Keynesianism and Neo-Keynesianism (assuming this includes Friedman/Monetarism) dominate because their theories/proposals are, usually, based in the world and in

Keynesianism and Neo-Keynesianism (assuming this includes Friedman/Monetarism) dominate because their theories/proposals are, usually, based in the world and institutions that exist. Austrian economics is mostly the economics of utopia, masked by an inexplicably pessimistic tone. The newest keynesian variant, modern monetary theory, isn't a "modern" theory of money... it's a theory of modern money systems. These aren't based on gold coinage. Austrian macro is centred around the idea that interest rates are prices. Some people have a desire to consume now. Others have a desire to consume later, interest rates are the price they negotiate. No second order effects. No money supply. No interest in where money comes from. No money, in fact. Money is just a trade good. There were two must-do-somethings" that "killed" Austrian economics, outside of dissident goldbug circles: the great depression & WW2. Their answer to "how do we win the war?" was "we can't, not enough money." The same applied to "how do we rebuild europe & japan?" Meanwhile, post war economists were aware of these theories. Yet, they often observed "non clearing markets" in the form of unemployment in places where Austrian economics reckons there shouldn't exist.