THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES
OF MORAL DEPRAVITY
The official biography of John Maynard Keynes stated that one of “his great gifts” was, “that virtue for which austere moralists reserve the brightest crown, the virtue without which all other virtues are being said to be vain and sterile. . . .”(1)
Lord Keynes Baron of Tilton died on Easter Sunday April 21, 1946. Since his death coincided with the most hallowed of Christian holidays, church sermons throughout the English speaking world dwelt on spiritual parallels of that event. A day of national mourning was marked with Memorial Services in Westminister Abbey, England’s great religious shrine. Keynes’ parents, in their nineties, walked up the aisle, amidst the chief dignitaries of the United Kingdom joined by notables from the major nations of the world. Westminister Abbey, the scene of every coronation since 1066, is the burial place of eighteen British monarchs. There lie interred the remains of England’s renowned statesmen, the great figures in art, in science and in literature. There also are entombed the mighty military figures of English history. Within those walls is enshrined the indomitable spirit of British manly courage.
Simultaneously, at Cambridge University Sir John Sheppard, Keynes’ life-long friend, rose in King’s College Chapel and intoned the passage from Pilgrim’s Progress: “. . . I do not repent me of all the trouble I have been at to arrive where I am. My sword I give to him that shall succeed me in my pilgrimage, and my courage and skill to him that can get it. . . .”(2)
We were told that Keynes, “got to love many Americans with whom he had to deal with during the Second World War.”(3) As the news of his passing reached the United States throngs of Government functionaries gathered at the National Cathedral at Washington D.C., “to do honour to a man whom they had come to love so much.”(4) Americans were told, “He had the most powerful mental machine of any man in public life, exact, lucid and supremely logical.”(5) A Harvard economist repeated the panegyric that, “He (Keynes) strode through life like a gigantic figure of the Renaissance, and he makes all present-day economists and politicans seem poor, sorry figures by comparison.” The same professor proclaimed that, “Millions to whom his name is unknown and his thought incomprehensible live nevertheless in a climate of opinion of his making.”(6)
The broad field of political and social science thinking in our high schools and colleges is imbued with the vision and teachings of John Maynard Keynes. American political leaders including former Presidents F.D. Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson subscribed to Keynesian policies. Eleanor Roosevelt expressed great public grief at his passing and General of the Army, George C. Marshall led a bevy of military brass in heavy mourning. Wall Street financiers joined the head of J.P. Morgan and Company in final tribute to Keynes. The academic world, in America, resounded in a glorification seldom accorded to any man. In the judicial circles Supreme Court Justice Frankfurter led with a tribute that was echoed throughout the entire legal structure.
It is quite natural that Keynes should be extravagantly memoralized. The economic, political and sociological ideas associated with his name have become the dominant doctrines not only in Britain but in the United States as well. They have shaped the social fabric of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and many other nations.
Traditionally, great economic thinkers have been predominant in the areas of philosophy, morals, ethics, religion and government. Adam Smith was a professor of moral philosophy; John Stuart Mill was a social philosopher; William S. Jevons was a professor of logic and ethics, Henry George was an exponent of ethics, religion, morality and social psychology. Keynes major predecessor and sponsor Alfred Marshall was originally a lecturer in moral science. Even Karl Marx, the father of modern socialism, studied law and received his doctorate in philosophy.
Since economics embraces relationships affecting all human action it is important to realize that those who expound economic doctrines stamp upon them the imprint of their own individual attitudes and philosophy. As Keynesian teachings aim at the very fundaments of society it is essential that its central figure embody high credentials in morals, ethics, virtue, integrity, patriotism and a sense of obligation to mankind. As one of Keynes chief disciples stated it, “If he continued to labour, that was solely for the good of his country, or of mankind.”(7)
At the outset we can discount the religious coloring given in memorializing the death of Keynes. Most offensive is the performance of Sir John Sheppard in exalting the name of Keynes by quoting passages from Pilgrim’s Progress, one of the most inspired religious works of all time. Not only was Keynes an atheist all his adult life but he was most zealous in ridiculing and undermining religious faith. Ironically, it was the same Sheppard who joined with Keynes at Cambridge University in a campaign to eliminate religion from University life. However, there is so much hypocrisy countenanced in this area that most of todays atheists are memorialized via the religious route.
Keynes once wrote in the Nation (British),
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many psuedo-moral principles which have hagridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues.(8)
At the same time that the above was published in book form (1932) Keynes reiterated atheistically that,
The decaying religions around us, which have less and less interest for most people unless it be as an agreeable form of magical ceremonial or of social observance, have lost their moral significance just because—unlike some of their earlier versions—they do not touch in the least degree on these essential matters. A revolution in our ways of thinking and feeling about money may become the growing purpose of contemporary embodiments of the ideal. Perhaps, therefore, Russian Communism does represent the first confused stirrings of a great religion.(9)
Elevating the world center of atheism as the precursor of a new “great religion” and condemning the moral principles of the last two hundred years as “the most distasteful of human qualities” puzzled many observers including those who were impressed by Keynes’ respectable credentials. Since Keynes always used extreme cunning in concealing his real motives behind a heap of embroidered rhetoric, it has been difficult to pinpoint his real intentions. However, like John Galbraith, his current disciple, Keynes’ self-conceit, inflated by successful deceptions, caused him to be careless. He declared, “I cannot doubt that Sex Questions are about to enter the political arena.”(10) Keynes, adding a whole constellation of questions that are tearing apart society today, declared,
Birth Control and the use of Contraceptives, Marriage Laws, the treatment of sexual offenses and abnormalities, the economic position of women, the economic position of the family—in all these matters the existing state of the Law and of orthodoxy is still Mediæval—altogether out of touch with civilized opinion and civilized practice and with what individuals, educated and uneducated alike, say to one another in private.(11)
These judgements were put together by Keynes for publication in 1932 while he was preparing the manuscript for his magnum opus the General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.
Keynes’ aversion to human conception and marital fidelity, defeminization of women via state intervention and the shattering of the family as a cohesive unit sound strangely like something out of the Communist Manifesto of 1848. The above item on “sexual offenses and abnormalities” is indeed a strange note. Keynesian apologists have maintained an uncomfortable silence on J.M. Keynes championing the cause of sexual offenders.
In 1967 the world was startled by the publication of the letters between Lytton Strachey and Maynard Keynes. Undisputed evidence in their private correspondence shows that Keynes was a life-long sexual deviate.(12) What was more shocking was that these practices extended to a large group. Homosexuality, sado-masochism, lesbianism, and the deliberate policy of corrupting the young was the established practice of this large and influential group which eventually set the political and cultural tone for the British Empire.
Keynes’ sexual partner, Lytton Strachey, indicated that their sexual attitudes could be infiltrated, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all quite naturally, if need be, without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He further explained, privately, that, “he sought to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual mores—a change that couldn’t ‘be done in a minute,’ but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.”(13) This is a classic expression of the Fabian socialist method of seducing the mind. This was written in 1929 when it was already in practice for over forty years. It is no wonder we are reaping the whirlwind of student disorders where drug addiction and homosexuality rule the day.
