Adam Tooze argues that Germany *could* have made the Treaty payments, but that their unpopularity resulted in efforts to dodge them by means of expedients such as inflation.
I don't know whether Keynes or Tooze is right on this particular point (I suspect Tooze is), but I am sure Keynes is otherwise right in his economic prescriptions.
That is interesting about Germany being able to make the payments. I would have thought this would have been a "extreme austerity" program as France, in particular, wanted reparations and its pound of flesh. .
This might possibly have worked in the 1920s, but with the collapse of stockmarkets, germany would have been even more impoverished in the 1930s. As it was, Germany wanted "payback" and needed to surreptiously rearm to do so. My copy of the 48th Congress report on Fascism (1948) has some details of how the Nazis managed to do this with one-sided trade agreements, plus societal changes and, of course, an internal set of enemies to lay the blame on their WWI defeat and continuing economic problems.
[It is interesting how a century later, a number of nations are repeating this approach after self-induced economic problems. Conspiracy theorists might say this was deliberate. I hope it falls under the saying that one should not assume maliciousness when stupidity is a sufficient explanation.]
"Our attitude… must be determined by our whole moral and emotional reaction to the future of international relations and the Peace of the World. [Right now] we take the view that for at least a generation to come Germany cannot be trusted with even a modicum of prosperity… must be kept impoverished and her children starved and crippled… must be ringed round by enemies… [must not be] assist[ed] to regain a part of her former material prosperity and find a means of livelihood for the industrial population of her towns….
If this view of nations and of their relation to one another is adopted by the democracies of Western Europe, and is financed by the United States, heaven help us all.
If we aim deliberately at the impoverishment of Central Europe, vengeance, I dare predict, will not limp.
Nothing can then delay for very long that final civil war between the forces of Reaction and the despairing convulsions of Revolution, before which the horrors of the late German war [WWI] will fade into nothing, and which will destroy, whoever is victor, the civilization and the progress of our generation…"
Keynes was quite prescient about this, as Germany almost collapsed, veered into fascism, and sterted WWII. It was a lesson learned after WWII with teh US taking a strong lead to prevent it reoccurring. The establishment of the EEC kept the peacce in Europe. It was so advantageous that Britain begged to be allowed to join, which was only possible once Charles de Gaulle was dead. 50 years later, an incompetent government and a stupidly ignorant Britain fooled by demagogues resulted in exiting the now political EU despite special advantages like a separate currency. The consequences of the Brexiteers fantasies have arrived with a vengeance.
What's even more bizarre is that the Brexit supporters either failed to see (or failed to care) that Northern Ireland, a loyal part of the UK, would be cast adrift with a tariff wall running through the Irish Sea!
You may recall that both the NI government and UK voters were lied to about this, especially by the "oven ready deal" Johnson government. The problems were pointed out at the very beginning. The right-wing Daily Telegraph had a article saying that the problem of the border between Eire and NI was illusory, and that the UK could ignore it. The "deals" for trading with the EU were to be the easiest ever made (false) and that the arrangement would be like Norway++ and similar. The real result was a horrendus amount of paperwork for exports to the EU, arguments over fisheries that worsened British fishermen's catches, and overall a bet impact on the economy that was pretty much predicted by the "Remainer" camp. Have any of the Brexit principals suffered consequences? Not that I can see.
Britain is trying that on 2 fronts - Brexit and "Stop the Boats" tp try to stop immigration to a trickle. Brexit has shot the country in the right foot. Blocking immigration (that allows work) has crippled sectors that rely on foreign workers for both long and short term periods. Left foot shot. In addition it has stimulated succession attempts of Scotland and Northern Ireland. Wales isn't too happy either. There may be only the English rump left within 50 years.
Having said that, it seems all but inevitable that there will be a mass migration from the more equatorial regions to the cooler north as this century progresses. That will inevitably result in raised drawbridges, with the Mediterranean the proverbial flaming moat facing Africa. The failure of the rich North nations to mitigate the global heating trend seems to me the equivalent of the Versailles Treaty after WWI, but so far more lackadaisical than malicious. I do not see this ending well...at all.
