What do you think?
Rate this book
Keynes
En 1936, quand parut la Théorie générale, les conséquences de la grande crise de 1929 se faisaient encore sentir dans la plupart des pays : grèves, chômage, inflation.
Keynes, bousculant les théories classiques, montre que l'État est capable, par ses recettes et ses dépenses, de régulariser l'économie. Cette découverte n'a rien perdu de son actualité.
Mais l'oeuvre de Keynes, comme toute oeuvre scientifique, est d'un abord difficile. L'immense mérite de Michael Stewart est de la rendre intelligible à chacun.
Keynes, bousculant les théories classiques, montre que l'État est capable, par ses recettes et ses dépenses, de régulariser l'économie. Cette découverte n'a rien perdu de son actualité.
Mais l'oeuvre de Keynes, comme toute oeuvre scientifique, est d'un abord difficile. L'immense mérite de Michael Stewart est de la rendre intelligible à chacun.
141 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1967
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
June 2, 2008
A bit dated nowadays but does a fantastic job explaining Keynesians economics in a way that only requires one re-read and doesnt leave you with a headache. Also some good history on Keynes himself and some interesting economic highlights of the 20th century.
July 12, 2017
The first half provides a good layman's summary of Keynes' theories and is still worth a read for the curious and time constrained. The second is a somewhat dated application of these theories to the mid 1960s.
February 21, 2021
Brilliant expose to the layperson of JM Keynes, his General Theory and determination to see it implement. Michael Stewart writes about complex concepts & situations with the simplicity of JK Galbraith. This might sound odd for an economics book but it is a "great read".
November 5, 2016
One of the best introductory books for someone wanting to get to grips with Keynes and his economic theories which transformed western economies in the 1930s.
August 25, 2026
Economics can be divided into two eras. There is economics prior to John Maynard Keynes and economics post John Maynard Keynes. This view may be myopic, but it gets to the heart of economics. Prior to Keynes, economists did not view the importance of the government in managing aggregate demand. After Keynes, the government became a very important part of the economy, to such an extent that Keynesian economics was at the focal point of Western economics until the late 1970s, when the Monetarists took over with the New Right.
Keynes and After is a book that sums up the life of John Maynard Keynes, his impacts on economics and what has happened after Keynes. It has two sections: the section directly on Keynes and the section after Keynes. The economics before Keynes mainly was what is known as the Neo-Classical school, with the exception of Karl Marx, who is in his own theory entirely. Keynes obviously challenges Neo-Classical economics. One example of this is the idea of savings; Neo-Classical economists view that savings would inevitably be invested in the economy. Keynes did not think that this was inevitable, and the book looks at why savings are not automatically invested into the economy. Another conflict described by the book is the opposition between Keynesianism and Monetarism. The book makes out that the Monetarists have a very different idea of interest rates compared with Keynesians. This book therefore looks at the differences between Keynesianism and the main ideas that opposed him.
I have read from other reviews that the book has a dated version of Keynes. I think that is somewhat the case. Many of the ideas of Keynesianism has been revised in the “post-Keynesianism” school. The second section does go through all the economics of the mid-twentieth century, pointing out that the post-war boom did create inflation and raises in prices but also increases in wages for workers. The late 1940s to 1970s are the closest in capitalism’s history to what is known as “full-employment” in that everyone (men) had a job. Indeed, when conservatives reminisce after the 1950s, they are reminiscing after an age of full employment brought on by Keynesianism. Unfortunately, the economics of Keynesianism was not to last as Monetarist views ultimately eclipsed Keynesianism in the 1980s. There was also discussed the “balance of payments” crisis mentioned in the book as one of the problems that Britain had in the era of Bretton Woods that strangely is never mentioned today, partly because fiat currencies no longer require a strong amount of foreign currency.
I have considered one of the views of Keynes being focused on aggregate demand as problematic recently. I connected the dots between Keynesian policy and post-war suburbanism and consumerism. Growing aggregate demand led to the unsustainability of modernity, which has led to the existential crisis of climate change. Indeed, the one thing that has been overlooked by traditional Keynesianism and most Western governments but fully embraced by the Chinese government is the role of the government in the supply-side of the economy. China has fully integrated the state in the production part of the economy, from major public works programmes like high-speed rail and power grids to loans and state support building entire industries such as electric cars, solar panels to AI and electronic chips. If there is anything to say, China’s integration of capitalism and socialism has made it into a superpower and will have impacts on the rest of the 21st century.
Overall, I would say that this book is an interesting look at Keynesianism. It is dated, but I feel that the book is a good overview of Keynesianism.
