{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028075970272502065, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010734929810074319, 'mean_word_length': 5.446808510638298, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Keynes's Revindication of Classical Monetary Theory

John Maynard Keynes’s insightful critique of the classical economists in his General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936) aimed at rebuilding economic analysis from its very foundations. Most, if not all, historians of economics agree that he succeeded, as they ascribe the discipline’s only scientific revolution, in Thomas Kuhn’s sense (1970), to the General Theory.1 Keynes’s pathbreaking contribution held the stage for most of the twentieth century. It prompted the response of the monetarist counterrevolution (Johnson 1971), giving rise to a heated debate that is still going on, fueled by novel arguments, between new classicals and new Keynesians. The propensity for radical innovation is not confined to Keynes’s magnum opus but characterizes many of his writings and especially those regarding the international monetary system, a topic of foremost interest to him throughout his life. Keynes’s unflagging quest for monetary reform is grounded in his theoretical work on money. Until the early thirties, it was based upon an elaboration of the classical model. Afterward, the General Theory provided an alternative model, leading to an