Keynes and his fellow voluptuaries made numerous excursions to the resorts ringing the Mediterranean, where little boys were sold by their parents to bordellos catering to homosexual appetites.(14)
The practice of crudely castrating small boys (where most died from infection or shock) to provide effeminized children for the edification of depraved visitors is a well-authenticated historical fact.(15) Boys from the ages of seven up to twelve were subjected to sadistic carnal abuse. Since in almost every instance these children were sold into sexual slavery by desperately poor parents who were steeped in ignorance and superstition, it sheds an insight into the hypocrisy of Fabians like Keynes, who aimed propaganda shafts at private enterprise in England and America because it did not guarantee full employment. He and his fellow leftist reformers however, had no compunction in exploiting human degradation and misery in Tunis, Algeria, Morocco, Egypt and Constantinople (Istanbul). These served as convenient spawning grounds for the establishment of enclosed brothels filled with children, who were compelled to satisfy the unnatural lusts of high-born English socialists.(16)
Keynes always ready to guide others freely advised his fellow debauchees to go to Tunis, “where ‘bed and boy’ were also not expensive.”(17)
This circle of sexual deviates consisted of a considerable number of participants. They were augmented by a larger group of prurient Bohemians who secured vicarious pleasures either as bisexuals or as voyeurs. Most lived off inherited incomes or family patronage. Attachment to Fabian socialism was endemic to this group. They came under the general appellation of “the Bloomsbury Group.” This orgiastic vortex had as its axis, Gordon Square in London. Keynes owned No. 46 and the Stracheys possessed No. 41. As one wit sarcastically put it, “all couples were triangles who lived in squares.”(18) Critics assigned to the ‘Bloomsberries,’ “Strange rites, sinister rituals and unmentionable initiation ceremonies. . . .”(19)
In academic deviate circles, Keynes acquired underground fame as a skilled connoisseur who was able to spot potential material for future debauchment among the male children at Eton (eight to sixteen years of age), as well as the youth of Cambridge. The Keynes-Strachey correspondence is replete with reports of such expeditions to both Eton and Cambridge University. Lytton Strachey wrote a poetic amoretto about his bed partner, Keynes, in which he classed him, “A liberal and a sodomite, An atheist and a statistician.”(20) In a fit of pique he once exclaimed, “Keynes sits like a decayed and amorous spider in King’s . . .” (Cambridge University).(21) Strachey’s chief biographer observed that the letters passing between his subject and Keynes, “would have provoked curiousity in Gomorrah and caused the inhabitants of Sodom to sit up and take note.”(22) It is noted that, “For several years Lytton’s intimate personal life was bound up with that of Keynes. . . .”(23) On one of their trips to the Mediterranean theatre of sexual aberrations, Strachey wrote of lounging around, “discussing ethics and sodomy with Keynes.”(24) Asking Lytton Strachey to spend time with him, Keynes once wrote, “my bed is depressingly disengaged all this month”(25)
As is usual in male homosexual circles there is a constant effeminate rivalry and intrigue for the favors of sexual partners. On one occasion Keynes seduced away Strachey’s male sweetheart and created a crisis in Bloomsbury. The amorous prize in question was Duncan Grant, the noted artist and a cousin of Strachey’s. The emotion laden scene resulted in Keynes answering Strachey’s accusation, contritely, “Your letter made me cry.”(26) Strachey’s coldness to Keynes persisted for many months resulting in Keynes breaking down in tears before James Strachey (Lytton’s brother).(27) Although Keynes was reported to have had many homosexual partners throughout his life, his attachment to Duncan Grant continued until his death. It covered a span of 38 years.
Keynes, like other homosexuals, had a fascination for the male ballet dancers. He and the rest of the Bloomsbury deviates were particularly taken up with the Diaghilev Ballet. The Diaghilev publicity manager in the United States explained, “—business managers loved dancers; men and women of all ranks consorted with men and women of varying degrees of masculinity and femininity; husbands fell in love with other husbands or their wives.” He characterized them as behaving, “like inmates of a rabbit hutch, constantly darting about, pulled by intrigue or sex.”(28) Diaghilev, himself, was reputed to be a homosexual.
One of the enigmas of modern history is the role of Lydia Lopokova, the premiere ballerina of the Diaghilev troupe. Before she became the wife of J.M. Keynes her romantic career had curious left-wing overtones. Shortly before the Russian revolution Lopokova was engaged to Heywood Broun, a New York newspaperman and a socialist. Broun was conspiring with those Russian emigres in the United States who later appear in Moscow as prime movers of the Bolshevik Revolution.(29) Lydia suddenly decided to marry a member of the Diaghilev entourage who was a strange shriveled dwarflike person by the name of Barocchi. His movements have been covered in mystery to this day.
Right after the Bolshevik Revolution with the Red and White armies locked in a death struggle for the control of Russia there was thrown together an international espionage network, by Lenin, for the purpose of detecting the plans of the White Army leadership. A group of Cossack officers appeared at the Diaghilev performances in London in 1918. Lopokova dissappeared with the chief Cossack general for several weeks. She returned to the ballet after the general headed back to Russia at the end of his leave of absence.
In 1925 Lydia Lopokova consented to be Keynes’ wife. On their honeymoon they visited her relatives in Soviet Russia. This puzzled experts on bolshevism since former nationals were strictly forbidden to visit their kin unless they were partisans of the communist cause. It was even more of a surprise in the case of Keynes since foreigners were severly restricted in their movements in Russia. The Keynes’ visited Lydia’s relatives again in 1928 when the Red Terror was even more intense and non-communist Soviet residents were in mortal fear of even speaking to foreigners.
In fact in Russia the mere exchange of mail with relatives abroad often was the cause of death through firing squad or enslavement in Siberian labor camps. In the midst of such repressive conditions, Lydia and Maynard were allowed unrestricted privileges to visit relatives and to travel freely. Even foreign heads of Communist Parties and representatives of the Communist International could not secure such a broad Soviet indulgence.(30)
It is well recognized that homosexuals are prone to blackmail by both communist and fascist movements, however, Keynes had previously proclaimed himself a bolshevik in private correspondence. His subsequent friendship with those accused as Soviet spies in the United States helps to explain his easy access to forbidden Soviet areas.(31)
Keynes marriage was obviously ‘an arrangement’ since he continued his association with his male amours until his death. In fact, his male sweetheart, Duncan Grant, served as best ‘man’ at his wedding.(32)
The facade of possessing a wife is a standard device in homosexual circles. Bloomsbury abounds in such arrangements. Frequently such ‘legal’ wives were lesbian or entirely asexual.
The deviate Keynes circle, dubbed as the “Bloomsberries,” were not originators of the London Bloomsbury tradition.(33) As far back as 1888, Eleanor Marx the daughter of Karl Marx, and her common-law husband Dr. Edward Aveling formed the Bloomsbury Socialist Society.(34) Aveling was noted as the first official translator of Marx’s Capital into English. Karl Marx’s alter ego, Frederich Engels lived nearby in the wealthy Regent’s Park area, closely supervising the organization of the original Bloomsbury leftist group.
Eleanor Marx set many of the standards claimed as original by “the New Left” today. She was an intimate of the novelist Olive Schreiner, who was a notorious dabbler in intersexual abnormalities.(35) Olive was a fanatic leftist who straddled both the Marxian and Fabian camps.(36) Eleanor Marx was a confirmed drug addict and on one occasion nearly died from an overdose of opium. Like the protesters of today, she was unkempt, slovenly and unwashed, possessing a body odor strong enough to be mentioned in books about that period. A top female Fabian leader of that time wrote an account of Eleanor’s narcotic addiction.(37) Eleanor Marx continued an old socialist tradition by cohabiting with her male partner without benefit of marriage.
Engels had set the precedent of companionate marriage a generation before with Mary Burns, a red-headed Irish beauty. When Mary died suddenly in 1863, Engels assumed the same relationship with her sister, Lizzy.(38)
The Keynesian circle did not originate the idea of an entrenched academic and intellectual depravity. As early as 1874 Oscar Wilde set the fashion in college circles of what was described then as, “the effeminate pose of casting scorn on manly sports, wearing his hair long, decorating his room with peacock’s feathers, lilies, sunflowers,” and walking around in velvet knickers with a singer flower in his hand. From Oxford University the fashion spread to Cambridge and then to other British universities. The movement took on a leftist tinge and the charge was made that “the cult spread among certain sections of society to such an extent that languishing attitudes, ‘too-too’ costumes and ‘aestheticism’ generally became a recognized pose.”(39)
It created such public revulsion that it prompted Gilbert and Sullivan to ridicule the practice into oblivion through their satirical operetta, Patience in 1881.
