MMT Takes Center Stage – and Orthodox Economists Freak

The massive, coordinated assault on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) scholars by the most elite forces of orthodoxy represents a watershed moment in economics, but we must not lose sight that the real attack is actually on progressives, particularly the newly elected progressive members of Congress plus Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders.

正统最精英势力对现代货币理论（MMT）学者的大规模、协调一致的攻击代表了经济学的分水岭，但我们绝不能忽视，真正的攻击实际上是针对进步派的，特别是新当选的进步派国会议员加上伊丽莎白·沃伦（Elizabeth Warren）和伯尼·桑德斯（Bernie Sanders）。

Even that statement is incomplete, for it is the combination of the rise of these progressive elected officials, the 2020 presidential election (and nomination battle), and the exceptional embrace of progressive policies by the general public and Democratic Party candidates for the presidential nomination that prompted the coordinated and personalized assault of overwhelmingly neoliberal economists on MMT scholars.

即使这样的说法也是不完整的，因为正是这些进步民选官员的崛起、2020年总统选举（和提名之战），以及公众和民主党总统候选人对进步政策的异常拥护，促使绝大多数新自由主义经济学家对现代货币理论学者进行协调一致和个性化的攻击。

This first column in a series provides an overview of why the progressives’ embrace of MMT spurred the terrified assault on MMT by orthodox economists.

本系列的第一篇专栏概述了为什么进步派对现代货币理论的拥护激起了正统经济学家对现代货币理论的可怕攻击。

That desperate assault reveals how much orthodox economists fear the voters’ increasing embrace of the progressive core policy issues on the environment, health care, and restoring the rule of law to the markets.

这种绝望的攻击表明，正统经济学家有多么担心选民越来越多地接受环境、医疗保健和恢复市场法治等进步的核心政策问题。

Later articles in this series will flesh out that overview.

本系列的后续文章将充实这一概述。

The polls showing enormous public support for the key progressive initiatives terrify the neoliberals.

民意调查显示公众对关键进步倡议的巨大支持令新自由主义者感到恐惧。

Sanders’ 2016 policy initiatives have transformed the Democratic Party candidates’ policy proposals for 2020.

桑德斯 2016 年的政策举措改变了民主党候选人 2020 年的政策建议。

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

模仿是最真诚的奉承形式。

Warren’s policy proposals are having a similar effect.

沃伦的政策建议也产生了类似的效果。

Polls show broad support for the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, a jobs guaranty program, a tax system that would reverse the current race to plutocracy, a campaign to reduce gun slaughter and massacres, the restoration of the rule of law (including antitrust laws) to business (particularly banking and Silicon Valley), and a meaningful minimum wage.

民意调查显示，绿色新政、全民医疗保险、就业保障计划、扭转当前富豪统治竞争的税收制度、减少枪支屠杀和屠杀的运动、恢复企业（特别是银行业和硅谷）法治（包括反垄断法）以及有意义的最低工资得到了广泛支持。

The emerging progressive policy core enjoys far stronger public support than do the neoliberal policies of the self-described Democratic Party ‘moderates.’ That professed ‘moderation,’ has become code for extreme opposition to the policies that the public overwhelmingly supports.

新兴的进步政策核心比自称为“温和派”的民主党的新自由主义政策享有更强大的公众支持。这种自称的“温和派”已成为极端反对公众压倒性支持的政策的代名词。

The progressive policy core is centrist in terms of the electorate’s preferences.

就选民的偏好而言，进步政策核心是中间派。

The progressive policy core is not “socialist,” “extreme,” or “left.”

进步政策的核心不是“社会主义”、“极端”或“左派”。

The Democratic Party “moderates,” on two key economic issues, their embrace of austerity and willingness to cut the safety net, are to the right of Republican conservatives.

民主党在两个关键经济问题上的“温和派”，即支持紧缩政策和削减安全网的意愿，属于共和党保守派的右翼。

Republicans only pretend to embrace austerity when there is a Democratic president.

当民主党总统上任时，共和党人才会假装接受紧缩政策。

The New Democrats, Blue Dogs, and “Problem Solver” Democrats actually believe in inflicting self-destructive austerity and cuts to the safety net regardless of the President’s party.

新民主党、蓝狗党和“问题解决者”民主党实际上主张实施自我毁灭性的紧缩政策，并削减安全网，无论总统属于哪个政党。

Neoliberal Democrats’ big club to bash progressive policies is the typically mythical catastrophic effects of federal budget deficits.

