Although Minskys interpretation of Keyness macroeconomics and essential message clashes with authoritative alternative interpretations, it has become increasingly influential during the years following the Global Financial Crisis, even in mainstream circles. This work offers a critical evaluation of Minskys Financial Instability Hypothesis from the perspective of the alternative Austro-Wicksellian paradigm. Although some of the similarities and/or analogies between Minskys approach and that of the Austrian School suggest a more than merely superficial affinity between the two theoretical frameworks and although some scope for cross-fertilization between both approaches can be found, both theoretically and empirically, at a fundamental conceptual level both theories remain incompatible and difficult if not impossible to reconcile, in particular in terms of fundamental causality and in terms of policy conclusions and prescriptions. Despite the fact that Minskys policy conclusions are multifaceted and somewhat eclectic, they manifest a lack of familiarity with the conclusions of the Austrian analysis of the problems of central planning by Big Players.

Ludwig Van Den Hauwe earned degrees in Laws, Philosophy of Science, Applied Economics (BSc) and Finance (MSc, Vlerick Business School) before receiving a PhD in Economics from Paris Dauphine University (PSL). He is an alumnus of the Rothbard Graduate Seminar (Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, USA). He pursues interdisciplinary research.