T

he marriage of economics and politics is as old as civilization itself, yet it remains a turbulent union at best. This turbulence manifests most clearly when societies face a choice between short-term relief and long-term stability. The 1920s British return to the gold standard is a compelling historical case that illustrates this tension. While rational discourse and economic analysis suggested the virtues of a “hard money” policy, the public’s imagination was captured by the illusory benefits of nominalism.

The Gold Standard: The Fall Guy for Unemployment and Economic Woes

During the interwar period, particularly in 1925, Britain made the controversial decision to return to the gold standard. Though it aimed to restore the pound’s pre-war convertibility and provide a stabilizing force for the economy, this choice was met with sharp criticism. Antony Pally, an economist, noted that the actual economic disturbances had more to do with unchecked money supply growth and pent-up purchasing power. Devaluing the pound, contrary to popular belief, wouldn’t have significantly mitigated debts or unemployment rates.

Nevertheless, the gold standard became an easy target for politicians and union leaders alike. One union leader even attributed the 1926 general strike to the return to gold, feeding into fallacies that tight money policies “strangle business.” This weakening of the gold standard’s ideological stance set the stage for more enticing yet flawed ideas to take root.

The Irresistible Charms of Nominalism

In this vacuum of uncertainty and discontent, emerged John Maynard Keynes, armed with theories that offered the allure of relief without apparent sacrifice. Keynes capitalized on what can be described as “inarticulate longings” for financial ease, advocating for stable nominal wages. He positioned monetary policy as a “natural lever” for economic betterment, circumventing the need for more painful adjustments like industrial reformation.

The appeal of such nominalist notions was profound. After all, who would choose apparent wage cuts when the option for apparent wage stability was on the table? In the political arena, the seductive simplicity of nominalism easily outweighed the complex realities of economic fundamentals.

Inflation’s Deceptive Attraction

Governor Montagu Norman was among those who cautioned that merely devaluing the pound would not solve the fundamental economic challenges facing Britain. Yet, the voices advocating for hard money were drowned out by the Keynesian narrative, gradually eroding the standing of traditional monetary policies like the gold standard.

In contemporary times, the tug-of-war between economic stability and the allure of nominalism has not lost its potency. The chorus advocating for inflationary measures is a siren song as captivating now as it was in the past. While inflation might offer the veneer of prosperity, true wealth is generated through production, not merely by manipulating monetary policy. Hard truths have a staying power that transcends generations, but the allure of nominalism, when acted upon, bequeaths a legacy of instability and turmoil.

As we navigate the waters of an ever-complex and interconnected global economy, let’s not forget that the power to print money isn’t the power to create wealth. Money’s worth isn’t defined by the numbers on a note, but by the integrity of the system that note represents. In an era where the temptation to trade long-term stability for short-term gain is greater than ever, the fortitude to uphold foundational principles becomes not just a virtue, but a moral imperative.

Thank you for reading “The Tug-of-War: Economic Stability Versus Political Narratives“.

• Subscribe to our newsletter: ConsensusProtocol.org
• Follow us on Twitter: @ConsensusPro

Sources:

• Robert Breedlove — The Power of Myth | The Twilight of Gold Series | Episode 14 (WiM362)
• The Birth of Inflation (Chapter 6) — Jacques Rueff
• Lords of Finance — Liaquat Ahamed
• Financial Statescraft — Benn Steil