− N Y Times 25:1 F 29 ’20 4600w N Y Times 25:196 Ap 18 ’20 80w
“In estimating the value of the present sensational arraignment of the work of the peace council, it must be borne in mind that Mr Keynes is a leftwing Liberal, and by nature has a little of that slant of mind which we are accustomed in America to associate with the theoretical humanitarianism and internationalism of the New Republic school.... It is on the subject of the amount of the reparations that there is grave reason to doubt the soundness of Mr Keynes’s view.”
+ − Review 2:155 F 14 ’20 3000w R of Rs 61:336 Mr ’20 210w
“We have not read a more acute and witty (in the old sense of the term) exposition of the economic equilibrium of Europe and the relation between capital and labour in England than the opening pages of this book.”
+ Sat R 129:85 Ja 24 ’20 1550w
Reviewed by Arthur Gleason
+ Socialist R 8:248 Mr ’20 1450w
“Mr Keynes is at liberty to say what he likes, and to denounce his former chiefs and colleagues to his heart’s content. Still, the effect of his book is weakened by the circumstances in which it came to be written. Mr Keynes says that he resigned his post on June 7th last, ‘when it became evident that hope could no longer be entertained of substantial modification in the draft terms of peace.’ The implication is that he could have made a better peace than that which the Allies proposed and the enemy accepted. We are bound to say that this seems to us improbable. Mr Keynes’s economic criticisms are in a different category. When he comes down to facts or estimates he deserves attention.”
− + Spec 123:861 D 20 ’19 1200w
“It is emotionally written, in passages where feeling broke bounds and Europe presented herself to Mr Keynes’s mind as a vision of all but consummated ruin. But in the main it is a model of careful and penetrating analysis. It is enough to add that Mr Keynes has said outright what other authorities like Gen. Smuts, Mr Hoover, and Lord Robert Cecil have half said, and wholly thought.”