 First of all, I want to launch a preemptive strike against any critics By I might accuse this talk of being ad hominem First place the ad hominem fallacy is that you attack instead of attacking the doctrine of the person you attack the person And that's fallacious because it doesn't that doesn't refute the argument. I've never been a favor of that I've always been a favor of refuting the doctrine and then going on to attack the person That's not an ad hominem fallacy Also, but I'm gonna talk about the person of Cain's I think is related directly to his ideas And so I think it's it's also important historically what sort of a person he was and how that did relate to his ideas Okay, first thing I'm gonna start by saying that Cain's his favorite political philosopher might surprise many of you Do what was? It was Edmund Burke An interesting question, why was Edmund Burke why here's somebody who's the the Edmund Burke the Darling of conservatives or neo-conservatives or whatever and here's Cain's it was certainly not conservative in that sense one would think He liked he was a little bit more democratic than Burke if of course for Burke was an 18th century Working in 18th century political system, which is hardly democratic. So if you're more democratic than Burke doesn't say much He was also thought that Burke left out some of the great political ideas or great ideologies that statesmen should pursue But the three basic reasons why he liked Burke a lot We're precisely by the way three basic reason why I disliked Burke First place He liked the fact that Burke was opposed to Abstract principles Cain's always hated principle goal of his life. He said one time he said in the speech or testimony I'm afraid of principle Per se that is And he was against principles in particularly was against individual rights and first Burke was against individual rights But Burke believed in expediency against as against abstract natural rights And this is one of the great reasons why Cain's liked them now There are certain Burke theorists who claim that Burke really really did believe in individual rights I don't agree with them. But the point is I'm talking about like why Cain's like Burke So Cain's like Burke one because he was against principles and particularly against abstract individual rights to You like Burke because Burke was in favor of focusing on present Unpresent goods and ignoring future benefits future goals That was Burke's conservatism The fact that Burke didn't like the idea of any kind of change or radical change because he worried about future consequences Which we wouldn't know this is a short-term position of course This is fits in with Cain's admiration for the short run hatred of the long run So Cain's idea the long run rule dead fits in with a Berkian idea. You should concentrate on current present Questions of present course and not worry about not consider future benefits too much So in other words Burke essentially Burke's political philosophy was a high-time preference philosophy as was Cain's whole outlook was very much a favor present Benefits present goods as against future As Cain's put it quote it is the paramount duty of governments And of politicians to secure the well-being of the community under the case in the present and Not to run risks over much for the future So the present orientation fits into the same with Cain's short-run orientation Thirdly admire the fact that Burke believed and ruled by an organic organically arrived at elite a ruling class ruling a lead of British establishment big shots and for since King's was a British establishment big shot. Let's fit in beautifully with Kings his world outlook It's came to coat Cain's the machine itself. I mean the British state the machine itself people. I'm quoting from skedelsky on Cain's the machine itself he believes to be sound enough if only the ability and integrity of those in charge of it could be assured That's the key and somebody said that this week this weekend that Who cares about I mean the state is great Who cares about you shouldn't have restrictions and government rule the state is great provider That we know that people in charge of what a great guys people of integrity and ability and separate sector Which of course means they organically arrived at British ruling elite IE himself Okay, so this these three things I think Mark Cain's throw out his his life short-run attack on principal and individual rights and belief in the ruling elite with himself among it Okay, Cain starts off first of all his whole His whole life is born of a silver spoon in his mouth so to speak. He was his father was a big shot at Cambridge John Neville Cain's was a controller at Cambridge Cain Bridge for many years He also was also very important for Cain's development and career and his father was a was that it was a close friend of Alfred Marshall And also Marshall had certain obligations. He felt he had certain obligations to Cain's namely that the Neville Because apparently Neville was a close friend of Cain's a promising scholar, but never accomplished much The scholarly output was almost nil. He wrote a book on methodology which was sort of a pedestrian book on methodology And it didn't write anything else and as often happens in academia. If you can't write anything you go into an academic administration So he became a Controller financial controller of Cambridge. So and so Marshall always felt that Marshall was not in his own right. Okay