Wilde entered into close collaboration with Bernard Shaw in writing of critical reviews and gained notoriety as a leftist—with his 1891 essay “The Soul of Man Under Socialism.” Shaw made strenous efforts to get the Fabian socialists to print this work and have it widely distributed.(40)
In 1895 the famous trial and conviction of Oscar Wilde took place. The shocking disclosures of Wilde’s sexual depravities, perpetrated on young boys, resulted in his being imprisoned as a sexual degenerate. This made him a martyr among the leftist academics and literary elite to this day. Bernard Shaw boasted that it was he, “and the Rev. Stewart Headlam, a fellow Fabian Socialist, who had gone bail for Wilde. . . .”(41) Attempts have been made to refurbish Wilde’s reputation with claims of his subsequent reformation and his receiving of the last sacraments of the Catholic Church and being buried in consecrated ground.
What has been omitted was the approbation he gave to his publisher shortly before his death when he wrote, “He loves first editions, especially of women—little girls are his passion—he is the most learned erotomaniac in Europe. He is also a delightful companion, and a dear fellow, very kind to me.”(42)
During this same period Havelock Ellis put together his six volume compendium entitled Studies in the Psychology of Sex. To this day this is the bible on sexual studies in our colleges and universities. Ellis was an ardent defender of Oscar Wilde and declared that, “his (Wilde’s) essential judgments on life and literature were usually sound and reasonable. His essay on ‘The Soul of Man Under Socialism’ witnessed to his large and enlightened conception of life. . . .”(43)
Incredible as it may seem, Havelock Ellis was a sexual psychopath of the most degenerative type. He was a life-long urolagniac. He was sexually addicted to playing with his own urinary functions and also received an erotic stimulus from watching others do the same thing. He was conditioned to practice this most bizarre of perversions by his mother. She would thrust a urine soaked diaper, just removed from an infant, into his face to condition him, as he admitted into a “germ of a perversion.” As Ellis’ biographer put it, “Mother liked weeing on her hand and to young Ellis that was marvelous.”(44) Havelock carried over an abnormally intense adoration of his mother throughout his life.
At the age of 25, Ellis entered into a strange relationship with Olive Schreiner. She was mentioned previously as an intimate of Eleanor Marx. According to his own admission everything took place except normal heterosexuality.(45) He was masochistically feminine in his tendencies and enjoyed the company of aggressive lesbians. In fact, after marrying Edith Lees, a Fabian socialist with an inherited income, he drove her into lesbianism and took particular pleasure in having her recount her experiences with her female amours. Such induced depravity, plus drugs, (Ellis wrote the prescriptions) caused Edith to lose her sanity. She was pushed over the brink into complete mental collapse after Ellis wrote her that he was having a rather bizarre and abnormal relationship with Margaret Sanger, the notorious American crusader for birth-control.(46)
Thus Havelock Ellis, the sexual psychopath, is hailed in our halls of learning as, “The Father of social psychology” and is installed as one of the great progenitors of modern psychiatry. This might be analagous to investing the inmates of our mental hospitals with the right to set the guidlines for the sane population. Actually, Ellis antedated Freud when he declared, “I regard sex as the central problem of life.”(47) Sigmund Freud was in close collaboration with Ellis and acknowledged his debt in private correspondence. James Strachey, the brother of Lytton, was addicted to a passion for young men and his wife Alix was a consort of a notorious lesbian. They both studied under Freud while adhering to militant atheism and Fabian socialism. They became the English literary executors of Freud. Lytton Strachey, who was internationally known as a sexual pervert of the most pernicious kind, was lauded by Freud who wrote him, “As a historian, then, you show that you are steeped in the spirit of psycho-analysis.”(48) A thorough scientific re-evaluation of the motivations and the distortions of the founders of psycho-analysis as a “sick” movement is long overdue.
A Fabian reference work in describing Ellis states, “He was one of the founders of the Fabian Society and the New Fellowship.”(49) Ellis and his wife were in the germinal group that spawned Fabian socialism.(50) When Ellis was charged with publishing obscene material in 1898, a Free Press Defence Committee was set up including such Fabians as Bernard Shaw, Frank Podmore and Walter Crane.
Ellis had tremendous influence in furnishing the depraved nests of leftists with documented justification that no matter what they did, it was “normal.” He not only supplied his wife with morphine, via prescriptions, but was a chief advocate of the use of hallucinogenic drugs. He imported the drug, peyote, from the American South West and in partnership with an artist and two poets used this hallucinogen as an inducement to depravity. Ellis described it as, “a saturnalia of the specific sense, and above all, an orgy of vision.” His American biographer and friend wrote that Ellis, “recommends the experience as ‘an unforgettable delight’ and ‘an educational influence of no mean value.’ ”(51) Ellis was the Timothy Leary of 1898.
Bertrand Russell, the chief aristocratic show-piece for Fabian socialism, once wrote, “I have read a good deal of Havelock Ellis on sex. It is full of things that everyone ought to know, very scientific and objective, most valuable and interesting.”(52)
Depravity had its rewards. Ellis was made editor of Contemporary Science series for the Walter Scott Publishing Company. These were basic texts used by colleges in Britain and America. They included economics, anthropology, sexology, history and ethics. Ellis personally penned a text-book on criminology.(53) He also had the dubious distinction of pioneering the movement for socialized medicine in England and America in his Nationalization of Health, in 1892.
Thus the evil precedent was already laid for the Keynes-Strachey perverted Fabian circle. One of the Fabian transmitters of tradition to the next generation of students was G. (Goldsworthy) Lowes Dickinson, a lecturer on political science at Cambridge University. Keynes, as a student, frequently went on excursions to the countryside with Dickinson. His attachment to the older man was deep and permanent. He gave “Goldie” full credit for fashioning his political thinking. Dickinson drew about him a bevy of young men at Cambridge who became the subjects of homosexual confidences in the Keynes and Strachey letters. Leonard Woolf was one of that group.
Woolf and Dickinson pioneered the concept, via Fabian circles, of the League of Nations and the United Nations.(54) Keynes became a fanatic proponent of the idea. When the Fabian socialists first put forward the idea of the League of Nations some were worried that Keynes was too left-wing in reputation to win over audiences when speaking for Dickinson’s League of Nations Union.(55)
Dickinson was a true carrier of the Oscar Wilde tradition.(56) Keynes’ official biographer observes that Dickinson, “seemed to waft with him, in his gentle way, the atmosphere of the Fabians. . . .” and that he was active with the Fabian leaders, “in the foundation of the London School of Economics. . . .”(57)
Dickinson, like other Fabians, steered a cautious course in his leftist gyrations always making certain that all his actions were covered by a facade of respectability. His primary function was that of being expediter for the Fabian process. His seeding operations bore fruit a generation later and in the subsequent years his ideas escalated until today they assume monstrous proportions.
His career represents a microcosm of the Fabian methods in subtle permeation of leftist concepts and activities. His lack of masculinity was communicated to hundreds of students at Cambridge University and this also grew to swollen dimensions. Today Great Britain has legally given sanctuary to homosexual depravity via the political pressures of homosexuals in all the political parties. This has been communicated to the United States by an ever growing pro-British claque in intellectual circles. Americans traditionally have followed European ideologies rather than fashioning their own. Curiously they have failed to draw theoretical lessons from the most powerful economic and political force of modern times.
The gentle Dickinson technique in the long run proved to be more pernicious than the violent variety of leftist action. It is of the creeping glacier variety that eventually sweeps everything in its path without appearing to be catastrophic in its future results.
