Explaining a joke always ruins the joke, but am I right to interpret your comment as the assumption that libertarians like imposing pain on the economy? Austerians and all that?
I would say somewhat the opposite. There is a libertine wing of the libertarian movement, which wing we can safely assume has a significant percentage of homosexuals and others with, shall we say, interesting views on sexuality. And I don't doubt that those libertines would readily agree that their libertinism does explain, in part, their libertarian politics and economics. David Shemano -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Eugene Coyle Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 12:15 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] the Ferguson files So does this mean your view is that that Libertarians are into Bondage and S & M? Gene On May 7, 2013, at 11:25 AM, David Shemano wrote: > I am far removed from academia, but isn't LGBT studies an accepted part of > the leftish canon? And isn't it inherent to the relevance of such studies > that the fact that one is LGBT is in turn relevant to what one writes or > thinks regarding literature, politics, etc.? So if so, would it not be > consistent with LGBT studies to try and connect Keynes' economic thinking to > his homosexuality? > > David Shemano > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine > Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 10:55 AM > To: Pen-l > Subject: [Pen-l] the Ferguson files > > from SLATE: > Niall Ferguson in 1995: Keynes' Homosexuality Caused His Views on the > Treaty of Versailles > > By Matthew Yglesias > > Posted Tuesday, May 7, 2013, at 10:44 AM > > Niall Ferguson has already apologized for saying over the weekend that John > Maynard Keynes' homosexuality was at the root of his views on fiscal policy, > but Brad DeLong has recovered a remarkable 1995 Spectator article in which > Ferguson alleges that Keynes' views on the Treaty of Versailles were also > caused by his homosexuality. In this case, Ferguson's view is less that > Keynes had a distinctive gay outlook on the issue, and more that a gay crush > on a German representative to the conference led him to adopt pro-German and > pro-inflation opinions. > > The article's conclusion: > >>> From 1919 onwards, for reasons which owed as much to emotion as economic >>> logic, he had repeatedly encouraged the Germans in their resistance to >>> Allied demands. He had heard and echoed their arguments at Versailles, >>> predicting currency depreciation, the dumping of German exports and the >>> westward march of Bolshevism as consequences of the treaty. He had shared >>> their dismay at the reparations total set in 1921, and predicted German >>> default from the outset. Even when he began to suspect that his friends >>> were exaggerating their fiscal difficulties, this only inclined him to egg >>> them on to a more confrontational strategy. Only when this ended in the >>> complete collapse of the currency did Keynes distance himself. > >>> All this sheds revealing light on Keynes's later views on inflation. >>> Those who see Keynesianism as, at root, an inflationary doctrine >>> will not perhaps be surprised; just as those familiar with >>> Bloomsbury will appreciate why Keynes fell so hard for the >>> representative of an enemy power. Only those-like Robert >>> Skidelsky-who seek to rescue his reputation as a monetary theorist >>> may find Keynes's conduct less easy to account for. << > > I have not read The Economic Consequences of the Peace, but am somewhat > familiar with the general debates at the time. My view of the situation is > that the whole question of an "enemy power" is actually the crux of the > dispute here. Keynes, in keeping with general liberal sentiments at the time > and vindicated by history, took the view that it was foolish for France and > Britain to try to treat Germany as an enemy-to-be-crushed rather than a > partner-to-be-rehabilitated. The only possible consequence of crushing the > German economy would be to compel the Germans to overthrow the treaty and > thus start a new war. > This is roughly what eventually happened, and obviously in the late-1940s the > Western allies took a different approach, which paid off. I don't know if any > key Truman administration advisors were seduced by sexy German conference > representatives. Perhaps someday we'll learn that was the real story of the > Marshall Plan, in which case I think we'd have to be thankful for the > emergence of a sentiment that could transcend petty nationalism. > > -- > Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way > and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