going to that but anyway Marshall always felt that He had a certain extra obligation to Neville They didn't have to other people because the Neville didn't accomplish didn't achieve what he's supposed to have achieved and so this obligation Went on was placed on young Maynard and so when Maynard Got out of Cambridge and after it was a clerk in the office for a while Marshall was going to retire make sure that Before he retired the Cain's got a post as a lecturer in economics at his old college Cain's college Cambridge And part half of the salary was paid by Cambridge the other half was paid by his father John Neville So this is how Cain started off an academia. Oh, I can't only had one term in economics When he started lecturing in economics, you know, he'd taken one course in Marshall This is probably was not unusual at the time in British academia. It's still kind of peculiar. However He knew very little economics to begin with and Marshall he wrote me read Marshall's principles He learned on the job so to speak on the job training and The red Marshall's principle we had Marshall's oral tradition. In other words as evidence before royal commissions and his unpublished papers That's essentially it a Key thing about Cain's also just come out in recent years He was a member and leader of us of the secret society of the Apostles the Cambridge Apostles Very powerful in group at Cambridge and the thing is it wasn't just a college fraternity group It met it met for the rest of Cain's life In other words, they have continual meetings until till Cain's die to go back to Cambridge have these have meetings and sessions, etc etc and his first characteristic that comes out of Cain's Cain's attitudes at the and the Apostles and everywhere else is First place Cain's is constant Emphasis on personal power on domination including Up to brutal domination of his fellow people or friends involved. In other words power and dominance for the key to his personal relationships The second of all he was very interested in philosophy philosophy ruled his his life and the and the philosophy which which he adopted The philosophy of GE Moore and David Gordon has mentioned this before but I'm not I'm not interested not so much in more himself But in Cain's interpretation of Moore and Cain's reaction to it Moore was also a Cambridge Apostle and all close friends of this in this group and the the philosophy which seemed to the dominate Cain's was a Bitter attack on bourgeois morality. This is the key to Cain's life and thought an attack on any kind of Conventional or middle class of bourgeois morality both in personal matters sexual matters and ideological matters so It's an attack on heterosexuality is inferior attack on thrift It's like on bourgeois family life and the whole business And shrimp haters sort of allude to this and it's sort of a subtle fashion by constantly talking about Cain's childless vision and So Cain's episode on a short run a short run hedonism, etc. That's being a key to to life So the attack on thrift starts from the very beginning in this attack and of course culminates in his Call for the use in Asia the Montier class the Murtley mercy killing of the creditor class Which are the first the epitome of bourgeois life is the thrifty creditor and thrifty saver Okay his interpretation of GE Moore They keep referring they will know more than I do about this they keep referring to Moore as a pure More tremendous personal charisma apparently with Cain's everybody else and they keep referring to his purity of his intellect I think he was pure so like a living embodiment of pure intellect He had no small talk. He would make sort of crazed statements to me sounds like a nutty poser But what do I know? I'm that that's it wasn't it's not not my type of guy It's sort of that way any right. He seemed to impress everybody else at King's College Cambridge and when Moore wrote the Proccipia Ethica in 1903 Cain's said in retrospect and said at the time so we have two checks here in other words He said this is the great revelation Recruiting from Cain's the book was exciting and exhilarating the beginning of a new Renaissance the opening of a new heaven on earth Talking about Cain's millennialism. That's interesting phrase here That's that's what he said in retrospect about the 30 years later and he was talking about Wikipedia ethical at the time he said it was stupendous and trancing the greatest book on the subject wondrous and original original a true theory of ethics The Now it seems to be that the true theory of ethics basically was or at least the way Cain's interpreted it With a rejection of bourgeois morality and rejection of any kind of general rules Cain's hated most of all in life is general rules and Ethical rules or any so any other sort of rules and therefore emphasis on personal Personal when personal can preach personal will I think it fits in with Cain's entire will to power and He felt that any general rules were limiting limited the freedom Freedom to power on part of the individual so So the shift of personal ethics personal friendship personal love personal Beauty contemplation of beauty and things of that sort as against obeying any sort of general rules More by the way, that's sort of interesting reflection of the Moore's attack on bourgeois morality or any any kind of moral principle One of his famous statements was From Moore quote we should spread skepticism until the last everyone knows we can