Review of Keynesian Economics, Inaugural Issue, Autumn 2012, pp. 1–4

Statement of the Co-Editors
Economics and the economic crisis: the case for change

It is widely recognized that economic crises can sometimes trigger enormous change, with regard to both economic theory and the politics of governance. Today, the global economy is struggling with the fall-out from the financial crash of 2008 and the Great Recession of 2007–2009. The economic crisis that these events have generated, combined with the failure of the mainstream economics profession, has again put the question of change on the table. The economics profession stands significantly discredited owing to its failure to foresee the recession and the financial crash, its repeated over-optimistic forecasts of rapid recovery, and the lack of plausibility surrounding its attempts to explain events. Reasonable people do not expect economists to predict the daily movements of the stock market, but they do expect them to anticipate and explain major imminent economic developments. On that score, the profession failed catastrophically, revealing fundamental theoretical inadequacies. This intellectual failure has prompted us to launch the Review of Keynesian Economics. At a time of journal proliferation, some may wonder about the need for another journal. We would respond there is a proliferation of journals, but that proliferation is essentially within one intellectual paradigm. As such, it obscures the fact that the range of theoretical inquiry is actually very narrow. A journal devoted to Keynesian economics is therefore needed, both to correct this narrowness and because events have once again confirmed the profound relevance of Keynesian theory. Reflection upon the intellectual history of macroeconomics over the past 75 years can help to understand the current predicament and need for this new journal. That