Dickinson maintained a life-long hatred of his early school years caused by ridicule from his school mates because of an obvious physical disability. His soft voice and effeminate manner made him the butt of many cruel pranks. However, it is reported that while a don at Cambridge University, “his hatred of school had not sprung from any aversion to the young of his own sex.” Lytton Strachey’s biographer draws a close parallel between the sexual propensities of his subject and that of Dickinson.(58)
What was lacking by this deviant circle was some academic postulate that would furnish the philosophic justification both for their perversions and their adherence to socialism. They found this in the philosophy of George Edward Moore who has been eulogized by Keynes, Strachey and others as the greatest intellectual influence on their lives. Personally, Moore was a tragic example of a formerly brilliant spiritual youth who was diverted into an evil direction. A precocious boy at the age of twelve, Moore dedicated himself to publicly preaching the Christian creed. He stood on street corners exhorting passers-by to heed the Ten Commandments. His atheistic older brother physically dragged him home. His family then forcibly kept him confined long enough to drum agnosticism into his head.
A brilliant mind, thus perverted, created an epistemology that absolved the worship of depravity and justified the advocacy of socialism. Years later at Cambridge, Moore rose before a group, including Keynes, Strachey and Bertrand Russell, and mockingly recited, “In the beginning was matter, and matter begat the devil, and the devil begat God.” Russell says that on this occasion, “I first became aware of Moore’s excellence.” He also reports that, “The paper ended with the death first of God and then of the devil, leaving matter alone as in the beginning.”(59)
Havelock Ellis, Oscar Wilde, Sigmund Freud and Karl Marx had previously proclaimed that no firm basis exists for moral and ethical judgements. G. E. Moore formalized this attitude in a philosophic phantasmagoria serving as a free-wheeling device to justify perverts and socialists in pursuit of social chaos. The most depraved practices and deliberately ruinous policies were given a philosophic license so as to make eventual socialization that much easier.
A definitive book on Fabian socialism states, “The great influence on the young Oxford and Cambridge Fabians of those days [1902-1930]—and they were an astonishingly brilliant batch—was that of G.E. Moore.” Among those listed were J.M. Keynes, Lytton Strachey, G. Lowes Dickinson, Harold Laski and Leonard Woolf. Of the entire roster of names alluded to in the above list, the majority are described as homosexuals in the Lytton Strachey–J.M. Keynes letters. The same source admits that Moore’s work, Principia Ethica, was a “focal” “book” for the Fabian Society in the 1920’s.(60)
The official biographer of Keynes boasts that Moore was mainly admired for, “his doctrine that ‘good’ is an attribute, the meaning which is indefinable.” (Italics ours) Bertrand Russell quickly jumped on this philosophic bandwagon, leaving the field of mathematics, and became Moore’s co-philosopher. As early as 1894 Bertrand Russell privately confided, “I almost worship him (Moore) as if he were a god. I have never felt such an extravagant admiration for anybody.”(61) In a paper by Keynes, published in 1949, he admits that for years, “I was writing under the joint influence of Moore’s Principia Ethica and Russell’s Principia Mathematica.”(62)
In the United States John Dewey led the American Fabians, in a deliberately abstruse manner, to echo the philosophic maze of Moore and Russell.(63)
When Russell was scheduled to teach in the College of the City of New York he was prevented from doing so on the charge of, “lecherous, libidinous, lustful, venerous, erotomaniac, aphrodisiac, irreverent, narrow-minded, untruthful, and bereft of moral fiber.”(64)
The philosophic credentials of Moore take on a peculiar meaning when one reads the letters of Lytton Strechey and J.M. Keynes addressed to Moore. They sought Moore’s advice in arbitrating sexual disputes relating to their claims for this, or that, male sweetheart. Moore was installed as unofficial mediator on these jurisdictional claims. Various accounts of Moore, Keynes and Lytton Strachey lying on a rug together, in different rural retreats, attest to Moore’s physical association among that homosexual coterie. The Lytton Strachey—Keynes correspondence is replete with lewd reports to Moore on the performances of their male sexual partners. This included progress reports on seductions of the young sons of the wealthy and the socially prominent.(65)
These organized perverts acted out a distorted “Alice through the looking glass” performance. Their bleatings for equal rights for homosexuality was promptly converted into general harassment of the normal population. The cry to be left alone hid covert moves to control and exploit the heterosexual majority.
Homosexual preoccupation with decreasing population and crusades for birth control has at its foundation their senses of revulsion against normal procreative sex. They also furnish a major thrust to justify the use of drugs and halucinogens because they are the most likely to seek out stimulants that create an artificial orgiastic mood. As noted before, they early seized upon the field of sex study as a propaganda weapon to indoctrinate generations of college youth with attitudes leading to twisted sexual appetites.
They perform like self-made eunuchs, converting their handicaps into centers of control that manipulate a maze of sociological propaganda. The castrated logothetes of the Byzantine Empire were mere amateurs compared to these modern leftist degenerates.
Deception and trickery coupled with acid criticism of everything moral and progressive as “reactionary” is a standard fare among them. Past history has many examples where homosexuality played a similar role amidst declining cultures. Aboriginal savages of the most primitive type abound in homosexual practices. The fact that the Keynes-Strachey Fabian socialist coterie practiced sodomy, lecheurism, lesbiansim, coprolagnia, scatophagy and urolagnia is evidence of infantilism carried to the point of psychopathia. However, by persistant permeation of the centers of information, education and government the deviates have been able to invest themselves with a “Progressive” and “Liberal” cover. Actually, they are a throwback to the animal past of ancient primitive man whose sex habits operated on an infantile level.(66)
According to Stekel, such sexual cripples, “display the presence of strong sexual drives and of deep-seated criminal propensities. Their unbridled egocentrism leads them to hate everyone who surpasses them or stands in their way.” He further records that the sex deviate generally operates on the basis of “spite.”(67) Another authority states succinctly, “The homosexual is inwardly sick; in a convenient process of displacement, he shifts the blame for his illness to the outer world.”; and, “He is the classical injustice collector; his constant complaint is that he has been ‘unjustly treated.’ ”(68) These attitudes make the sexual deviate a natural candidate for collectivist tyrannies. In the case of Keynes, Strachey, Ellis, Moore and Woolf the nesting place was the Fabian socialist menage. Others so afflicted become enamoured of nazi or fascist movements. In the case of the Keynesian grouping there existed an avenue whereby they could move to-and-fro into the bolshevik orbit and back to Fabian respectability again. They cultivated not only the deceptive devices of the covert pervert but also inherited the massive arsenal of political tricks accumulatted for generations in the socialist movement. The socialist perverts became in fact a living embodiment of continuous employment of falsification and practiced deceit. Keynes became so skilled in habitual conniving that his fellow intriguers dubbed him with the name of “pozzo.” He reminded them of one of the most devious and treacherous machiavellians of all time, Pozzo diBorgo (1764-1842).
In a letter written to Keynes, in 1909, Lytton Strachey emoted, “Oh dear me!, when will my heaven be realized?—My Castle in Spain? Rooms, you know, for you, Duncan and Swithin, as fixtures—Woolf of course, too, if we can lure him from Ceylon; and several suites for guests. Can you conceive anything more supreme! I should write tragedies; you would revolutionize political economy, Swithin would compose French poetry, Duncan would paint our portraits in every conceivable combination and permutation, and Woolf would criticize us and our works without remorse.”(69) This projection of the future was prophetic. Keynes did become a revolutionary in economics; Strachey became a dramatist and a wrecker of historical moral symbols and Woolf became the architect of both the League of Nations and the U.N. via the Fabian society.