know absolutely nothing Sounds self-contradictory to me And again, he stressed the perfect love of friendship as being a key the only thing we can bank on only thing only goes in life Here's the way Cain's looked back on it on the Moore circle Years later. He said we entirely repudiated a personal liability on us to obey general rules This was a very important part of our faith Interesting words their faith violently and aggressively held and for the outer world was our most obvious and dangerous characteristic We repudiated entirely can customary morals conventions and traditional wisdom we were it is that is to say in the strict sense of the term immoralists And at the age of 55 in the evil World War two Cain said the more that the more I creed is still quote my religion under the surface. I remain and always will remain an immoralist unquote and Cain's also wrote that one of the greatest advantages of Moore's theory was it made morals unnecessary That's an interesting comments on the more on the more right circle including Cain's at the time Beatrice Webb Talking about more and the more people pushing them very well He said the whole doctrine the whole ethical doctrine which they pursued was quote nothing but a metaphysical Justification for doing what you like doing what you like what other people and what other people disapprove of quote Also right keen insight. I think there's a more more circle Bertrand Russell was also an apostle Cambridge apostle and these people very well And what he said is that Cain's in the other group Cain's straight she and the other more people quote aim rather the life of Retirement among fine shades and new and nuanced and nice feelings He's made more fine shades and no nice feelings and conceived of a good that's consisting in the Consisting of a it's conceived of a good it's consisting of the passionate mutual admirations of a clique of the elite Unco I think that beautiful summation of more right doctrine and more I practice at the time The passionate mutual admirations of a clique of the elite of course they will a clique of the elite Now one interesting thing is apparently Cain's also said the one chapter in Moore's pre-Kippy ethical Which they ignored was this I think ten ultimate chapter called the ethics in relation to conduct When Moore tries to set up general rules, and this is what they disregarded So Now another fascinating thing in the Skidelsky book about about Cain's is apparently as David mentioned the first From I say 1904 to 1914 Believe it is Cain's his whole leisure time was devoted to his treatise on probability of thinking about probability and writing the book The book was published in 1921 but was written before the war so And apparently the reason why he arrived at this was he was trying to destroy general rules In other words basically he's trying to destroy the idea of general rules of conduct and general causal rules and Causal rules in general so Moore had apparently fallen back on a frequentus theory of probability in other words fall back on Probabilistic causal doctrine where you say well at least something is probable and therefore you go on that basis so Cain's being against the idea of a Realistic cause an effect cause the fact in the real world Came to the conclusion no now we have to eliminate the frequentus theory because at least there that's that's too realistic We have to claim the probability theory is purely logical in our priori so we have our priori logic Which then is no relation to the real world. There was no relation to individual individual instances so even if for example, I let's say the the Probability of a whole two-spot on a dice is one sixth on a die one sixth You have to say there's nothing to do an individual die-throwing. See this cuts any relationship So the probabilities is pure logical a priorism has nothing to do with the real world This eliminates any any threat the real world might be governed in some sense by general rules So in other words this whole treatise on probability is essentially part of a more right attack on general principles general rules By the way Richard von Mises living when Mises brother was the great developer of the frequentus theory of probability And little big took it over in human action. You know, he doesn't he apparently disliked his brother intensely They're not really admit it, but I Think I think that was that's pretty clear Okay having done this and by the way another thing about Keynes is personal and ideological cultural life as he gets involved in the 19 teens in that period Also 1920s of the Bloomsbury set I think somebody they even mentioned this yesterday or somebody else and the boom very settled also Virginia Wolf and Leonard Wolf and Vanessa Bell and these people was mostly King's College and other Cambridge people I was all of them the males course were Cambridge people even females and going to I think the Pemberton College in Cambridge and Their whole life and their whole writings were essentially a tax on bourgeois morality It was the whole point of the whole business and so it all fits into the To the King's person lifestyle and ideology In 1913 he gets his first He become a bit on the end. I should say first place. He was in the work in the Indio office before he gets back to Cambridge Keynes in 19 He graduates in 1906 and he goes into the Indio office as a clerk and Goes back in 1908 gets his position partially pay for my father and He becomes an India currency