Unlearningecon has asked on his twitter what ‘ring winger’ has the endogenous view on money.
“Of all the institutions within the framework of which the human actions described by economic science are performed, the existence of money-debts is doubtless one of the most important. Now, Money is the legal means of payment, i.e., its owner can use it for discharging debts.’ This is the only use in which it has no substitutes, for its very institutional character excludes that. On the worst of days, when all instruments of exchange fail us, when all markets and banks are closed, when the most liquid assets have become entirely illiquid, Money-and only Money -will still serve to discharge a debt.” (emphasis mine)
After posting this I realized there was another important ‘right winger’ that held the endogenous view, actually he is seen has one of the key figures of the endogenous view: Joseph Schumpeter. In his book The Theory of Economic Development, Schumpeter states:
“…[C]redit is essentially the creation of purchasing power for the purpose of transferring it to the entrepreneur, but not simply the transfer of existing purchasing power. The creation of purchasing power characterises, in principle, the method by which development is carried out in a system with private property and division of labour. By credit, entrepreneurs are given access to the social stream of goods before they have acquired the normal claim to it. It temporarily substitutes, as it were, a fiction of this claim for the claim itself.”
Steve Keen and Hyman Minsky both see Schumpeter as an important influence because of his view of endogenous money and growth. Minsky’s basic theory on financial systems, the Financial Instability Hypothesis, is arguably based on what Schumpeter states on endogenous growth.