新自由主义民主党抨击进步政策的大棒是联邦预算赤字典型的神话般的灾难性影响。

MMT scholarship disarms neoliberals, removing the legitimacy of their deficit hysteria ‘club’ in the vast bulk of circumstances where federal deficits do not cause significant shortages of real resources.

MMT 奖学金解除了新自由主义者的武装，在联邦赤字不会导致实际资源严重短缺的大部分情况下，消除了他们的赤字歇斯底里“俱乐部”的合法性。

Fox News, President Trump, and neoliberal economists mounted a desperate attack on the progressive policy core precisely because the public overwhelmingly supports it.

福克斯新闻、特朗普总统和新自由主义经济学家对进步政策核心发起了绝望的攻击，正是因为公众压倒性地支持它。

Their attack makes three claims.

他们的攻击提出了三点主张。

First, the policy core represents bad economics.

首先，政策核心代表着糟糕的经济。

Second, the policy core represents ‘socialism.’ Third, even if the policies are desirable, the world cannot afford to adopt them.

第二，政策核心代表“社会主义”。第三，即使这些政策是可取的，世界也承担不起。

These three points form the all-encompassing neoliberal meme that the government cannot and should not act to protect the public.

这三点构成了包罗万象的新自由主义模因，即政府不能也不应该采取行动保护公众。

They think the government should serve and fund the plutocrats, kleptocrats, and the “chicken hawks’” massive military expenditures and wars.

他们认为政府应该为富豪、盗贼和“鹰派”的巨额军事开支和战争提供服务和资助。

Neoliberals try desperately to convince the public to adopt their ideology that democratic government is fundamentally illegitimate while the reality of a rigged kleptocracy represents the fiction of ‘capitalism.’

新自由主义者拼命地试图说服公众接受他们的意识形态，即民主政府从根本上来说是非法的，而受操纵的盗贼统治的现实代表了“资本主义”的虚构。

This is the place where MMT scholars became involved.

这就是现代货币理论学者介入的地方。

MMT is not inherently ideological, but a number of prominent MMT scholars are progressives.

现代货币理论本质上并不具有意识形态性，但许多著名的现代货币理论学者都是进步派。

To no one’s surprise, the coordinated orthodox assault on MMT scholars focuses on progressive MMT scholars.

毫不奇怪，对现代货币理论学者的协调正统攻击主要针对进步的现代货币理论学者。

The orthodox economists’ aimed the schwerpunkt of their assault at Stephanie Kelton, the world’s top female MMT scholar.

正统经济学家将攻击的矛头指向了世界顶尖女性 MMT 学者斯蒂芬妮·凯尔顿 (Stephanie Kelton)。

The lead orthodox assault corps was exclusively male.

领导的正统突击队全部由男性组成。

(They will soon move to cure that obvious ‘tell.’)

（他们很快就会采取行动来解决这个明显的“问题”。）

There are five primary reasons why increasing numbers of progressive elected officials have embraced MMT scholarship.

越来越多的进步民选官员接受现代货币理论奖学金有五个主要原因。

First, progressive MMT scholars are among the economists who have demonstrated that the progressive core policies are good economics and the opposing neoliberal policies are bad economics.

首先，进步的现代货币理论学者是证明进步的核心政策是好的经济学而反对的新自由主义政策是坏的经济学的经济学家之一。

For example, it is insane to keep adding to global climate change.

例如，不断加剧全球气候变化是疯狂的。

It is insane economics to claim that we can afford to cripple our planet’s climate but cannot afford to prevent the catastrophe.

声称我们有能力破坏地球的气候，但却无力阻止灾难的发生，这在经济学上是疯狂的。

Second, MMT scholars have blown up the effort to smear the progressive core’s policies as ‘socialism.’ Laissez faire economics is terrible economics.

其次，现代货币理论学者们对将进步核心的政策抹黑为“社会主义”的努力大肆渲染。自由放任的经济学是可怕的经济学。

It is literally suicidal with regard to global climate change.

对于全球气候变化来说，这实际上是自杀行为。

Similarly, neoliberal policies have eviscerated the rule of law, producing the “criminogenic environments” that produce the epidemics of elite fraud and predation that drove the Great Financial Crisis (GFC).

同样，新自由主义政策削弱了法治，创造了“犯罪环境”，导致精英欺诈和掠夺泛滥，从而引发了金融危机（GFC）。

Absent an effective rule of law, it is easy for elite fraud and predation to create a “Gresham’s” dynamic in which bad ethics drives good ethics from the markets, professions, and sports.

如果缺乏有效的法治，精英欺诈和掠夺很容易形成一种“格雷沙姆”动态，即不良道德驱使市场、职业和体育领域的良好道德。

Effective government is essential to effective markets.