and finance expert now typical this by way of course is typical of British attitude to India in general It's not just Keynes And all of his work in the Indio office He had never expressed the slightest interest whatsoever in the Indians and their British imperialism and the colonialism anything That sort of the idea of British rule as a natural developments Just you know, just just assumed it. It also showed never no interest whatsoever and ever visiting India as an indie expert This is this by my typical also true also James and mill and John Stewart mill both indie experts both rulers of East India company never had any any intention whatsoever visiting India The floor was important to visit it At any rate and as Joe slano said he was a very beginning against the gold standard in favor of Managed credit and expansionary credit In 1913 he gets his first big government post as a royal commission on Indian current finance and currency and He's put in there by Edwin his friend Edwin Montague who was as his a patron and mentor way back in college and he and he writes his defense of the gold exchange stand as a reaction to the Great Montague silver scandal at the time and Montague as Relatives and friends and how much of other people involved in a big a big scandal He defended the scandal as and try to defend them as a Honorable on a citizen of the separate any rate and this this this Indian currency was a part of that part of that move And of course he calls for the gradual elimination of gold standard as Joe said There's an interesting phrase here in his book. He's in his book in the infancy currency says Gold is a quote a relic of a time when governments were less trustworthy in these matters than they are now In other words that what you need is good people trustworthy people to run the thing And then you don't have to have a gold standard trustworthy people of course meaning the English ruling elite That is including himself This of course then we get in the general theory that gold was a barbers relic He also called a book for a central bank in India bussings of central bank and Again he wanted a discretionary monetary policy, which would not be limited by general rules There was a key thing a theme in Keynesian doctrine and As a result of this He gets to know Sir Basil Blackwell. I was secretary of the Royal Commission in India When World War one comes immediately gets a key post in the Treasury it goes off and they have a fame and fame and fortune And that's the theme I think I want to stress in Keynesian doctrine is in Keynesian life in doctrine is his personal arrogance Incredibly arrogant which goes along with his will to power and including in his arrogance There's his willingness to have a systemic use of lies in the seat in order to gain his ends The One of the things by the way what which have not been noted at the time and now is this Quick change of viewpoint. He was a passionate free trader for a long time They suddenly becomes a passion of protectionist and he shifts back to passion of free trade And he was attacked in the English press in the early 1930s for being an economic acrobat India rubber man and a boneless man For this swift changes position First of all in all these positions in favor of government management and second of all, of course He was a the build of power to him as much more important than these these rules which you know, we can be can be shifted well In fact, he went so far to attack truth and politics even in general Is a quote from Keynes a preference for truth or for sincerity is a method may be a prejudice Based on some aesthetic or personal standard Inconsistent in politics with a general with the practical good So the people people's like of liking improve is just some sort of queer aesthetic It obviously comes back to bourgeois morality, which could be should be tossed over by statesmen in one of Asian and public welfare Also, there's a hint there that Keynes was a favor of Exaggeration on lies while he was out of power when he gets into power he wants to be more prudent He says at one point words ought to be a little wild But after after after he gets in the power quote that should be no more poetic license the Harry Johnson points out in his book on Cane's a case was always always convinced on any issue whatsoever Whatever it happens to be that no one was doing anything about it We also have serious the problem was no one else was doing anything about it if they were they were wrong Only Keynes was right and he can see rule question So Keynes was right and every question not because he had a general consistent principle because we've seen we've seen he hasn't But because he was right he was he was the superior elite person with the will to power The He believed apparently I just call Keynes an egomaniac and believe that he could he could conquer any problem quickly And come to the right conclusions on it He is typical of Keynes for example He told Hayek is a famous thing among Hayekians and anyway He's told Hayek at the end of his life If his disciples went too far with inflation and public debt he could always change things around he just snapped his fingers and everything would shift Unfortunately Keynes died and left us with his long run The we're now living in the Keynesian long run he's happily dead the Typical to be the most typical thing about it and Keynes intellectual hour is ever it was fought intellectual irresponsibility was the way he When