Being gay and childless led economist John Maynard Keynes to push short-term-oriented economic policy, asserted British commentator Niall Ferguson over the weekend. After a Twitter spasm of ire, Ferguson apologized pretty thoroughly.
For one thing, Keynes and his wife reportedly lost a child to miscarriage. For another thing, Keynes’ “in the long run, we’re all dead,” line doesn’t quite have the “Eat, Drink, and Be Merry, for Tomorrow we Die” sense Ferguson assigned to it (and which I had previously understood it to mean).
While Ferguson was wrong, it’s not wrong to posit a link from a thinker’s sexuality and family values to his or her economics and politics. These things are often intertwined.
Wendell Berry wrote on it very well in his essay, “Sex, Economy, Freedom, and Community.” Joseph Schumpeter discussed it well in Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy:
Liberal writer Jeet Heer also says the two are intertwined:
Yes, sexuality is tied up with economics and politics. Keynes understood this. “Sex Problems are Political, Keynes Holds” — that was the headline after a speech the economist gave.
Keynes argued the “economic problem” could be “solved” if we “control population.”
How sex and economics relate is complex. It’s a good topic to discuss. But, Prof. Ferguson, let’s start by getting our facts straight.
