Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/277040 
Year of Publication: 
2005
Citation: 
[Journal:] Intervention. Zeitschrift fuer Ökonomie / Journal of Economics [ISSN:] 2195-3376 [Volume:] 02 [Issue:] 1 [Year:] 2005 [Pages:] 57-73
Publisher: 
Metropolis-Verlag, Marburg
Abstract (Translated): 
This paper provides textual evidence that Boughton's interpretation of Keynes's proposals for shaping the international monetary system of the post-war period misses the point. I want to investigate two points which contradict Boughton's interpretation published by the International Monetary Fund. Boughton states that White won the battle against Keynes because White was determined to create a multilateral system whereas Keynes favoured bilateral financial support to Britain by the U.S.A. I submit that Keynes's view on the function of the International Clearing Union (I.C.U.) was first of all to encourage both creditor and debtor countries to avoid trade imbalances. Second, as Keynes mentioned, the I.C.U. was not to be implemented as a "multiplicity of bilateral arrangements". Here we find the thrust of his view of the post-war period – avoiding bilateral arrangements because he believed that bilateralism could cause a new war.
JEL: 
E22
E25
E12
F32
F33
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.