Keynes Hayek

The Clash That Defined Modern Economics

By: Nicholas Wapshott

Narrated by: Gildart Jackson

Length: 11 hrs and 37 mins

Publisher's summary

As the stock market crash of 1929 plunged the world into turmoil, two men emerged with competing claims on how to restore the balance to economies gone awry. John Maynard Keynes, the mercurial Cambridge economist, believed that government had a duty to spend when others would not. He met his opposite in a little-known Austrian economics professor, Friedrich Hayek, who considered attempts to intervene both pointless and potentially dangerous. The battle lines thus drawn, Keynesian economics would dominate for decades and coincide with an era of unprecedented prosperity, but conservative economists and political leaders would eventually embrace and execute Hayek's contrary vision.

From their first face-to-face encounter to the heated arguments between their ardent disciples, Nicholas Wapshott here unearths the contemporary relevance of Keynes and Hayek, as present-day arguments over the virtues of the free market and government intervention rage with the same ferocity as they did in the 1930s.

©2011 Nicholas Wapshott (P)2011 Tantor

Critic reviews

"Wapshott offers a colorful look at a bygone period and the theories that epitomize the economic divide still shaping Anglo-American politics today." ( Publishers Weekly)

Authors bias spoils an interesting story.

This is a promising book about a pivotal ideological difference on economics, the role of the state and individual freedom. Unfortunately the promise is hollowed by an author unable to hide his own ideology and preference.

Objectivity by the author would have made for a far better book.

Riveting

This is how economics should be taught: Reflecting on the history of choices made and their impacts really helps us to understand various economic terms and scenarios.

The author created a masterful presentation on capitalism, its value, and its vulnerability.

Gilbert Jackson delivered the message with a perfect accent.

If there were any weaknesses in the presentation of Hayek and Keynes, it would be that there could have been more material covering Hayek’s vision for economics and society. However, it is understandable that this cannot be the case since there are no cases in history of societies implementing anything truly close to what Hayek proposed.

Lastly, character-wise, in spite of the author’s desire to present a balanced account of both men, readers will put two and two together and conclude that Keynes was a great man and Hayek was not.

[Even though the author calls them both “exceptional men”.]

I found this book very enlightening and I wish everyone had the time to enjoy it. It’s fundamental to understanding our present economic and social circumstances.

Good expo of 20th century economics and politics

This book does a good job of covering the battle between the theories of Keynes and Hayek, and reveals some insights into our 20th century presidents' economic ideas, successes and failures.

A good insight to the history of fiscal policy

Good insights to fiscal policy that will get you reaching for more books on the matter.

Must listen

Any additional comments?

The way the author chose to present the information I found to be the best part of the book. I felt it was quite fair to both sides and stayed as factual as possible considering hayek vs keynes is like an economic religious war (which the author touched on even). By presenting the data in the way chosen, it helps explain why Keynesianism took hold as well as it did and why it came to be. It also did a good job going a little further in how Keynes and Hayek influenced the economic debate and influence other economists that have carried on the "war". Recommend to all.

Well done...

I’ve spent more than my share of time reading and studying economics and public policy of the 20th century. This book caught hold of me in a way that I have never experienced before. The fight for the mind of public policy thinkers is on display with this book. This is a fabulous political and economic history lesson that will push me on to read more and is the jolt that I needed in the age of the great pandemic. Thank you!!

A balanced as can be

From a 10,000 foot view, this is balanced. In terms of whether we defend a market capitalist system or revert to communism or mercantilist policies, both Keynes and Hayek stand in the market capitalist camp. However, of the two, it is to Keynes we owe the most for maintaining the status quo. Hayek’s thoughts aren’t thrown out either, but there impact on our current system are limited since politicians merely give lip service to his policy positions. Personally, I don’t think most Americans would truly be able to stomach what Hayek truly wanted. He’s about as far out there as Noam Chomsky’s Anarcho Syndicalism. Anyway, the books is good for its historical overview, and places both men in their context. If you want to know their economic ideas alone, read their writings.

An unbiased evaluation of both the major economist

** Disclaimer - Am a classical economist and prefer Austrian economics to Keynes remedies. ***

Unlike many economist authors, this author is unbiased and lays it out factually.
His ability to separate opinion from facts makes the book easy to digest. Hats off to the author.
His first brilliant assessment that Keynes talks about Macro while Hayek talks about Micro economics sets the stage and expectations that the two shall never compete on an equal platform.
Next, he walks us through each personal life, although i feel he explored and criticized Hayek's personal life more than Keynes.
The success of Keynes and how governments devoured his advice of intervention is elucidated clearly. I can now see how the world fell into his enthrall (and his ability of public speak).
Hayek's greatest weakness and the classical school's weakness was its extreme insistence on laissez faire to the point of being cruel.
Add to that, Hayek's inability as a public speaker. If probably Hayek were like President Reagan, we would have seen a Hayekian world now. Sadly Keynes was a better preacher.
The first Great conflict between Hayek and Keynes as criticism of Keynes's first book makes for interesting reading, anecdotally.
Keynesian economics assumes that the economy is a fragile thing, one that involves constant tweaking by the State. This automatically assumes that entrepreneurship is guided by the hand of the State. Keynes does not explain business cycles and why they happen. Instead he talks about how to spend yourself out of recession. However, the Great Depression was becoming a past thing by 1936 as the author noted, before keynes remedies were fully applied.
Hayek assumes that the economy is a living, breathing sentient being which can find its own path through the judgements and decisions of millions of entrepreneurs who make them. Much like the millions of cells in a human body.
Hayek proves that State intervention skews up the investment judgements made by individual investors and thus forces them to make bad judgements.
That may be true, but when an economy is in a slump, Hayek prescribes doom and despair to Keynes's optimistic approach.
In short, a book worth reading.

Solid history, weak discussion of issues

What made the experience of listening to Keynes Hayek the most enjoyable?

I was primarily interested in a discussion of the economic issues, where the economists agreed, where they disagreed, and how Hayek and Keynes changed their opinions over time.The book assumed more knowledge of the issues than I have, and while, making the positions of the economists clear, it did not help me understand the reasoning behind their conclusions. Nor did I get a clear understanding of how - and why- their positions changed over time.On the other hand, the biographies of not only Hayek and Keynes, but of their contemporaries - and the setting of their lives in the events of their times - were fascinating. I was especially impressed with the portrayal of Herbert Spencer, the Webbs, and Alfred Lord Marshall. The portrayal of the Austrian school was weaker but still made profitable listening.This work was both enjoyable and profitable. I expect to listen to it again.

Great Read!

This is an excellent summation. I'm sure I'll be referencing this text for many years.