Unwarping the record: a reply to Paul Davidson

This is a reply to Paul Davidson's review, in the winter 2003-4 issue of JPKE, of my book, A History of Post Keynesian Economics Since 1936. After attempting to clear up some minor misunderstandings, I criticize Davidson's characterization of Marx and Sraffa as "classical economists," of Kalecki as an "imperfectionist," and of Minsky and Eichner as "mainstream Keynesians." Hicks, however, should be regarded as a New Keynesian rather than a Post Keynesian. Davidson and I also differ on more fundamental questions concerning the degree of coherence that is required in macroeconomic theory and on the related issue of whether Post Keynesianism should be a small tent or a large one.