socialist interpretations which also emphasised freedom from want. However he did recognise that his turn to the minimalist state did throw up other problems, in particular in terms of international relations. Small, isolated states pursuing their own interests would tend towards conflict and Hayek conceded the need for some sort of supranational organisation. 

Hoerber sees the EU as the sort of organisation that fills this role within a Hayekian framework. Neoliberalism is baked into its rules, while it retains some influence of Keynesian planning, and Hoerber rightly claims that it played a significant role in bringing peace to a war prone continent for 65 years. Hoerber’s hardback version of this book was completed in 2017. By 2022 however, the EU had decided firmly that its future was entwined with Nato and it would actively participate in a war at Russian borders. 

As a work in the history of economic thought Hoerber’s contribution is neatly packaged around two strands of pro-capitalist thought which have defined the post-war economic policies of the West, in particular in Britain. It’s concise and well-written and covers the subject matter well. However by staying tightly within this lane it fails to account for the role and influence of the Soviet Union for 65 years, and all but dismisses socialist theory and practice. 

Capitalism itself is of course problematic. It tends to suck money upwards into smaller elites who then use the power this provides to protect their interests. The quest for markets causes the commodification of everything and contrary to both eminent scholars, the system remains addicted to war. Keynes sought to tame the excesses, Hayek thought it should be supercharged. 

Neither economist could deal with the fundamental contradictions of the capitalist system. 

Support the Morning Star
You have reached the free limit.
Subscribe to continue reading.
Similar stories
US President Donald Trump gestures to the crowd as he depart
Eyes Left / 16 April 2025
16 April 2025
ANDREW MURRAY casts an eye over past upheavals and asks whether the left can find a fire escape before the world goes up in flames
United States Vice-President JD Vance, right, shakes hands w
Features / 12 February 2025
12 February 2025
The EU and Nato are umbilically tied – but what will the new Trump era and a reconfiguration of US interests mean for the war in Ukraine, asks VINCE MILLS
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi
Features / 13 September 2024
13 September 2024
The notorious ‘free’ market think tank happily allies with Narendra Modi’s authoritarianism to push a perverse economic ideology that has only ever deepened inequality and poverty worldwide, reports BHABANI SHANKAR NAYAK
A twisted sign, felled concrete posts and a broken wall outs
Editorial: / 14 June 2024
14 June 2024