—John Maynard Keynes—
Economics From A
Homosexual Worldview

Dateline: 31 August 2013

I was listening to Why Economic Recovery is Impossible at Generations With Vision radio back on August 20th. The show is an excellent interview with Christian-economist, Dennis Peacocke about his recently-published book, On The Destiny of Nations: Resolving Our Economic Crisis. I bought the book, I read it, and I have mixed feelings about it, which I'll write about here in a future blog post. For now, I want to focus on John Maynard Keynes, who is credited with being the architect of our current global economic system.

From that radio interview I learned of a prior Generations radio interview with Dennis Peacocke titled, Doing Business God's Way, which I also listened to. At one point in that interview Dennis Peacocke says that John Maynard Keynes was a "flaming homosexual." After making it clear that he is not homophobic (he's theophobic), Mr. Peacocke said:

"The issue with Keynesian economics is that the homosexual community, in general, is not interested in generational transfer. That is, the accumulation of capital across family lines. And biblical economics is all driven by generational transfer. That is how God expects us to pass on skills to our children, who are then able to build off what we have created. The Keynesian economic model is debt-driven, and it basically assumes that a current generation has the right, if not the responsibility, to consume whatever level of assets it wants, even if it has to borrow from the future—borrow from children and grandchildren, born and unborn, in order to support that consumption level."

Biblical economics is driven by "generational transfer." That, in itself, really piqued my interest, and needs to be better understood, but I was downright intrigued by that "flaming homosexual" comment. 

What exactly is a flaming homosexual? Well, I would suppose it to be an openly "gay" person who is a promiscuous sodomizer, and whose conscience is seared.

With that in mind, I checked the Wikipedia page for John Maynard Keynes, and it appears that he truly was  a flaming homosexual. 

Now, it matters not a whit to me what Keynes did in his private life, but I was powerfully intrigued by the idea of how his homosexual worldview related to his now-dominant economic theory. Dennis Peacocke alluded to the connection between Keynes's moral depravity and his economics in the radio interview. Indeed, that was his reason for mentioning the homosexuality of Keynes in the first place.

My curiosity led me to do a Google search of "homosexual worldview." I found my way to Gospel Analysis of The Gay Worldview, by Dustin Conner. I found it to be an interesting read. Here's a pertinent snippet:

"The gay worldview largely reflects a post-modern mindset when it comes to knowledge. Knowledge is gained primarily through desires and inclinations that feel normal to each individual."

Well, that's interesting. My biblical worldview tells me that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7). But I'm well aware that I'm countercultural in that respect. Then the Gay Worldview essay states:

"In a gay worldview, the individuals ethic is defined not by a transcendent universal code to be adhered to by all, but is instead defined by the preference of an individual or a specific community."

So, in other words, in the homosexual worldview, there is no higher moral authority than preference or feelings.  If it feels good, if it pleases me, then it is morally good. Instead of God giving mankind standards of righteousness to live by and to order civilization, the homosexual worldview believes that humans can make up their own standards of right and wrong. 

That was the worldview of John Maynard Keynes, and that is exactly what he did when he applied his worldview to economics.

In one of those aforementioned radio interviews, Dennis Peacocke makes the statement that there are fundamental God-created, economic laws (akin to physical laws, like gravity) that can not be broken. He then pointed out that we don't break God's laws...they break us. The point being, when men and societies stray from the transcendental truths of God's word, there will be a price to pay. Thus, economically speaking, our civilization will pay a heavy price for following the economic theory of John Maynard Keynes. 

After I received Dennis Peacocke's book and got to reading it, I found more discussion about Keynes:

"I am citing [the homosexuality of Keynes], not out of moral concerns in this discussion, but rather out of the obvious effects his orientation had on his view of economic theory. He clearly cared very little for future generations, based on the debt levels he was willing to create for them by borrowing from the current generations, hoping to create added employment through government spending or higher levels of consumption to stimulate the economy. The point of these effects relative to his sexual orientation was that his parental concerns or views regarding children were non-existent in his conversations, and his books featured strong attacks on the "traditional life-styles" as he called them, of traditional society and traditional family morals."

The Bible makes it clear that actions have consequences. Actions are based on beliefs. Beliefs are built on fundamental presuppositions about the world we live in, about our origins, about what is true, about reality, which is to say that beliefs come out of a person's worldview. I find it fascinating that an economic theory, based on the perverted worldview of one man could be so universally accepted.

But the more important thing to be considering is what kind of economic system should prevail when the Keynesian economy finally collapses.


Sunnybrook Farm said...

As I remember from economics class back in the 70s(so I may be wrong LOL), Keynesian economics is all about the economy and money supply being based on debt rather than a positive value of some kind. It comes from a progressive outlook I believe and may go hand in hand with homosexual outlook, I don't know. But our tax system and laws encourage people to spend to be in debt rather than to save for the future. I think it is a progressive debt based theory that may happen to fit a homosexual life style though some probable have children from prior life styles or what ever, they aren't all alike but debt based economists are, they all favor spending, it is a good thing.

Gorges Smythe said...

