その３ “An analysis of Soviet views on John Maynard Keynes.“ Carl B. Turner

　興味有るテーマその３回目です。次から次へと“未読の本“ばかり挙げると投稿者は“本は買うが全然読んでいない“という事になりそうですが、一応弁明しますと読んではいないが“一応当たりは付けている“という事ぐらいは言っておいた方が良いかもしれませんが、今回投稿は表題のとおり、ソ連のケインズ評価　という本です。

ケインズがマルクスを殆ど評価していなかったと言うのは有名な話ですが、ではレーニンはどうであったのか？これは経済思想史的に些か重要な問題であると投稿者は考えています。簡単に言って８０年代に簡単に旧社会主義体制が瓦解したのは何故かと言う問題はやや難しい問題であり、勿論投稿者は現代において短期的でなく“一党独裁“が許されるとは思っていませんが、その問題に連関が有るか、無いかという事であります。またここでくどくど投稿者が述べるより、今度は表紙カバー裏の説明書きを引用したいと思います。

　　An Analysis of Soviet Views on John Maynard Keynes is the first study to be made of Soviet criticism of Keynes’s　theories. It traces the development of Soviet criticism of Keynes from the time of Lenin until the retirement of Khrushchev. The study is based chiefly on articles which have appeared in Soviet economic journals and on complete works by Soviet experts in the field of Western economic thought,many of which are not availavle in translation or outside the Soviet Union. Mr. Turner also includes an examination of the Russian translation of The General Theoly,Keyness major work,in order to evaluate its accuracy and the extent of editorial bias.

Keynes is one of the few Western economists treated individually by Soviet economists. Soviet criticism of Keynes has varied considerably in scope and intensity,reaching an extraordinaly pitch of vindictiveness at the height of the cold war. However,in Lenin’s time,before Keynes’s influence had become paramount in　the West, and before publication of The General Theory,Keynes was regarded with relative leniency,since certain aspects of his views on the Versailles Treaty coincided with those of Lenin.

After World War Ⅱand the translation of The General Theoly into Russian in 1948, the Sovietsw became aware of the dangers of Keynesianism from a Marxian viewpoint. Since Keynes had adovocated a modified form of capitalism, intended to eliminate its worst excesses and crises by moderate state intervention without recourse to revolution or radical socialism, his ideas were anathema to the Soviets. One critic,V.S.Volodin,devoted an entire work to the refutation of Keynes’s theories.

Publised rt the height of the cold war, Voldin’s work reflects the crudely distorted Soviet view of Keynes then prevalent,which attempted to discredit him as little more than an imperialist warmonger. There was no real point-by-point rebuttal by selecting major issues and dealing with these at length in an oversimplified and abusive manner.
Voldin and other critics found Keynesian economist to be the basis for revisionist and reformist movements in the West and even in Yugoslavia.

The possibility of effective, beneficial state intervention in the economy under a capitalist system was completely ruled out.

Under Khrushchev, the hardness of Soviet criticism of Keynes was considerably modified. More varied and sophisticated criticism was evident, particularly with regard to the Soviet view of the role of planning in the capitalist state.The Soviets began to distinguish between different types of Keynesianism and even noted other Western schools of economics opposed to it.

However, they still remained unalterably opposed in principle to all form of Keynesianism. Since capitalism could no longer be considered in imminent danger of collapse,the Soviets were forced to admit in 1960 to a third stage in the general crisis of capitalism,whose doom had been predicted by Lenin.

1969年の発行です。

という事で、投稿者は勿論、語学堪能と言う訳では有りませんが、“必要最低限な限り“判読はしなければならないという事でやっておりますのでご一読下さい。

　
尚、投稿者、別サイトで勢い余って“研究者“としましたが、あの“イングランド銀行券の歴史“で名高いコピーターズが自分の事を“経済学徒“と呼んでいるのから比べるとやはり精々“一経済学徒“と呼ぶのが適切と思われます。

尚、投稿者はここ以外にケインズとレーニンの関係について、やや興味ある部分を他の本で読みましたが又別の機会に述べたいと思います。

以下次回