he and he reviewed Mises money and credit when he came out in German He was an editor of the economic journal for many years and as an editor he reviewed in a short book note and But he said about the book with something like that is very short He said well, this is very it's a useful book the authors of the highest highest enlightened view something like that Which I don't quite know what that means any with highest enlightened views, but the book is a disappointing because there's nothing original in it That's why he summed it up and whatever you think of Mises theory of money and credit was blazingly original But the one thing he can't say about it was just the old trite stuff So he writes in his treatise on money 20 years later in a footnote that well, you know, he doesn't really know German He knows German fairly well, but he only knows German enough to understand ideas that he already knows He can't understand he can't understand any new ideas I want I want you to kind of play for a moment. They the Hutzpah the unmitigated Unmitigated goal of somebody with mitzvah. He doesn't know German well enough to understand any new ideas and then attack Mises for not having any new ideas That's I mean only Keynes can do that Okay, also I Think his certainly a strategy and the general theory was out of a chronic liar I think no no other way you can put it for example He says in general theory and he talks about history of thought she does quite a bit in there And nobody before him even worried about unemployment much less thought about it He was the only one he John Maynard Keynes the only one ever to think about unemployment and worry about it think about the solution He lives in a time of force that everybody before him he called classical economists Sneer he lived at a time when when when Hayek and with Hayek's doctrines were have become important precisely because of the tackle the unemployment Problem whether you read with it or not He knew that also he knew about Austrian theory at least tackling unemployment probably knew about the pigoo and so forth Oh, I'm not talking about unemployment yet. He had the goal to claim. He was the first one ever thinking about it and unfortunately most Economists since Keynes are not steeped in history of economic thought not one of the great strengths of the profession It died out almost because as the economists began to think of economics as like physics If you're a physicist, you don't really bother dealing with 18th century physics And so he got away with it He managed to persuade most of the profession and nobody but before before Keynes worried about unemployment or how many any solution Offer any theory to offer about it That I think is the most flagrant case of obvious lie. There's no no way you can get around that and he also He also lied about say his law He's here again, everybody takes us as gospel and everybody to find say his law Sites it as being quote supply creates its own demand that is not say his law first of all say for it's never even said anything like it But the point is it says law as huck points out is that supply of X? Constitutes of demand for YZ et cetera something it's not that the supply of peaches creates a demand for peaches The supply of peaches creates it a man for other products a peach seller will then buy other things So by misstating say's law and making him seem like a loony law he then of course can easily refute it this is called a straw man tactic and Unfortunately most of most historians of economic thought of taking this as gospel she says law says The only thing they've done since Keynes to put it in the math Put say's law the math say did not use any mathematics say was a very sound on a mathematical economics question He also said that well this might be a common fact He might not have lied about this he might he might have been honestly an error about Malthus Malthus was a pre-Keynesian. It's true. We're worried about underconsumption But you know he was only a pre-Keynesian for about three years after the Napoleonic Wars and the recession after that After that he bounced back and rubbed the underconsumption stuff So then he ready to give him a possible lie of that but can't can't prove it Okay, now we get to Keynes's personal style Edition was Systemic lying in the seat itself personal style kind of very interesting Basically as the Johnson's point out he flattered his students outrageously But if you if you were a student he'd say any dumb thing you said he said yes There's a great point there. So he's very charming and flattering with students thereby gathering their loyalty and his Vicious, well, my name is colleagues In public and was he denounced he's show up his colleagues being stupid in front of the common students Probably the most vicious single thing he's done. I'm not an expert. I'm how vicious he was but At least to me one of my single vicious things that Keynes did was this way he treated his old buddy Dennis Robertson DH Robertson who was a former student and colleague at Cambridge was a much better economist than Keynes But one of the things about Robertson was he was extremely and painfully shy even in a period of very shy academics of Accentrics and all that he was he stood out. He said almost almost pathologically shy For example, can't Robertson would write out all of his lectures That's often done in those days. He'd write every word out. He refused to take any questions whatsoever Wouldn't talk