A short account presents a wriggling mass of intertwining perversions. Keynes had relations with Strachey; Strachey had affairs with Duncan Grant; Keynes stole Grant from Strachey; Lytton’s brother James Strachey adored Ruppert Brooks but so did Keynes; Strachey reports to G.E. Moore on seduction of new boys; Keynes steals Edgar Duckworth from Lytton; Keynes and Lytton agree that homosexuality is, “that love which passes all Christian understanding”; Strachey emulates Oscar Wilde with absinthe and drugs; He also declares that, “the whole truth is the Devil”; He predicts that in one hundred years, “everyone will be converted,” to homosexuality; Strachey and Keynes promote obscenitarian talk in colleges; Lytton lives with Dora Carrington, a lesbian; Carrington solicits homosexual partners for Lytton; Keynes, Lytton and Carrington have orgies involving lesbian and sodomistic interchanges; Keynes and Strachey dress in women’s clothes and dance; Keynes and Strachey give a sanctuary to homosexual objectors to military service thus frustrating the authorities; Keynes defends the use of drugs and Strachey smokes hashish; Carrington married several men so they could be Strachey’s boy-friends; Lytton stole Sebastian Sprott from Keynes—(the tables were turned); Lytton excuses his drug taking as a liberation from “this wrong world”; Finally, there are engrossments by Keynes and Strachey with sadistic beating of young boys, “compulsive preoccupation with male re-productory and excretory organs” and voyages to the most depraved dens of perversion throughout Europe, North Africa and Asia.
George Bernard Shaw spanned the entire period of this deviant circle beginning with the Oscar Wilde scandal and extending beyond the death of Keynes in 1946. He not only had knowledge of these obscenities and perversions but defended the culprits when they were arrested or accused. He was himself a most bizarre deviate. He insisted on watching the cremation of his mother behind the scenes so he could enjoy the sight of the flames consuming her body. A witness reported that Shaw had a “look of ecstasy as the coffin burst into twirling rhythms of soaring flames.” He left the crematorium happily humming a tune and immediately went to a gay week-end party given by the Sidney Webbs. He attended many cremations and definately got a sexual thrill from watching burning of bodies.(70)
Shaw was also addicted to another sexual peculiarity. He spent his weekends with a notorious lesbian and was known as her “Sunday Husband.”(71) He openly boasted, “I put the physical act of sexual intercourse on the stage. . . .” His sexual eccentricity included playing the game of tennis in the nude with other males.(72) His marriage to a millionairess Fabian socialist, of masculine habits, was clearly one of financial and political convenience. Shaw was a chief patron and sponsor of Keynes in Fabian socialist circles in England and the United States. Keynes gave Shaw a full report of the progress he made in writing books over a period of seventeen years.
The biographer of Lytton Strachey explains, “we are to picture Lytton and other brave Bloomsbury spirits with their copies of [Moore’s] Principia Ethica debating how best to translate its message into the various realms of art, economics, literature (subdivided into fiction and non-fiction), painting and politics. All members chose or were allocated particular fields in which to work, and spent the remainder of their careers running this specialized school for higher philosophic propaganda.”(73) We know that Keynes did the economic and political task for this group. There were others who dominated entire fields of endeavor that profoundly influenced not only England but America as well.
One noted instance of such influence was Edith Nesbit, the wife of Hubert Bland one of the founders of the Fabian Society. Edith was strangely attracted to members of her own sex and had the unique task of raising the children of her girl friends whom her husband had impregnated. Olive Schriener, whom we mentioned before, was particularly intimate with Edith. Olive described her experiences with Edith, “The last night she lay by me on the bed and drew me very close to her and pressed her face against mine, and do you know, I have felt it ever since.” Edith responded with “You took me out of my world into another from which I came out with a sigh and a shiver.” This mannish woman with a boyish haircut was the author (often under masculine names) of scores of childrens books that have been sold by the millions on both sides of the Atlantic.(74) It is a sad commentary but the left-deviant slant began with conditioning of little children and continued by progression to embrace all classes in every major category of thought and education.
The pertinent question to this study is whether Keynes and his disciples were significantly influenced in their economic and political projections first by their organized perversions; secondly by their covert Fabian socialist aims, and finally did the mixture of the two result in a cunningly fashioned parasitism that would leave the deviate-socialists in a controlling position?(75) It has been recognized by historians and scholars for several thousand years that subjective immoral conditioning has a degenerating effect on philosophic, religious and political judgements. In the case of the Keynes the subjective problem was magnified a hundred fold not only by his sexual depravity but also by his immersion in the tightly knit intellectual circle of deviant-Fabians. At no time did he break away from them. His condition was permanantly ingrained and his philosophy was structured to consider homosexuality as superior and the regular habits of the majority as a boorish moral deficiency.
It was almost inevitable that Keynes and his cohorts would evolve a program calling for a stationary society where production, prices, consumers and labor could be manipulated and controlled by an effeminized bureaucracy. History records many attempts by organized homosexuals to control society. Babylon, Persia, Egypt, Greece and Rome experienced such abominations.(76) The logothetes of Byzantium, the Janizzaries of the Turkish Sultans and Knight Templars (1314) of the Roman Church were charged with similar motives. Since the 15th century such charges were leveled against the Illuminist sects of Spain, Portugal, France and Germany and when the Jesuits of 1773 were outlawed by the Pope, sexual deviation as a power seeking ingredient was one of the accusations used. Intrigues are as old as history. However, the present danger of such movements is greater than before because the complexity of modern society opens up unlimited opportunities to permeate control centers by small groups who can either disrupt or dominate huge masses of people.
Almost as pernicious are those who knew of these perverted machinations and kept them secret due to loyalty to the collectivist ideal. R.F. Harrod, the economist and official biographer of Keynes, definitely knew of the homosexual intrigues. A comparison of letters quoted indicate that Harrod edited out sections of Keynes correspondence that unquestionably referred to the degeneracies of the Keynes-Strachey circle. The entire Fabian top leadership knew of these pervasive activities. Today evidence is clear that it was a well kept secret from the public but it was common knowledge among the Keynesian economic fraternity. Lytton’s cousin, John Strachey and the Fabian leadership both in England and in the United States knew about the perversions both of his kinsman and Keynes. Shuffling between the Fabian and the Communist camp he was one of the greatest proponents of Keynesianism as a weapon to bring about socialism. Bertrand Russell mentioned the organized homosexuals by indirect inference and then proceeded to denounce those who would restrain the sexual aberrants. J.K. Galbraith cleverly shielded himself by boasting, in a book on economics, as to his personal facility in sexual manhood. It is inconcievable that the Keynesian economic host in the United States, who made periodic pilgrimages to England, did not perceive the sordid nest that bred their economic theories. Also Barbara Ward, the current favorite Keynesian, certainly had access to the true facts. Her Fabian credentials are too extensive to allow any disclaimer.
A new appraisal is long overdue on Walter Lippmann who served as chief expediter of Keynes in the United States. He introduced Keynes to the American public in 1919, by arranging, along with Felix Frankfurter, to have the Economic Consequences of the Peace printed in this country. Lippmann, like Frankfurter, was a member of the British Fabian group and was privy to all their secrets. With the new information as to the Keynesian depravities one can understand the curiously slanted attacks against normal morality in Lippmann’s A Preface to Morals.(77)
It is difficult to unravel the intertwining web of sexual and socialist motivations. It is easily apparent that the socialist-communist aims are dominant and in the final show-down are decisive. The homosexual sickness is utilized like germ warfare, to spread degeneracy and immorality throughout society. The blackmail potential of the homosexual condition by communists has been too well documented to need much repetition here. The defection of the British homosexuals, Burgess and Maclean, who carried secrets to Moscow is only one of many examples where depravity has been harnessed to serve red purposes. The fact that these two were products of Cambridge University while Keynes was one of the administrative powers there, is a significant testimony to the degenerative climate there.
