Harvard Professor Trashes Keynes For Homosexuality by Tom Kostigen
(FA) May 3, 2013 * Harvard Professor and author Niall Ferguson says John Maynard Keynes’ economic philosophy was flawed and he didn’t care about future generations because he was gay and didn’t have children.
« click for bio
Speaking at the Tenth Annual Altegris Conference in Carlsbad, Calif., in front of a group of more than 500 financial advisors and investors, Ferguson responded to a question about Keynes’ famous philosophy of self-interest versus the economic philosophy of Edmund Burke, who believed there was a social contract among the living, as well as the dead. Ferguson asked the audience how many children Keynes had. He explained that Keynes had none because he was a homosexual and was married to a ballerina, with whom he likely talked of “poetry” rather than procreated. The audience went quiet at the remark. Some attendees later said they found the remarks offensive.
It gets worse.
Ferguson, who is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University, and author of The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die, says it’s only logical that Keynes would take this selfish worldview because he was an “effete” member of society. Apparently, in Ferguson’s world, if you are gay or childless, you cannot care about future generations nor society.
This takes gay-bashing to new heights. It even perversely pins the full weight of the financial crisis on the gay community and the barren.
Not only is this intellectually void, it’s mad. And anyone with a moral conscience should be outraged. It is one thing to take issue with a society fueled by self interest and one fueled by a larger ethic. But it’s entirely vulgar to make this argument about sexual preference — and to do so glibly.
Throughout his remarks, Ferguson referred to his “friends” in high places. They should all be embarrassed and ashamed of such a connection to such small-minded thinking. Ferguson says U.S. laws and institutions have become degenerate. Rather, I dare say, it’s Ferguson’s arguments which are.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Theo van Gogh and film Submission
(The Guardian) – She arrived in the Netherlands as an asylum seeker and became a fiery critic of both multiculturalism and her own religion, Islam. Then last November the director of a film she wrote about the subjugation of Muslim women was killed, sparking a crisis over the country’s attitudes to immigration. In her first British interview since the murder, Ayaan Hirsi Ali talks to Alexander Linklater
« click for Dutch article
My opinion is that I do not care about his nonsense about Keynes being gay. Niall has been one of the most wrong public “intellectuals” of the decade. I didn’t see his comments as insidious homophobia – although it was, as he tried using people’s prejudices about homosexuality to make a point in favor of austerity. It’s fairly standard Ferguson-style: lose the argument, fall back on xenophobia/racial/homophobic slur to marginalize opponents. I do, however, see it as an opportunity to make people think he should exit stage left. The world would be better off if he resigned from Harvard and went into retirement.
He’s always been a grasping and vain tosser and only regrets he missed out on being Thatcher’s poodle. His history of the Great War is sensationalist and contrarian bollocks. He would be a total sell-out if he could only find a buyer.
Note that he was appointed to his Harvard chair during Lawrence Summers term as President of Harvard.
Not only was Niall’s comment consistent with what he’s said in the past, it’s not even original to him. It’s what anti-Keynesian “economists” use to discredit Keynes and therefore, his economics because they can’t prove that Keynes was wrong.
EuroTrib link. Sorry for the omission.