有效的政府对于有效的市场至关重要。

MMT scholars come not to destroy honest markets, but to make them possible.

现代货币理论学者的到来不是为了摧毁诚实市场，而是为了让诚实市场成为可能。

Sound regulation constitutes a large part of the “rule of law.” Effective regulation is essential to allow honest business people to prosper.

健全的监管是“法治”的重要组成部分。有效的监管对于诚实的商人的繁荣至关重要。

MMT scholars documented how and why elite fraudsters and predators “rig the system” and the horrific harm that “control fraud and predation” cause.

现代货币理论学者记录了精英欺诈者和掠夺者如何以及为何“操纵系统”以及“控制欺诈和掠夺”造成的可怕危害。

We did not design this branch of our work, which began in 1984, to help any candidate.

我们从 1984 年开始工作的这个分支并不是为了帮助任何候选人而设计的。

It is remarkable that Warren has not yet used this strand of MMT research to bolster her central policy positions.

值得注意的是，沃伦尚未利用现代货币理论的这一研究来支持她的核心政策立场。

Our multi-disciplinary scholarship draws on the best of white-collar criminology, economics, law, accounting, and psychology.

我们的多学科奖学金借鉴了白领犯罪学、经济学、法律、会计和心理学的精华。

Our proposed regulatory policies are immensely popular among voters, including many Trump voters, but progressive support is near universal.

我们提出的监管政策在选民中非常受欢迎，包括许多特朗普选民，但渐进式支持几乎得到了普遍的支持。

Our scholarship demonstrates in detail why Warren is correct – our most elite predators have systematically rigged huge areas of the economy.

我们的学术研究详细证明了为什么沃伦是正确的——我们最精英的掠夺者已经系统地操纵了经济的大片领域。

We also explain why “control fraud and predation” cause such devastating harm to the public, our overall economy, and honest business people.

我们还解释了为什么“控制欺诈和掠夺”会对公众、我们的整体经济和诚实的商人造成如此毁灭性的伤害。

Our research and theories also explain why this predators target people of color, women, the elderly, children, and the elderly (and the ‘intersection’ of these characteristics).

我们的研究和理论还解释了为什么这种掠食者会针对有色人种、女性、老人、儿童和老年人（以及这些特征的“交集”）。

For any economists wondering what this branch of our scholarly work has to do with macroeconomics, the answer is that it provides part of MMT’s devastating critique of the ‘microfoundations’ of “modern macro.”

对于任何想知道我们学术著作的这一分支与宏观经济学有什么关系的经济学家来说，答案是，它提供了现代货币理论对“现代宏观”的“微观基础”的毁灭性批判的一部分。

If neoliberals want to define as “socialism” an effective government that produces markets in which honest people prosper and we imprison or at least drive from the markets the elite cheaters, then we are all socialists.

如果新自由主义者想要将“社会主义”定义为一个有效的政府，它创造出让诚实的人繁荣的市场，而我们则监禁或至少将精英骗子赶出市场，那么我们都是社会主义者。

An economic system without an effective rule of law and with massive negative externalities such as global climate change is a suicidal kleptocracy.

一个没有有效法治且具有全球气候变化等巨大负外部性的经济体系是自杀式的盗贼统治。

If neoliberals want to define that as “capitalism,” they should get used to the public rejecting it as an ideology that is as economically illiterate as it is inhumane and unethical.

如果新自由主义者想将其定义为“资本主义”，他们就应该习惯于公众将其视为一种既不具备经济知识又不人道、不道德的意识形态而拒绝接受。

Kleptocracy and plutocracy invariably corrupt and ruin democracy.

盗贼统治和财阀统治总是会腐败和破坏民主。

The truth is that honest markets and governments are complements and that the most effective economies are ‘mixed-economies.’ Using ‘socialism’ or ‘capitalism’ as swear words is a pointless waste.

事实是，诚实的市场和政府是互补的，最有效的经济体是“混合经济”。使用“社会主义”或“资本主义”作为脏话是毫无意义的浪费。

Third, MMT has been of particular use to progressives in countering the bizarre claim that while we can afford to destroy our planet’s ability to support life we cannot afford to prevent that catastrophe.

第三，现代货币理论对于进步人士来说特别有用，它可以反驳这样一种奇怪的主张：虽然我们有能力摧毁地球维持生命的能力，但我们却无力阻止这场灾难。

A significant strand of MMT scholarship focuses on understanding the true fiscal capacity of nations with fully sovereign currencies.