Guy Burgess was a member of a Keynesian dominated group at Cambridge called “the Apostles” and was constantly sponsored and promoted by a top Fabian socialist into government positions even though he had a notorious record as a communist during his university days. A startling similarity to Keynes’ reference to “bed and boy for the same price” in Tunis is an incident by Burgess in Tangier where he publicly chanted the refrain, “Little boys are cheap today; Cheaper than yesterday.”(78)
Harry Dexter White and J.M. Keynes were inseparable in the United States shortly before Keynes died. When Keynes fell ill on a train to Washington D. C. it was reported, “And there too was Harry White, keeping patient vigil by his dear friend, full of sad anxiety.”(78) The facts are incontrovertable that White served as a Soviet agent while doubling with Keynes as the architect of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. For a Soviet agent to express so much emotional devotion to a British representative seems odd, to say the least. In fact the Bloomsbury group to this day considers White as one of its Keynesian heroes.
While in America Keynes wrote in a private letter, “Our personal relations with the Russians have been very cordial and we have seen quite a lot of them socially. We like them exceedingly and, I think, they like us.”(79) It must be noted Keynes wife (nee Lopokova) was in charge of the social arrangements and liaison between the British and American representatives and the Soviet representatives. The entire edifice of the International Monetary Fund and the foreign hand-outs of American wealth was structured and aimed by this strange combination.
It has long been recognized among left-wingers that homosexuals are useful tools to soften up the intellectual and moral fiber of society. Soviet secret police defectors have reported that special Soviet schools exist for training of political prostitutes and homosexuals as blackmailing squads to induce key personnel in non-communist countries to do their bidding.
The solicitation of “urnings” as tenants in American Fabian institutions such as Hull House in Chicago and the Henry Street Settlement in New York City has long been an open secret among socialists and communists.(80) The frequent accusations that there are leftist homosexual circles in the State Department and many other government bureaus take on a more meaningful note with the disclosures of the Keynesian cabal in England and America.
What appears as a sudden explosion of sexual depravity in America today is a cumulative result of several generations of sociological corrosion of our sexual mores. This pervasive process can be traced step-by-step in the social studies text books that have been the required academic fare in undergraduate and graduate studies in almost every college in the country. The sexually sick in their arrogance, being puffed up by power within control positions, are allowed full rein in spreading their lascivious rot through literature, education, jurisprudence, entertainment and government itself. Religion which has traditionally served as a bastion against regression to bestiality and savagery is today showing the effects of leftist permeation. Some churches even lend themselves to homosexual rallies.
It has been the irony of history that communist and fascist regimes eventually kill the perverts who served as political panderers in undermining society. A fighter for freedom can get no retributive satisfaction from this, since under a police state he figuratively stands to be crucified between two sexual degenerates.
The growing literature that presents child molestors in a sympathetic light, as poor victims of “the social system,” is a direct outgrowth of the influence of those who want to build a social sanctuary for perverts such as Keynes. The depravities committed by Keynes and his cohorts against the young are legally considered felonious acts in every nation of Western civilization. This is even true in the Soviet Union and its satellites. The communists encourage and promote such depravities only in those nations they want to soften up for the take-over.
The communist and socialist masterminds who mobilize the degenerate and criminal elements to do their work of social demolition are hereby exposed in all their hypocricy. Their claims to build something finer and more civilized lies exposed as a mere snare. The most venal usurer and the most ruthless profiteer cannot even begin to compete in terms of evil when contrasted to the malignant leftist panderers within the morally depraved circles of perversion.
A re-examination of the economic and social theories of the Keynesian-Fabian host in the light of the psycho-sexual twist in their thinking, carries an urgent priority among honest scholars and statesmen of today. This must be done carefully, thoroughly and with judicious balance. The therapy to heal the damage must be applied energetically and courageously. Otherwise our civilization will retrogress into a cultural and moral barbarism as other civilizations have retrogressed in the past. Let the shame and decline of Great Britain be an object lesson, especially, to the rest of the English-speaking world.
1 R.F. Harrod, The Life of John Maynard Keynes, Macmillan & Co. London, 1951, p. 648.
5 Seymour E. Harris, John Maynard Keynes, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1955, p. 33.
7 Harrod, The Life of John Maynard Keynes, p. 645.
8 John Maynard Keynes, Essays in Persuasion, Harcourt, Brace and Co. New York, 1932, p. 369.
At the time Keynes issued the above book the Soviet terror was killing millions of peasants who were considered enemies of forced collectivization. It is estimated that at least twelve million persons of all ages were destroyed through incredibly inhuman methods. One technique consisted of jamming human cargo into open-slat cattle cars which were routed into areas of arctic cold. The corpses remained in an upright position since there was no room for them to fall down. The frozen stiff bodies of men, women and children were then piled on the ground in Siberia like cordwood until the spring thaws, when they would then be burned. This was only one brutal aspect of what Keynes called, “stirrings of a great religion.” (See Victor Kravchenko, I Chose Freedom, Charles Scribner’s New York, 1946, pp. 51, 63, 98, 104-05, 137. See also, Ivan Solonevich, Soviet Paradise Lost, Williams & Norgate, London, 1938, passim.)
12 Michael Holroyd, Lytton Strachey: A Critical Biography, Heinemann, London, 1967. Printed in two volumes. Vol. II printed in 1968. An American edition distributed by Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York. The pagination is the same in both the British and American editions.
14 Havelock Ellis, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Vol. I, Part Four, Random House, New York, 1942, “Sexual Inversion,” pp. 13, 23, 39, 58, 62, 75. The Fabian perverts used the areas mentioned by Ellis practically as a guide book. Keynes visited all of the Mediterranian areas mentioned, usually in the company of another English homosexual. (Tunis, Algeria, Constantinople, Sicily, Capri, Cairo, Greece and Salerno.)
15 Encyclopaedia Britannica, 13th Edition, vol. 9, pp. 890-91 and Vol. 31, pp. 323-24.
The Americana, Scientific American, New York, 1908, Vol. III, “castration.”
16 Holroyd, Lytton Strachey, Volumes I and II, passim.
20 Ibid., p. 260. (The items, “Eton” and “Cambridge” in both volumes.) See also page 496 to Harrod, Keynes.
28 Edward L. Bernays, Biography of An Idea, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1965, p. 113.
29 Broun was a close associate of Leon Trotsky and his group in New York City as well as the cell around Ludwig C.A.K. Martens, the first Soviet representative in the United States (1920). Broun became a red under the leadership of Walter Lippman at the Harvard Socialist Club in 1906. This was a Fabian endeavor. Lippman was actually a member of the British Fabian Society. Broun was an underground Sovieteer but nominally a Fabian socialist serving as an officer of the League for Industrial Democracy and the Rand School. During the Hitler-Stalin pact he gave up his disguise in disgust with the admission, “The masquerade is over!”
30 The testimony of former Communist International leaders such as Benjamin Gitlow and Joseph Kornfeder clearly proves the nature of the Terror existing during that period. Even socialists in Russia, who were akin to the British and American Fabian socialists, were being slaughtered by the thousands.
The late Robert Hunter after leaving the American Fabian Socialist movement wrote that in 1918-1919 alone over 128,000 moderate socialists were arrested in Soviet Russia. Therefore Keynes could not have pleaded special privilege because of his socialist credentials. (Robert Hunter, Revolution, Committee for Constitutional Government 1943, New York, p. 184.)
See also Victor Kravchenko, I Chose Freedom, pp. 56-57, 186.
Robert Payne, The Life and Death of Lenin, Avon Books, New York, 1967, pp. 568-69.
31 Harry Dexter White, Lauchlin Currie, Frank Coe and others. Harrod, Life of Keynes, pp. 537-41.
33 The reference to members of the Keynes-Strachey Bloomsbury group as “Bloomsberries” is an obvious play on words identifying with “fruit,” a slang expression for homosexuals.
