Could the “Friedmanite” idea that monetary policy should not be countercyclical make a comeback?

Since the 1980s, monetary policy has been used countercyclically: to keep inflation at bay in periods of full employment, to combat unemployment in recessions, to increase the employment rate after recessions when it is deemed too low. But it is now apparent that this countercyclical use of monetary policy has many drawbacks: The absence of any effect of monetary policy on inflation; The financial instability caused by the use of expansionary monetary policies to lift employment; The irreversibility of expansionary monetary policies once they have been introduced (due to the rise in debt and in asset prices that they cause). Should we not then be thinking about a return to a “Friedmanite” view of monetary policy , i.e. that it is not a countercyclical instrument , but should be conducted with a long-term objective (the provision of a suitable level of liquidity, the absence of financial instability with slow and steady growth in asset prices, etc.)?