现代货币理论学术的一个重要部分侧重于了解拥有完全主权货币的国家的真实财政能力。

The most effective means neoliberal opponents of vital public programs have found to dissuade Democrats from adopting such programs is the deliberate creation of the myth that the U.S. cannot afford to fund progressive programs.

重要公共计划的新自由主义反对者发现，阻止民主党采用此类计划的最有效手段是故意制造美国无力资助进步计划的神话。

The express goal of the economists creating and spreading this myth was to deceive the public in order to prevent it from voting for social programs the voters viewed as highly desirable.

经济学家创造和传播这一神话的明确目标是欺骗公众，以阻止他们投票支持选民认为非常理想的社会计划。

The most famous admission of this myth is by Paul Samuelson, one of the two Nobel Laureates in Economics who were Larry Summers’ uncles.

对这一神话最著名的承认是保罗·萨缪尔森 (Paul Samuelson)，他是拉里·萨默斯 (Larry Summers) 的叔叔、两位诺贝尔经济学奖获得者之一。

Randy Wray made this point in his April 30, 2010 New Economic Perspective (NEP) blog (“Paul Samuelson on Deficit Myths”).

兰迪·雷 (Randy Wray) 在其 2010 年 4 月 30 日的新经济视角 (NEP) 博客（“保罗·萨缪尔森谈赤字神话”）中阐述了这一点。

[Randy Wray referred to] “an interview Nobel winner Paul Samuelson gave to Mark Blaug (in his film on Keynes, “John Maynard Keynes: Life/Ideas/Legacy 1995”).

[兰迪·雷提到]“诺贝尔奖获得者保罗·萨缪尔森对马克·布劳格的采访（在他关于凯恩斯的电影《约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯：生活/思想/遗产 1995》中）。

There Samuelson said:

萨缪尔森在那里说道：

I think there is an element of truth in the view that the superstition that the budget must be balanced at all times [is necessary].

我认为预算必须始终保持平衡的迷信观点有一定道理[是必要的]。

Once it is debunked [that] takes away one of the bulwarks that every society must have against expenditure out of control.

一旦它被揭穿，每个社会必须拥有的抵御支出失控的堡垒之一就会消失。

There must be discipline in the allocation of resources or you will have anarchistic chaos and inefficiency.

资源分配必须有纪律，否则就会出现无政府主义的混乱和低效率。

And one of the functions of old fashioned religion was to scare people by sometimes what might be regarded as myths into behaving in a way that the long-run civilized life requires.

老式宗教的功能之一就是用有时可能被视为神话的东西来吓唬人们，让他们按照长期文明生活所要求的方式行事。

We have taken away a belief in the intrinsic necessity of balancing the budget if not in every year, [then] in every short period of time.

我们已经不再相信平衡预算的内在必要性（如果不是每年，那么）在每一个短时期内。

If Prime Minister Gladstone came back to life he would say “uh, oh what you have done” and James Buchanan argues in those terms.

如果格拉德斯通首相复活，他会说“呃，哦，你做了什么”，詹姆斯·布坎南用这些话争论道。

I have to say that I see merit in that view.

我不得不说我看到了这种观点的优点。

Notice the key logical error in Samuelson’s endorsement of economists deceiving the people by spreading a myth.

请注意萨缪尔森支持经济学家通过传播神话来欺骗人民的关键逻辑错误。

MMT scholars stress that “there must be discipline in the allocation of resources.” MMT urges us to focus on the use of scarce real resources.

MMT学者强调“资源配置必须有纪律”。现代货币理论敦促我们关注稀缺实际资源的使用。

MMT explains that dollars are never scarce for the U.S. government given our fully sovereign currency, but real resources can be scarce and that their scarcity can lead to inflation and significant “opportunity costs.” If we fail to adopt government policies that stop global climate change, we will not show “discipline,” but irrational idiocy.

现代货币理论解释说，鉴于我们拥有完全主权的货币，美元对美国政府而言从来不稀缺，但真正的资源可能稀缺，而它们的稀缺可能导致通货膨胀和巨大的“机会成本”。如果我们不能采取阻止全球气候变化的政府政策，我们就不会表现出“纪律”，而是表现出非理性的白痴。

Samuelson made this statement 24 years ago, but Ed Crooks, a top Financial Times editor, just praised the same myth.

萨缪尔森在 24 年前就说过这样的话，但《金融时报》的高级编辑艾德·克鲁克斯却赞扬了同样的神话。

Note that he expressly adopts the statement that MMT is “obviously true” – and they must keep that truth from the public.

请注意，他明确采用了现代货币理论“显然是正确的”这一说法，并且他们必须向公众隐瞒这一事实。

He retweated with his highest praise this tweated text:

他以最高的赞誉转发了这段经过修改的文字：

Modern Monetary Theory is reverse Santa Clause.