34 Letter of Frederich Engels to Sorge in the United States, April 30, 1890. Engels also refers to the fact that the Fabian socialists in America are “just a rehash of Fabians in this country.” (England).(Ref. Labour Monthly, May, 1934, London, pp. 308-311.)
35 Robert Payne, Marx, A Biography, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1968, pp. 515-16.
Doris Langley Moore, E. Nesbit—A Biography, Clifton Books, New York, 1966, pp. 110-111.
Arthur Calder-Marshall, The Sage Of Sex, G.P. Putnam, New York, 1959, pp. 88-105.
37 Payne, Marx, pp. 514-515. Also Beatrice Webb, My Apprenticeship, p. 292.
38 Leopold Schwartzchild, Karl Marx—The Red Prussian, Grosset and Dunlap (The Universal Library—paperback), New York, n.d. pp. 279, 346.
The female enthusiasts of the “new left” convinced, by their male counterparts, that living without marriage bonds is to their advantage should take heed from the tragic experience of Elizabeth Marx. She secretly lived with Dr. Aveling while Karl Marx was alive. After his death her relationship was openly declared in leftist circles. Her life with Aveling was a continuous tragedy. Her “female emancipation” consisted of supporting Aveling while he consorted with other women and subjected her to emotional and physical abuse which could rival the horrors of Marquis de Sade. Aveling regularly wrote out prescriptions (illegally) to furnish Elizabeth with narcotics. Actually, he was secretly, but legally, married to a young woman in France. Although a verdict of suicide by poison was given at Elizabeth’s death, it was the opinion of leading English socialists that Aveling had murdered her after she found out about his legal marriage. Engels, who carried on the same kind of relationship for over 30 years, was almost the sole defender of Aveling’s conduct. (See Payne, Marx, pp. 527-531.)
39 Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Ed., Vol. 28, p. 632.
40 Anne Fremantle, This Little Band of Prophets, p. 51. (Unwin edition).
The Soul of Man under Socialism by Oscar Wilde was published and distributed by the American Fabian Society after his conviction for sexually perverting the young. (Ref., American Fabian, Feb. 1896, p. 14.)
41 H. Montgomery Hyde, Oscar Wilde, The Aftermath, Farrar-Strauss, New York 1963, pp. 43-5.
42 H. Montgomery Hyde, Oscar Wilde, The Aftermath, p. 158. (The “dear fellow” died in great misery as a result of overindulgence from drinking absinthe accompanied by a drug addiction.)
43 Ellis, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Vol. I, part 4, pp. 48-9.
44 Calder-Marshall, Sage of Sex, pp. 20-25, 39.
45 Ibid., p. 91. (Ellis was also a close friend of Eleanor Marx. pp. 94, 107.
46 Ibid., pp. 198-204, 208-225,
47 Isaac Goldberg, Havelock Ellis, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1926, p. 203.
48 Ibid., pp. 200-201, 202, 212-213, 217-219.
Holroyd, Lytton Strachey, vol. 1, pp. 245, 248-50, 343; vol. II, pp. 97-98, 195, 256n, 222-223, 450, 616.
49 The Encyclopedia of Social Reform, (Fabian socialist) Funk & Wagnalls, New York, 1898, p. 552.
51 Goldberg, Havelock Ellis, (Ellis reported that the effect of the drug, “reveals an optical fairyland, where all the senses now and again join the play, but the mind itself remains a self-possessed spectator.” This is precisely the effect of modern LSD.)
52 The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, Little, Brown, Boston, 1968, vol. II, p. [ ]
53 American Fabian, Boston and New York, 1895-98 carried reference lists of the Walter Scott Publishers books for colleges in the United States. Scribners secured permission to print them in this country. (See also, Bernard Shaw Collected Letters, 1874-1897, pp. 190, 201, and Sage of Sex, p. 110.)
54 Dictionary of National Biography, London, 1931-1940, “Within the first fortnight of the war he [Dickinson, 1914] drafted schemes for a ‘League of Nations’ (a phrase which he may have invented) and played the leading part in founding the group of pacifist internationalists known as the Bryce group, which later became the nuclei of the League of Nations Union and promulgated some of the actual provisions of the League.” p. 226.
Woolf authored International Government, (1916), which was mentioned previously. It has a closer affinity to the concept of the United Nations than to the League of Nations. Both Woolf and Dickinson were Fabian socialists. Kitty Muggeridge and Ruth Adam, Beatrice Webb—A Life, Alfred Knopf, New York, 1968. “Woolf and Sidney [Webb] drew up a draft for an international treaty for the establishment of a supra-national authority. Both studies were first published as supplements to the New Statesman and were combined with Woolf’s blueprint for a League of Nations in his book, International Government, which was the basis of the British government’s brief at Geneva and which lay on President Wilson’s desk when he was first drawing up his plan.” p. 205.
What is omitted, in the above, is that Walter Lippmann, then a member of the British Fabian Society, arranged to place the socialist plan before Wilson and was the real author, along with his British Fabian co-conspirators, of Wilson’s Fourteen Points. This more than any other single factor probably prepared the conditions that gave rise to Hitler.
Fabians must be proud!!
http://keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html
WHERE WE ARE TODAY DUE TO BROWNS KEYNSIAN ECONOMICS!!
The first thing Keynes did was to disclaim any connection with marxism. This was an elementary Fabian socialist diversionary move to distract the public from noting Karl Marx’s projection of a “mixed economy” in the Communist Manifesto of 1847. Academic pundits suddenly developed a conscious amnesia about the fact that Marx’s socialist forces intended to “use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie” and that private savings would be eliminated by the simple expedient of, “centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.”(1) This is pure Keynesianism 45 years before Keynes was born. The elimination of private savings and the “euthenasia of the rentier” was the touchstone of the entire Keynesian edifice. Government manipulation of credit policies and regulations that control production movements to undermine the principle of property rights was boldly and directly proclaimed by Marx:
Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.(2)
Of course, the heavy lever to make all this possible is proclaimed as, “A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.”(3)
Karl Marx laid down these strategic devices not as socialism per se but as the means of emasculating private enterprise before instituting a functional socialism. This is precisely what the hard core Keynesians set out to do. With Marx’s clear exposition we begin to understand the Keynesian give-away programs and the soaring national deficit policies in which as stated above, “appear economically insufficient and untenable.”
When John Maynard Keynes was seven years old (1890) his father authored a volume entitled the Scope and Method of Political Economy. The Keynesian method of double entendre was developed by the elder Keynes to a fine art. An economist who could write a 370 page book studded with marxist-like metaphors without once mentioning the name of Marx must be credited at being a master of skillful literary concealment. J.N. Keynes’ talent of assuming a respectable posture within an academic sanctuary while chipping away at the edifice of private enterprise, was passed on to his son. John Neville Keynes managed to smuggle in the marxist theme that, “Schemes of socialism, moreover, as distinguished from pure communism, do not necessarily involve the entire abolition of free exchange.”(4)
J.N. Keynes illustrated through a most intricate web of subtle suggestions that the concept of private enterprise can be switched around to prove it either as desirable or a menace according to one’s motives. He also made allusions to government regulations and the possible need for a world body to control the economic life of man thus predating his son John Maynard by 54 years on the same proposition.(5) J.N. Keynes had two fellow leftists to aid him in his book. One was Henry Sidgwick and the other was Alfred Marshall, both being socialists and mentors of young John Maynard Keynes.(6) The elder Keynes book was required reading among Fabian socialists and was listed for sale in the official organ of the American Fabian Society under the listing, “Recommended books on Socialism and Social Reform.”(7) Thus John Maynard Keynes was nurtured on socialism and atheism practically from his mother’s milk.
