Introduction:

In this contribution I will make an attempt to systematically present my views on the issue in order to convince Jan that there is a perspective for post-Keynesian economics – or at least to start another round of discussions. In Section 2, I will define heterodox and post-Keynesian economics as alternatives to mainstream orthodox economics. Section 3 will deal with the different strands of post-Keynesian economics, their commonalities and the general implications for post-Keynesian macroeconomics and macroeconomic policies. In Section 4, I will take a broader perspective and summarise what has been achieved regarding the establishment of post-Keynesianism as an alternative school of thought. And in the final Section 5, I will present my views on the perspectives and tasks for the future. Before I begin, a note of caution is at place: I am not a trained methodologist, and the considerations below are rather those of a post-Keynesian macroeconomist doing theoretical, applied and, hopefully, politically relevant work. My references to the methodological debates around the coherence of the post-Keynesian research programme and its relationship with orthodox or mainstream economics will therefore be highly selective and subjective and do not claim to be comprehensive at all.