However, I think that Doug misses out on one point. It is not just "the man" or even "the man and *all* of his work" that is at issue. The fact of the matter is that the GT can be used (regardless of Mr Keyenes' dispositions) as a strong platform for a radical critique of redistributive inequities, on grounds that are unlike anything to be found in Marx. So in that sense it is new and useful. The GT opens a wide avenue for such an approach. It may not have been fully exploited by Keynes, and the fact that Keynes opened the wide avenue does not make him a social radical. But nonetheless it is a remarkable achievement, and one not typically to be found among members of an elite aristocracy. Keynes did not fully exploit the radical implications of his work; but others did. Marx respected Smith; Lenin begrudged Hobson respect for his book on Imperialism, even though Hobson was a liberal reformer. But Doug is much harder on poor Mr Keynes, though he has paid Mr Keynes the respect of reading him closely & extensively.
And perhaps that's enough.
-- Gregory P. Nowell Associate Professor Department of Political Science, Milne 100 State University of New York 135 Western Ave. Albany, New York 12222