The only way to understand Keynes is to only read the last sentence of each paragraph, accept his “conclusions” and ignore his argument. There was a theory extant when he was alive that he wrote it as a parody and the socialists and quasi socialists seized upon it because it seemed to justify their nonsense. Those last sentences were essentially unsupported by his argument and as English prose were nonsense. Incomplete sentences that run on for a page and the parts are inconsistent with each other. It makes a lot more sense to take Keynes’ work as that parody and when he was about to have a laugh he realized it SOLD and became then a Keynesian, himself. With all that acclaim he ran with it and the world got stuck with it.
To be candid, I have never managed to read any of his works because of the vast number of morons who enthusiastically endorse them.
Same with his followers like Kenneth Galbraith. Lots of formulas and equations but the entire theory is bunk. It rarely addresses the question of the alternatives. According to Keynes break that bread makers window and create demand for glass. Never mind the bread maker could have used that money to re-invest in his own business. The faulty theory is meant to be masked by complex equations.