to anybody with the key thing for Robertson and then so and then In those days the Cambridge major inter Cambridge mail system was extremely efficient They'd be like three mail services a day so a lot of people wrote notes to each other But his secretary was right next to him. He never speak to a secretary just write a message to her I leave it on her desk So this poor guy and a very sweet guy is obviously filled with gentle quotes from Allison Wonderland like that and And so Ross so Keynes, of course knowing this Exploiting Robertson's weakness would get and set his students and intellectual thugs On Robertson a harass him denounce him heckle them and so forth on it's horrible. It's a systematic torture for a poor Robertson Joan Robertson is one of the people involved in this escapade So I think go that I think that sort of sums up in many ways Keynes his character brutality and sadism of his character Okay, one of the things I want to point out about the general theory, I don't think it's been pointed out enough he really has Certain sociology and economic sociology in general theory. It's been sort of alluded to here this weekend He sets up three social classes basically the key to his general theory the three social classes and classes in society One is the consumers Consumers are a nice guy. They've their consumer spending is important, but they're dumb robots. They're passive determined robots and their their They're there can Okay, they might be lovable in a way, but they're stupid and passive and robots Then you have the investors that's the second Categories second social category investors are not robots. They have free will they're dynamic They're free will there are interesting people and so forth, but they're irrational They're crazy They're loonies they're creatures of mood. They're optimistic pessimists. It's been alluded to here before and they wake up in the morning They feel good to go out and invest if they wake up tomorrow morning feel lousy. They stop investing so you can't rely on them they're erratic and they're they're screwballs and so on and That's why and this these these two classes constitute the national output nationally coming out But fortunately, however, there's a Deus Ex Machina God out of the machine is a third class government Government does not determine their free will and they're active and all that they they're not determined by anything and government Contrast to being erratic and moody as the investors are are rational a supremely rational So especially of course that they're guided by a top economist like Keynes Philosopher King or the philosopher guiding the King and so the philosopher King Philosopher Kings and step in and correct for the moods of the investors the investors wake up one morning They're too pessimistic. They don't invest enough like government steps and it spends if If they if the investors are too little too manic and they spend too they invest too much the government steps in and taxes them Or us and so the government is the is the wise governor or balancing machine in the system Since their wise and supremely rational by the way, that's the reason why Government spending in the Keynesian national income statistics is always considered the similar to investment It's honorary investment whatever the government does is investing because they're they're they have free will and so A contrast of consumers or a robotically determined so Once one points this out, I don't think we have to go gauge too much and to see the fallacy of this This assumption Okay, the we now get to the Keynes's political philosophy which I'm going to too much so far and It hasn't been stressed enough I think in the literature For one thing there's the famous one key to Keynes's political philosophy as the Keynes's forward to his German edition This is not even mentioned by Harrod. I don't know if Skodalski mentioned I think Skodalski is very good historian so far, but Harrod is allegedly definitive life of Keynes there's not a single mention of the fact that Shortly after the book general theory came out 1936 Keynes wrote a forward for the German edition which came out late 36 It was it came out very quickly after the English edition and he writes this forward which is what's only been translated by obscure subversives in the United States like Henry Haslitz and Jim Morton and I mean, it's in German. Those were I want to check the translation anyway. He says in there He's talking about the birth about the German regime as of 1936 in the words of the Nazi regime He says quote the theory of aggregate production, which is the point of the following book the general theory Nevertheless can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state And the theory production and distribution of a given production puts forth under conditions of free competition and a large degree of laissez-faire This is one of the reasons I call my theory a general theory That was a theory is general for one reason because it's better suited to a totalitarian state and put it into effect and to a Rotten free competitive Society So so he looked at the Nazi regime. He thought this is great. It's a beautifully Beautifully suited to put to put Keynesian doctrine into effect, which indeed it was In addition to that in 19 is in 1930 Keynes was extremely interested in Sir Oswald Mosley's Fascist national economic plan which he proposed 1930s So Oswald Mosley set up the new and then the so-called new