<HTML><HTML> One irrational thing about Keynes is that he almost acts like Marx never existed. This is particularly irrational in critiquing Trotsky (!) If Keynes had acknowledged Marx and Engels, he might have found quite a bit on the "moral and intellectual problems of the transformation of society" and "the plan" Trotsky is relying on. Charles From: Ted Winslow Keynes on Trotsky: "He [Trotsky] assumes that the moral and intellectual problems of the transformation of society have already been solved - that a plan exists, and that nothing remains except to put it into operation. He assumes further that society is divided into two parts - the proletariat who are converted to the plan, and the rest who for purely selfish reasons oppose it.  He does not understand that no plan could win until it had first convinced many people, and that, if there really were a plan, it would draw support from many different quarters.  He is so much occupied with means that he forgets to tell us what it is all for.  ...  We lack more than usual a coherent scheme of progress, a tangible ideal. ... It is not necessary to debate the subtleties of what justifies a man in promoting his gospel by force; for no one has a gospel.  The next move is with the head, and fists must wait."  (Collected Writings, vol. X, pp. 66-7) This was written in 1926 when Keynes was himself giving serious consideration to "a coherent scheme of progress" along lines suggested by his criticism of capitalism in "Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren."  A central issue with which he was concerned was what to do about what he called the "Tolstoy problem" by which he meant the tenaciousness of irrationality in human affairs (e.g. the tenaciousness of the idea that destructiveness by itself is positively creative).  See Rod O'Donnell, "The Unwritten Books and Papers of J.M. Keynes" in History of Political Economy, 1992, vol. 24. issue 4. Ted </HTML>