IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Schumpeter Vs. Keynes: “In The Long Run Not All Of Us Are Dead”




Keynes was viewed by himself, Schumpeter, and most others as the most highly esteemed economist of the twentieth century. However, Schumpeter is receiving increasing attention from mainstream economists. A few specific examples are discussed, and the citation time series for Keynes and Schumpeter are compared for the period 1956 through 2006. Generally, Keynes receives more citations than Schumpeter from 1956 through roughly the mid-1990s. But subsequently until 2006, Schumpeter received more citations than Keynes.

Suggested Citation

  • Diamond, Arthur M., 2009. "Schumpeter Vs. Keynes: “In The Long Run Not All Of Us Are Dead”," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(04), pages 531-541, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:31:y:2009:i:04:p:531-541_99

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Ho, Sin-Yu & Njindan Iyke, Bernard, 2018. "Short- and Long-term Impact of Trade Openness on Financial Development in Sub-Saharan Africa," MPRA Paper 84272, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Tae-Hee Jo, 2011. "A Heterodox Microfoundation of Business Cycles," Chapters,in: Heterodox Analysis of Financial Crisis and Reform, chapter 9 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Vadim Kufenko & Niels Geiger, 2016. "Business cycles in the economy and in economics: an econometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 43-69, April.
    4. Richard N. Langlois, 2013. "Insights from Joseph Schumpeter," Chapters,in: The Economic Crisis in Retrospect, chapter 6, pages 111-134 Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jhisec:v:31:y:2009:i:04:p:531-541_99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keith Waters). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.