party and fascist party in the early 30s Skidelsky by the way was not Just correct mark on this. He's not a lifelong student of Keynes before he wrote the biography of Keynes He wrote a biography of Mosley, so he's particularly suited to understand the Mosley Keynes connection. And then you write So so much with the favor of fascism in the early 30s of Virginia Wolf wrote to an old friend of hers in a letter and said She she's afraid of Keynes Mike start converting her to converting her to a form of fascism She was if she felt in danger of her soul at that point As for communism Keynes was more ambivalent He on the one hand he admired the young intellectual communists of the late 1930s Because they reminded him of I get this this is kind of this is a real corker They reminded him of a typical nonconformist English gentleman who made the reformation fought the great rebellion 17th century one of us are civil and religious liberties and humanized the working classes last century unquote Let's interview in the new statesman in 1939 kind of odd way of looking at the communist party On the other hand he criticized the communists For the other side of the reformation great rebellion coin because they were Puritans They believe person bourgeois morality not too many people were more pure than an orthodox Stalinist type So Keynes is anti-Puritanism night comes out. He says he says our Cambridge Attacking a Cambridge undergraduate to go to Russia in my 30s and like it He says our Cambridge undergraduate is disillusioned when they go to Russia when they find it quote breathfully uncomfortable, of course Not that's what they're looking for but was he attacking communism because it's too puritanical it makes people it's it emphasizes austerity and lack of hedonism personally His his moral philosophy is is basically hedonistic and they're anti-hedonistic They want people to shape up and and and all that and he doesn't that's what he doesn't like Another thing he doesn't like about communism in addition to being puritanical is this proletarian somebody mentioned I think somebody mentioned this yesterday How quote how can I adopt such a creed which preferring the mud to the fish exhaust the boorish Poletariat above the bourgeois Z and the intelligentsia who are the quality in life and surely carry the seeds of all human advancement There I think we have a key. Who was he's who was he's grubby proletariat? He's interested in the bourgeois Z and the intellectual means of power elite that means him I mean he said somewhere. I think somebody mentioned this yesterday We get down to the class struggle between the bourgeois and the Poletariat. He's a bourgeois. Why should he join the Poletariat? I'll be useful. You know, it's an interesting point. Why indeed? so For all these reasons he was much more attracted to fascism than he was to the communists Okay to get to To get the Keynes the person the sum up Keynes the person There's one attitude I'll talk about one out and then I'll come on my own I guess one is Lionel Robbins is out of the Lionel Robbins converted the Keynesianism Although a new book by O'Brien on Robbins claims. He didn't really convert or he shifted back many recently to convert In many ways and there's or biography He writes about He writes about Keynes personally. Okay, and this is not irony. I want to point out to it's not being satiric here It's a straight stuff as Robbins talking about Keynes as he appeared a pre-Bretton Woods conference at Raft conference Atlantic City in June 1944 He's writing about Keynes quote Keynes was in his most lucid and persuasive mood and the effect was irresistible Keynes must be one of the most remarkable men in the world. Excuse me one of us remarkable men have ever lived The quick logic the wide vision of all the incomparable sense of the fitness of words All combined to make something several degrees beyond the limit of ordinary human achievement Only church will you guys is a comfortable stature and then he says but Keynes uses the classical style of our life and language is true But it's shot through with something which is not traditional and unique unearthly quality Which one can only say that it's pure genius The American sat in trance as a godlike visitor sang in the golden light play all around But godlike visitors sang a golden light play all around that's Robbins view of Keynes Before I get to my own view. I just I missed something here to rock them backtrack a second He's also He's also a pool the excesses of communism and he says He wrote my communist rule and part perhaps It Soviet rules the fruit of some beastliness on the Russian nature or on the Russian and Jewish natures when as now they are allied together Also, he said he had doubts and about cooking my communism in a duster quote Russian communism on quote would quote make Jews less Averacious on quote Okay, so that's that's the godlike figure It's a robin. He's the godlike figure with a golden light playing all around the halo. I've got a slightly different assessment Some up Keynes arrogant sadistic power power be sotted bully the Liberans systemic lawyer Intellectually irresponsible an opponent of principle The favor of short-term hedonism and nihilistic opponent of bourgeois morality in all of its areas a hater of thrift Saving somebody who wanted to liquidate the creditor class exterminate the creditor class and imperialist and anti-semite and a fascist Outside of that, I guess he was a great guy