I guess that would explain Clinton and Obama (confused, but heavily Keynesian), since I've always heard they swing both ways.

shannon templeton said...

It seems to me that the economic system that prevails when Keynesian economy finally collapses will depend on who survives the crash.

Herrick Kimball said...


That seems logical.

In one of those Peacocke interviews he states that earlier this year he attended a meeting with many top economists in the world and they were united in the opinion that we've never been in the economic situation we now find ourselves, and no one knew how to get out of it.

The analogy of the Titanic, headed at full speed towards the iceberg, was used and it seems appropriate. I can imagine the economists gathered on the bow hoping to come up with some miracle solution at the last minute to prevent the inevitable.

Meanwhile, some of the more aware passengers already donned their life vests, got in the lifeboats, and are off in the distance watching.

Cynthia (C.L) Lewis said...

Stop the world... I want to get off!

Herrick Kimball said...


We were born for such a time as this.

Joseph Burkholder Wesley said...

Dear Sir,
I am very disappointed that you chose to go this route with your blog. I have found your blog inspirational and informative over the last few years as I look for ways to become more self sufficient and attempt to provide a more just and responsible food source for my family. My goal is eventually to own a small farm and have a larger hand in the production of the meat and vegetables we consume. That said it was painful to read the malevolent piece that you wrote and quoted about Keynes. I agree that the economic road this nation has chosen is one of ultimate destruction. We are in for turbulent times ahead because of the folly of our economic gurus and self serving politicians regardless of their political persuasion but to refer to it as a homosexual problem or homosexual world view is offensive. I would agree that it is a self serving world view with little concern for the poor or the orphaned or the widowed or future generations for that matter but homosexual? I am a “homosexual” I am partnered with a man and have been for 10 years. We have four adopted children two girls and two boys. We attend church weekly, we pray, and we teach our children right from wrong. We met in an “ex-gay” organization (google exodus international) which was a Christian organization designed to help people who were Christians and struggle with their sexuality to leave the “lifestyle”. Of course we were taught homosexuals were people who lived deviant and perverted lifestyles and had random flings with others in dark alleys and in seedy bars. And while there are surely people like that, just as there are morally repugnant heterosexuals, that stereotype does not define us. It is a terrible misrepresentation of us and of the many gay people we know. Sure if you turn on the television is it wrought with sickening sexuality and most sitcoms these days center around the characters sex life, (the main reason we do not allow TV to be piped into our home) but that is a Godless culture that has no desire to adhere to any authority other than there on feelings and urges. That is not a gay world view or Hollywood world view that is just a world view that leaves God out of the equation. As a man who has struggled for decades with my sexuality and wrestled with scripture and faith for years, I was disheartened to see that you a professing Christian would stoop to this level. Not that you shouldn’t bring this authors ideas on Keynes to the blog for thought and debate but rather that you were okay with allowing it to be a homosexual worldview rather than just a worldview that leaves God out of the equation. Any world view that refuses to submit to God is headed for destruction but we are all lawbreakers and as you well know if you have offended at one point of Gods law then you have offended at all points of God’s law. No matter how “moral” you try to be you are lost without Christ’s atoning sacrifice. I am not trying to convince you that homosexuality is right or wrong but rather I would appreciate if you would refrain from exacerbating the common Christian practice of scapegoating homosexuals as the problem. I respect your right to disagree and it is your blog but I have enjoyed reading it through the years and would like to continue to read it.
Joe from New Hampshire

Herrick Kimball said...

Hi Joe,

Thanks for writing. This blog has a diversity of readers and your response is not unexpected. I'm sorry you took it personally and are offended. It was not written to be offensive. But I would probably take it personally if I were you too.

As a Christian, my worldview is based on God's word. As a Christian, I love what God loves and I hate what God hates. Nowhere in scripture do I see even a hint that God approves of homosexuality. What I see is that homosexuality is a particularly grievous offense to God. He directed that people be put to death for practicing homosexuality. He destroyed cities because of homosexuality.

Personally, I have family and friends that are homosexual. As offensive as homosexuality is to me, I would never want to see homosexuals put to death for their sin. But that's me. God evidently sees it differently. A lot differently.

You don't have to justify your sin to me and be upset with me because I believe God's word and his law is holy and righteous. I don't count. I'm nobody. You've got bigger problems, my friend.

Yes, we've all broken God's law, and we are all sinners, and Jesus Christ paid the penalty of eternal death for the sins of those who believe in Him. But conviction and repentance (turning away from sin) naturally come with salvation. Such things are the evidences of salvation and true relationship with Jesus Christ.

To commit to continuing in a blatantly obvious sin, thinking that God will "wink" at your sin and "give you a pass" is , In my opinion, theologically twisted. Nowhere in scripture is that kind of thinking supported. Christians are told to put away sin, to turn from sin, to flee from sin, in our continuing journey of sanctification in this life.

I won't say that I understand the inner struggle and angst you have regarding this sin you are enslaved to. But I know it is there, and I know it is real. I've heard the same from others.

I wish you the very best.

Daniel said...

Hi Herrick

You might find this related article interesting. http://kevinforcongress.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mises-132nd-birthday.html