The paper attempts at unifying the criticism of "classical dichotomy" made by J. A. Schumpeter and J. M. Keynes. Though Schumpeter's vision was that of the developing economy, with money being an important source of that development, while Keynes dealt primarily with an economy in a state of depression, Keynes's criticism is conjectured to presuppose the existence of the Schumpeterian world in the background, because only in this case can money play an active role by linking the past, present, and future. When the situation is that of Schumpeterian "circular flow", there is indeed a case for "classical dichotomy". Examples from the Japanese economy are cited to illustrate the theoretical points.