Naked Capitalism has the article Macroeconomics in the Crossfire (Again).
… the standard New Keynesian model is not a Keynesian model at all – it is a monetarist model. Aside from the mathematical sophistication, it is all but indistinguishable from Milton Friedman’s ideologically-driven description of the macroeconomy.
My political blog has always had an advantage over the economists who learned their macroeconomics much later than I did.
The economics I learned in the early 1960’s seems to work as well now as it did back then. I was lucky enough to be so busy at work in the decades that followed, that I did not have a chance to keep up on the mis-education of the time. When I had the time to start paying more attention to the subject again, I couldn’t understand what had happened to the knowledge that I had learned that seemed to explain all that was happening in the economy.
I had a similar experience with technical mis-education in my early years of work. As I worked in software engineering, it was mostly self teaching by reading and by working with other people on developing computer software. I decided to take a course in computer science at graduate school at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas where I was working at the time. We were studying binary searching algorithm which I thought I had understood from my own studies. The more the course went on, the less I seemed to understand. I had the good sense to drop the course before I ended up knowing less than when I started.
People who studied macro-economics in the 1980s for the first time didn’t have my good fortune of having knowledge of the topic that comported with real life experience of macro-economics. Apparently, not so many of them could resist learning stuff that was patently false to those who understood what Keynes had explained.
Fifty years later, some of the economics community is learning what I knew way back then.