408 WORLD POLITICS the IPE of money,also establish landmarks around which competing schools of thought will organize.Cohen,the thoughtful liberal,trusts markets but understands that monetary phenomena have inescapably political consequences.Strange,the skeptical Keynesian,recognizes the indispensable power and efficiency of markets but sees a monetary order reeling from political conflict and ubiquitous market failure. From these distinct perspectives,each author provides a new roadmap for navigating the international political space transformed by the ascendance of money.They also remind us why so many of the great economists,including Ricardo,Marx,Marshall,Keynes,Schum- peter,Myrdal,and Hayek,dedicated much of their efforts to the study of monetary phenomena.Deceptively theoretical debates about money-its definition,management,and idiosyncrasies-are typically rooted in fundamental conceptions of politics and society. Ultimately,however,and perhaps necessarily,these books raise more questions than they answer.But they do suggest a direction for the most promising avenues of investigation-toward the study of the unique interconnections between the ideas,material interests,and in- stitutions associated with the management of money.Those relation- ships are profoundly consequential for politics and demand the renewed attention of contemporary scholars of international relations and political economy.Cohen,and more explicitly Strange,clearly ac- knowledge the importance of ideas in monetary affairs.Cohen reminds the reader that money derives its very value from shared social conven- tions,indeed,"has no meaning at all except with reference to the mu- tual confidence that makes its use possible"(p.11).Strange is even more pointed,asserting that the basic differences between competing economic theories are"not technical but political"(p.190). But while the role of ideas is an important implicit foundation of these volumes,neither takes on the issue in a systematic way,largely be- cause each has a dominant theme.These themes,refected in their re- spective titles,provide the nominal touchstone for their analyses.This article,therefore,proceeds in two parts.The first part considers Geog- rapby and Mad Money on their own terms,concentrating on the themes stressed by the authors.The second part of the article then explores what is left implicit by these volumes-the need for a renewed atten- tion to ideology and politics in explaining monetary phenomena. This latter part of the article first shows how ideas can play a unique role in shaping monetary phenomena.It then argues that this matters because those ideas can mask distributional conflicts.Fundamentally political struggles about money,that is,are routinely cloaked in eco-the IPE of money, also establish landmarks around which competing schools of thought will organize. Cohen, the thoughtful liberal, trusts markets but understands that monetary phenomena have inescapably political consequences. Strange, the skeptical Keynesian, recognizes the indispensable power and efficiency of markets but sees a monetary order reeling from political conflict and ubiquitous market failure. From these distinct perspectives, each author provides a new roadmap for navigating the international political space transformed by the ascendance of money. They also remind us why so many of the great economists, including Ricardo, Marx, Marshall, Keynes, Schum￾peter, Myrdal, and Hayek, dedicated much of their efforts to the study of monetary phenomena. Deceptively theoretical debates about money—its definition, management, and idiosyncrasies—are typically rooted in fundamental conceptions of politics and society. Ultimately, however, and perhaps necessarily, these books raise more questions than they answer. But they do suggest a direction for the most promising avenues of investigation—toward the study of the unique interconnections between the ideas, material interests, and in￾stitutions associated with the management of money. Those relation￾ships are profoundly consequential for politics and demand the renewed attention of contemporary scholars of international relations and political economy. Cohen, and more explicitly Strange, clearly ac￾knowledge the importance of ideas in monetary affairs. Cohen reminds the reader that money derives its very value from shared social conven￾tions, indeed, “has no meaning at all except with reference to the mu￾tual confidence that makes its use possible” (p. 11). Strange is even more pointed, asserting that the basic differences between competing economic theories are “not technical but political” (p. 190). But while the role of ideas is an important implicit foundation of these volumes, neither takes on the issue in a systematic way, largely be￾cause each has a dominant theme. These themes, reflected in their re￾spective titles, provide the nominal touchstone for their analyses. This article, therefore, proceeds in two parts. The first part considers Geog￾raphy and Mad Money on their own terms, concentrating on the themes stressed by the authors. The second part of the article then explores what is left implicit by these volumes—the need for a renewed atten￾tion to ideology and politics in explaining monetary phenomena. This latter part of the article first shows how ideas can play a unique role in shaping monetary phenomena. It then argues that this matters because those ideas can mask distributional conflicts. Fundamentally political struggles about money, that is, are routinely cloaked in eco- 408 WORLD POLITICS