Keynes and After is a book that sums up the life of John Maynard Keynes, his impacts on economics and what has happened after Keynes. It has two sections: the section directly on Keynes and the section after Keynes. The economics before Keynes mainly was what is known as the Neo-Classical school, with the exception of Karl Marx, who is in his own theory entirely. Keynes obviously challenges Neo-Classical economics. One example of this is the idea of savings; Neo-Classical economists view that savings would inevitably be invested in the economy. Keynes did not think that this was inevitable, and the book looks at why savings are not automatically invested into the economy. Another conflict described by the book is the opposition between Keynesianism and Monetarism. The book makes out that the Monetarists have a very different idea of interest rates compared with Keynesians. This book therefore looks at the differences between Keynesianism and the main ideas that opposed him.
I have read from other reviews that the book has a dated version of Keynes. I think that is somewhat the case. Many of the ideas of Keynesianism has been revised in the “post-Keynesianism” school. The second section does go through all the economics of the mid-twentieth century, pointing out that the post-war boom did create inflation and raises in prices but also increases in wages for workers. The late 1940s to 1970s are the closest in capitalism’s history to what is known as “full-employment” in that everyone (men) had a job. Indeed, when conservatives reminisce after the 1950s, they are reminiscing after an age of full employment brought on by Keynesianism. Unfortunately, the economics of Keynesianism was not to last as Monetarist views ultimately eclipsed Keynesianism in the 1980s. There was also discussed the “balance of payments” crisis mentioned in the book as one of the problems that Britain had in the era of Bretton Woods that strangely is never mentioned today, partly because fiat currencies no longer require a strong amount of foreign currency.
I have considered one of the views of Keynes being focused on aggregate demand as problematic recently. I connected the dots between Keynesian policy and post-war suburbanism and consumerism. Growing aggregate demand led to the unsustainability of modernity, which has led to the existential crisis of climate change. Indeed, the one thing that has been overlooked by traditional Keynesianism and most Western governments but fully embraced by the Chinese government is the role of the government in the supply-side of the economy. China has fully integrated the state in the production part of the economy, from major public works programmes like high-speed rail and power grids to loans and state support building entire industries such as electric cars, solar panels to AI and electronic chips. If there is anything to say, China’s integration of capitalism and socialism has made it into a superpower and will have impacts on the rest of the 21st century.
Overall, I would say that this book is an interesting look at Keynesianism. It is dated, but I feel that the book is a good overview of Keynesianism.
June 28, 2026
Michael Stewart’s Keynes and After provides a strong and accessible explanation of the development of Keynesian economics and why it became so influential in the twentieth century. I found the book particularly useful in explaining the historical context behind the rise of Keynesianism, especially how it emerged as a response to economic instability and challenged earlier assumptions about free markets automatically correcting themselves. Stewart does a very good job of making Keynes’ ideas understandable and showing why they were so significant for modern economic thought.
One of the strongest parts of the book is its explanation of how Keynesian economics reshaped government thinking, particularly the idea that states should play an active role in managing demand, employment, and economic downturns. This helped me better understand why Keynesianism became the dominant economic framework for much of the post war period and why it represented such a major shift away from classical economics.
However, I think the book is limited by the period in which it was written. Because it predates the rise of neoliberalism and the shift away from Keynesian policies in the late twentieth century, there is little acknowledgement of the weaknesses or criticisms of Keynesian economics that later emerged. This reduces the book’s critical engagement with the theory and makes it harder to apply its arguments fully to the modern world. While I broadly agree with Keynesian ideas around regulation and state intervention, I think the absence of later critiques means the book presents a somewhat incomplete picture of the broader economic debate.
One of the strongest parts of the book is its explanation of how Keynesian economics reshaped government thinking, particularly the idea that states should play an active role in managing demand, employment, and economic downturns. This helped me better understand why Keynesianism became the dominant economic framework for much of the post war period and why it represented such a major shift away from classical economics.
However, I think the book is limited by the period in which it was written. Because it predates the rise of neoliberalism and the shift away from Keynesian policies in the late twentieth century, there is little acknowledgement of the weaknesses or criticisms of Keynesian economics that later emerged. This reduces the book’s critical engagement with the theory and makes it harder to apply its arguments fully to the modern world. While I broadly agree with Keynesian ideas around regulation and state intervention, I think the absence of later critiques means the book presents a somewhat incomplete picture of the broader economic debate.
June 17, 2015
There are many misapprehensions about Keynes, leading to viewing him as responsible for the sorry state of public finances in many Western nations. This book was helpful to me for separating the achievement of the man from the abuse of his theories.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews