During the neoclassical offensive of the last decades and the consequent economic policies, the defence of the post Keynesian and classical ideas have taken under - ground ways, as if it were necessary, for many an economist, to conceal his way of thinking. Thus, facing the new classical economics, the almost universal accept ance of the general equilibrium model, the rational expectations and the “social” theory of Coase, critical thinking has taken a variety of approaches, ranging from disequilibrium to endogenous growth theories, from institutional economics to the analysis of asymmetric information. Almost every such attempt has stepped out of the standard model introducing more realistic hypotheses, but has avoided the use of Sraffa’s critique as the base of analysis. Many, and myself, are not fully knowledgeable in the use of Sraffian methods and the best we can do is to continue the Keynesian tradition. However, for a long time since the late 1960s, the hard reality seemed to disprove the critical approaches, because free market policies were successful. For years, the concept of effective demand has been ignored or trampled upon: most economists have become trapped in the tautologies of rational expectations or the adhockery of the “supply side,” while Keynesian policies appeared ineffective during the stagflation of the 1970s, and useless later, when economic growth took place with less (apparent) government intervention.