现代货币理论是逆圣诞老人。

It is something that is obviously true & and believing in it will cause lots of bad behavior.

这显然是真实的，相信它会导致很多不良行为。

An underrated aspect of political economy, I think, is the extent to which obvious falsehoods – e.g., “the government’s budget is just like a household budget” – are worth maintaining because in the long run they lead to better outcomes than the truth would.

我认为，政治经济学的一个被低估的方面是，明显的谎言——例如“政府的预算就像家庭预算”——在多大程度上值得维持，因为从长远来看，它们会带来比事实更好的结果。

Orthodox economists and elite members of the financial press admit, in blunt terms:

正统经济学家和财经媒体的精英人士直言不讳地承认：

The fourth and fifth reasons why progressive elected officials find MMT scholarship so useful should apply to all elected officials.

进步民选官员认为现代货币理论奖学金如此有用的第四和第五个原因应该适用于所有民选官员。

The fourth reason is that MMT scholars have a superb record of predictive success.

第四个原因是现代货币理论学者在预测成功方面有着极好的记录。

Orthodox economists routinely claim that predictive success is the standard by which the soundness of theory is determined.

正统经济学家通常声称，预测的成功是确定理论可靠性的标准。

MMT scholarship is one of the strands of modern economic research that reveals that twin orthodox lies about that assertion.

现代货币理论学术是现代经济研究的一个分支，它揭示了双胞胎正统关于这一主张的谎言。

One, orthodox economists routinely employ theories and models that routinely fail hypothesis testing.

第一，正统经济学家通常采用的理论和模型通常无法通过假设检验。

Two, orthodox economists routinely refuse to adopt theories with far superior predictive success and instead continue to embrace theories that fit their ideological priors.

第二，正统经济学家通常拒绝采用预测成功率高得多的理论，而是继续接受符合其意识形态先验的理论。

Fifth, MMT scholars have a superb record in designing policies that prove effective when implemented.

第五，现代货币理论学者在设计政策方面拥有出色的记录，这些政策在实施后证明是有效的。

Orthodox macro and ‘microfoundation’ scholars have terrible records on policy.

正统的宏观和“微观基础”学者在政策方面有着糟糕的记录。

Orthodox policy on a broad range of fronts does not simply fail to cure severe problems; it is a primary cause of severe problems.

广泛领域的正统政策不仅不能解决严重问题，而且还能解决问题。这是造成严重问题的主要原因。

Orthodox economic policy prescriptions are frequently so criminogenic that they cause “control fraud and predation” to become epidemic.

正统的经济政策处方常常具有犯罪性，导致“控制欺诈和掠夺”成为流行病。

The successful policies that MMT scholars have helped formulate such as restoring the effective rule of law to Wall Street counter that criminogenic environment.

现代货币理论学者帮助制定的成功政策，例如恢复华尔街的有效法治，对抗了这种犯罪环境。

Such policies should attract overwhelming support from elected officials and economists of all stripes.

这些政策应该会吸引民选官员和各派经济学家的压倒性支持。

Is anyone surprised that progressives are horrified when they learn that orthodox economists and journalists know that MMT is “obviously true” and respond to that truth with lies designed to prevent the adoption of progressive core policies?

当进步派得知正统经济学家和记者知道现代货币理论“显然是正确的”，并用旨在阻止进步核心政策被采纳的谎言来回应这一事实时，他们会感到震惊吗？

MMT scholarship has exposed the campaign of lies and demonstrated that the progressive core policies are excellent economics and that the U.S. can implement them.

现代货币理论的学术成果揭露了谎言运动，并证明进步的核心政策是优秀的经济学，美国可以实施它们。

MMT scholars are the initial target of the orthodox counterrevolution against the ascendancy of progressive core policies among the electorate.

现代货币理论学者是正统反革命反对进步核心政策在选民中占主导地位的最初目标。

The ultimate orthodox target is blocking those policies.

最终的正统目标是阻止这些政策。

The second article in this series provides an overview of MMT scholars’ superb predictive and policy successes.

本系列的第二篇文章概述了现代货币理论学者出色的预测和政策成功。

Orthodox economists teach that such successes are the standard for judging the soundness of economic theory and theorists.

正统经济学家教导说，这种成功是判断经济理论和理论家健全性的标准。

It is revealing that the orthodox assault on MMT scholars has ignored the standard orthodox standard for testing the strength of economic theory.

可见，正统对现代货币理论学者的攻击忽视了检验经济理论强度的正统标准。