I have spent a night reflecting on whether to comment on a post Steve Keen made yesterday on his being uninvited from a modern monetary theory (MMT) conference being held in Leeds this week.
Steve reported this:
I fully understand Steve's annoyance. It is wholly appropriate.
But let me be clear that Steve is not the only person about whom this question is being asked. A leading proponent of MMT asked me yesterday why I was not there, and I had to say it was because the conference organisers - the so-called Gower Initiative for Modern Money, whose early development I encouraged, and to whom I became an adviser - long ago threw me out of that position and ostracised me.
My crime was a simple one. I pointed out that a great deal of what Australian academic Bill Mitchell, who created the term 'MMT', says is utter nonsense and has nothing, in my opinion, to do with the principles which underlie MMT.
This became very clear over the same issue over which Steven Keen has now been expelled. I wrote a post in 2019 entitled 'Why Bill Mitchell is simply wrong on modern monetary theory and imports and exports.
You could spend a happy hour or more reading that post and the comments on it, which I acknowledged at the time would annoy many hardcore MMT advocates. It did. The Gower crowd and I parted company because I had the temerity to criticise one of the great white male gods of MMT, and I had no regrets.
The supposedly MMT theory put forward by Bill Mitchell and Warren Mosler on exports and imports has, as far as I can see, nothing whatsoever to do with MMT, whatever they might say. It is also total garbage. Steve Keen has long held this view, I know. We have discussed that fact and shared our utter bafflement at it. Refer to my linked blog to see why.
So, let me be clear about what the real issues are here.
The first is that there is claimed to be an MMT community. Outsiders suggest it is cult-like because of its propensity to expel those who question those to whom the truth was apparently revealed. It is hard to argue against this suggestion. This community, and the associated cult around Bill Mitchell, is exceptionally harmful to MMT in this country, and probably elsewhere. They also talk a great deal of nonsense, promulgating the belief that MMT says governments can spend without taxing, when in reality they cannot.
Secondly, this MMT community thinks its male founders have all the answers to all known questions. They don't. They got many things wrong, and not just imports and exports.
As I have repeatedly pointed out, they do not understand tax, and when it comes to corporation tax, they are on the far-right, in my opinion, in arguing for its abolition. Either they wholly misunderstand that tax, the nature of the company and the way in which entities operate, or they have a deeply pro-wealth, anti-democratic agenda that they are pursuing when making this suggestion.
That agenda is also seen in the indifference of some MMT proponents to tax evasion and tax havens - not caring that these activities undermine the tax base so long as others pay more tax to make good the loss, making clear in the process that they are not concerned about any socially progressive agenda.
Bill Mitchell, meanwhile, also proposed support for the far-right in Italy because they opposed the EU.
All of this is profoundly worrying. Those on the left need to be very wary of all this. I have been.
Third, there is closed-mindedness on display. Randy Wray once acknowledged I was the only person outside the MMT founders who had contributed to MMT theory with my work on tax. You will not find that comment now: it was deleted subsequently. And that is because the ranks are closed: the fragile cohort of male founders seem quite sure that they do not think others can contribute to MMT thought.
The fact that I have is ignored.
The fact that Steve Keen has proved why MMT has to be right using Minskey and the logic of double entry is not enough to allow him entry to an MMT conference: he has transgressed, and the sin will not be forgiven.
This is profoundly unfortunate. I summarise what MMT is all about in this glossary entry. I will not repeat it here. I do not pretend that is the last word on the issue. Of course, it is not. It is an opening point for debate. That is a debate that needs to happen. Either the MMT cult debates these ideas open-mindedly, or they do irreparable damage to important ideas, which I think are correct and best expressed by Stephanie Kelton.
As it is, the event in Leeds is not in any way an academic conference. If some academics are excluded because they are deemed inappropriate because of their intellectual ideas, which are not an affront to anyone's ethics, it cannot be.
MMT has to get its act in order and allow debate, or the likes of Steve and I will take the ideas in it forward and ignore what the so-called MMT community has to say because, as things stand, it is clear that they are not open to debate or ideas. That is not to their credit.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
When I first came across MMT I was pleased to see fresh thinking. I read the Positive Money website and considered subscribing but I decided not to. I could go with much of the analysis but not their solution. It didn’t seem practical and then I read Ann Pettifor whom you supported in the debate.
I saw some of Mitchell’s videos and didn’t like his dogmatic tone but that doesn’t invalidate the concept. But again I could not quite bring myself to commit. Having a theory which explains everything is very seductive (you see it with dedicated Marxists and Free Marketeers ) but I always keep a sceptical edge. I am not an economist but as a counsellor that sceptical edge saved a lot of potential mistakes.
I began to think that it was another case of an economic theory becoming almost a theological concept. Pragmatism and empiricism are well established positions in England and for good reasons. I think MMT is good generally but doctrines-as in theology for me-and need to be held loosely. A guide not a directive.
It is a map. It is not the terrain.
Outrageous. And worryingly, they cannot see this is authoritarian, anti-democratic, anti-intellectual and might even be called fascist. This has all the hallmarks of a cult: the leader(ship) and their “truths” must not be criticised or opposed.
From Cult Education Institute – Some of the 10 signs
Absolute authoritarianism without accountability
Zero tolerance for criticism or questions
Abuse of members
A belief that the leader is right at all times
A belief that the leader is the exclusive means of knowing “truth” or giving validation
A further temptation to despair, Richard – were it not for the likes of Steve Keen, Stephanie Kelton and you.
I think ‘the principles that undermine MMT’ should be ‘the principles that underlie MMT’, though you’ve done an excellent job in this post of exposing the former.
Corrected. Thanks.
The only way to resolve differences is through discussion
And that avenue is not open
If Steve is in the country he could attempt to set up a fringe event one of the dates. This would need a venue, comedy venues can often put something on a short notice, a bit of promotion, and some courage to overcome any opposition that got nasty. Graham Linehan’s team have experience of this.
I am not sure he is, although we have bern on contact with each other