Adam Tooze argues that Germany *could* have made the Treaty payments, but that their unpopularity resulted in efforts to dodge them by means of expedients such as inflation.
I don't know whether Keynes or Tooze is right on this particular point (I suspect Tooze is), but I am sure Keynes is otherwise right in his economic prescriptions.
That is interesting about Germany being able to make the payments. I would have thought this would have been a "extreme austerity" program as France, in particular, wanted reparations and its pound of flesh. .
This might possibly have worked in the 1920s, but with the collapse of stockmarkets, germany would have been even more impoverished in the 1930s. As it was, Germany wanted "payback" and needed to surreptiously rearm to do so. My copy of the 48th Congress report on Fascism (1948) has some details of how the Nazis managed to do this with one-sided trade agreements, plus societal changes and, of course, an internal set of enemies to lay the blame on their WWI defeat and continuing economic problems.
[It is interesting how a century later, a number of nations are repeating this approach after self-induced economic problems. Conspiracy theorists might say this was deliberate. I hope it falls under the saying that one should not assume maliciousness when stupidity is a sufficient explanation.]
"Our attitude… must be determined by our whole moral and emotional reaction to the future of international relations and the Peace of the World. [Right now] we take the view that for at least a generation to come Germany cannot be trusted with even a modicum of prosperity… must be kept impoverished and her children starved and crippled… must be ringed round by enemies… [must not be] assist[ed] to regain a part of her former material prosperity and find a means of livelihood for the industrial population of her towns….
If this view of nations and of their relation to one another is adopted by the democracies of Western Europe, and is financed by the United States, heaven help us all.
If we aim deliberately at the impoverishment of Central Europe, vengeance, I dare predict, will not limp.
Nothing can then delay for very long that final civil war between the forces of Reaction and the despairing convulsions of Revolution, before which the horrors of the late German war [WWI] will fade into nothing, and which will destroy, whoever is victor, the civilization and the progress of our generation…"
Keynes was quite prescient about this, as Germany almost collapsed, veered into fascism, and sterted WWII. It was a lesson learned after WWII with teh US taking a strong lead to prevent it reoccurring. The establishment of the EEC kept the peacce in Europe. It was so advantageous that Britain begged to be allowed to join, which was only possible once Charles de Gaulle was dead. 50 years later, an incompetent government and a stupidly ignorant Britain fooled by demagogues resulted in exiting the now political EU despite special advantages like a separate currency. The consequences of the Brexiteers fantasies have arrived with a vengeance.
What's even more bizarre is that the Brexit supporters either failed to see (or failed to care) that Northern Ireland, a loyal part of the UK, would be cast adrift with a tariff wall running through the Irish Sea!
You may recall that both the NI government and UK voters were lied to about this, especially by the "oven ready deal" Johnson government. The problems were pointed out at the very beginning. The right-wing Daily Telegraph had a article saying that the problem of the border between Eire and NI was illusory, and that the UK could ignore it. The "deals" for trading with the EU were to be the easiest ever made (false) and that the arrangement would be like Norway++ and similar. The real result was a horrendus amount of paperwork for exports to the EU, arguments over fisheries that worsened British fishermen's catches, and overall a bet impact on the economy that was pretty much predicted by the "Remainer" camp. Have any of the Brexit principals suffered consequences? Not that I can see.
Keynes sound here as if he is presenting the antithesis to an argument rather than trying to achieve a proper neoliberal :) synthesis.
Britain is trying that on 2 fronts - Brexit and "Stop the Boats" tp try to stop immigration to a trickle. Brexit has shot the country in the right foot. Blocking immigration (that allows work) has crippled sectors that rely on foreign workers for both long and short term periods. Left foot shot. In addition it has stimulated succession attempts of Scotland and Northern Ireland. Wales isn't too happy either. There may be only the English rump left within 50 years.
Having said that, it seems all but inevitable that there will be a mass migration from the more equatorial regions to the cooler north as this century progresses. That will inevitably result in raised drawbridges, with the Mediterranean the proverbial flaming moat facing Africa. The failure of the rich North nations to mitigate the global heating trend seems to me the equivalent of the Versailles Treaty after WWI, but so far more lackadaisical than malicious. I do not see this ending well...at all.