At the age of 21 Keynes was taken in hand by G. Lowes Dickinson, the effete Fabian socialist at Cambridge University. There he was joined by Leonard Woolf, a life long Fabian and G.E. Moore the philosopher of the Fabian Society of socialists. John Maynard Keynes reported his activities dutifully to his father, who was a lecturer in moral science at the University. The role of steering his son into the respectable facade of Fabian socialism has not been properly aired in biographical sketches of the elder Keynes. It is generally overlooked that John Neville Keynes was general overseer of his sons activities and associations at Cambridge.
It is reported that in 1905, “A wave of Fabian socialism was soon sweeping over the new undergraduates, and politics, not psychological literature, became the principal topic of conversation among the intelligentsia. This new tide caught up many of Lytton’s friends—including James, Maynard Keynes, and Brooke himself.” (Lytton and James Strachey and Rupert Brooke. –ed.)(8) James Strachey was a life long member of the Fabian Society and Rupert Brooke, an intimate of Keynes, became the president of the Cambridge Fabian Society.(9) The teachings of Sydney and Beatrice Webb, as Fabian leaders, became the guide line for this group. In fact, every basic theme brought out by Keynes in later life can be traced to the economic and political principles taught by the Webbs many years before.
The chronology of John Maynard Keynes’ association and activity with Fabian socialism is unbroken from 1904 until his death. In 1912 Keynes was reported as a member of “an astonishingly brilliant batch” of Cambridge Fabians.(10) Like his American Fabian colleagues, such as Felix Frankfurter, Walter Lippmann and Frederick P. Keppel, Keynes was a key expediter of conscientious objectors in England. Like his American counterparts, Keynes was also a government official while at the same time carrying out socialist defeatist policies. This covered the World War I period from 1914-1918.
In spite of his public record as a socialist, Keynes was appointed as an aid to Prime Minister David Lloyd George during the Paris peace talks with Germany in 1919. During this period he was asked by the Fabian socialists to head their London School of Economics.(11) As mentioned previously, Keynes quit the peace conference along with Walter Lippmann because their leftist proposals were not accepted.
At the end of 1919, Keynes wrote The Economic Consequences of the Peace of which a special edition was published bearing the imprint of the British Fabian Society. This special edition was distributed among socialists both in England and the United States. It was at this time that the Fabian socialists began to pass off Keynes as a “capitalist economist.” At the same time the identical process was applied to Frankfurter and Lippmann in America.
However, Keynes privately was quite insistent that he was a red. During December 1917, Keynes wrote to his mother,
My Christmas thoughts are that a further prolongation of the war, with the turn things have taken, probably means the disappearance of the social order we have known hitherto. With some regrets I think I am on the whole not sorry. The abolition of the rich will be rather a comfort and serve them right anyhow. What frightens me more is the prospect of general impoverishment. In another year’s time we shall have forfeited the claim we had staked out in the New World and in exchange this country will be mortgaged to America. Well, the only course open to me is to be bouyantly bolshevik; and as I lie in bed in the morning I reflect with a good deal of satisfaction that, because our rulers are as incompetent as they are mad and wicked, one particular era of a particular kind of a civilization is very nearly over.(12)
The following year Keynes reiterated to his mother about “being a Bolshevik.” In September 1918 Keynes wrote confidentially,
My most amusing job just lately has been to invent a new currency for Russia. Dudley Ward and I have been spending a great deal of time on the details, as we have had to design the notes, get them printed, choose the personnel, answer conundrums and do the whole thing from top to toe. We hope to have the plan launched on the world in two or three weeks’ time.(13)
The plan to refashion Keynes as a capitalist authority who would play the role of ‘admitting’ the dastardly deeds of his ‘class’ was not confined to the socialists in England. The Bolsheviks pursued the same line. In 1919 Nicolai Lenin issued a wildly enthusiastic panegyric on Keynes book, The Economic Consequences of the Peace. He declared, “Nowhere has the Versailles Treaty been described so well as in the book by Keynes.”(14) The fat was in the fire and Keynes’ pro-bolshevism was in danger of being publicly established. Keynes as a covert leftist partisan posing as a defender of capitalism was in jeopardy.
Lenin later manipulated one of his adroit propaganda side-steps by quoting Keynes and utilizing his material and at the same time damning him as, “a ruthless opponent of Bolshevism.” This saved Keynes for the role as an anti-bolshevik figure among influential circles in Great Britain. It was a brilliant deception and indicated a skillful close-order drill in left-wing political cover-up. Lenin, of course, was well apprised of Keynes bolshevik sympathies. The red cells at Cambridge University were in close contact with the Fabians and a full dossier on Keynes was available to the Soviet leaders.
Lenin managed to exploit Keynes’ leftist slant in the Fabian Society’s edition of the Economic Consequences and at the same time sufficiently damn him so as to safeguard his role as a ‘plant’ in conservative economic circles.
Lenin formalized this Keynesian posture at the Second Congress of the Communist International addressing red delegates from every country in the world on July 19, 1920 with the declaration; “I will quote another economic source which assumes particularly great significance, the British diplomat Keynes, the author of The Economic Consequences of the Peace, who on the instructions of his government, took part in the Versailles peace negotiations, watched them directly from the purely bourgeois point of view, studied the subject step by step, and took part in the conference as an economist. He arrived at conclusions which are stronger, more striking and more instructive than any a Communist revolutionary could advance, because they are conclusions drawn by an acknowledged bourgeois, a ruthless opponent of Bolshevism, which he, like an English philistine, pictures to himself in a monstrous, savage and brutal form. Keynes arrived at the conclusion that Europe and the whole world, with the Versailles Peace, is heading for bankruptcy. Keynes resigned; he threw his book in the face of the government and said: ‘You are committing acts of madness.’ ”(15)
In this case when Lenin engaged in name calling he obviously furnished Keynes with political defenses that could be employed to further infiltrate the more respectable British institutions. This was and is a common Bolshevik device to cover their ‘respectable’ agents.
This “ruthless opponent of Bolshevism” was allowed to move freely throughout the Soviet Union in 1925 and again in 1928 with his Russian born wife. If Lenin’s accusation had any serious intent then Keynes and his wife would have naturally been barred at the red frontier. Otherwise they would have been shot since these were the years of the Red Terror where even menshevik socialists were being executed by the thousands.(16) Keynes had to be a pro-bolshevik in order to receive these special privileges. Keynes was not the only one since thousands of so-called reform socialists were flitting in and out of communist organizations at that time. In the United States the Fabians even applied to the Russian Bolsheviks for admission into the Communist International, with headquarters in Moscow.(17)
In 1926 Keynes emphasized his pro-bolshevik position by writing that he was on the “extreme left” as compared to Sidney Webb the head of the Fabian socialists in Britain.(18) Keynes’ subsequent organization of the International Monetary Fund in cooperation with Soviet representatives and American Soviet spies (1945-46) demonstrates his continuing Soviet associations even towards the end of his life.
Keynes’ sociological and economic devices are applicable to the entire dictatorial spectrum. In 1928 on his way back from the Soviet Union Keynes had a long conference with the German economist Hjalmar Schacht. Keynes reported that he and Schacht agreed on Keynesian policies. Thirty-four months later Schacht joined hands with Hitler and utilized Keynesian methods to socialize the German nation for a war economy. When World War II began Keynes declared, “that Britain would have to employ all of the weapons of Dr. Schacht.”(19) Later Keynes reiterated that, “the various recipies devised by Dr. Schacht for Germany would have to be applied by Britain. . . .”(20) The Fabian socialists pondered over the Keynesian nature of Hitlerian economics. As mentioned before, Mussolini saw in Keynes projections the basic economic weapons with which to shore up his Fascist System. Earl Browder while still National Secretary of the Communist Party of the United States also realized that Keynes furnished the perfect battering ram with which to topple the system of free enterprise thereby laying the groundwork for an American Soviet system. Hitler, Mussolini and the communists all found Keynesian formulas equally acceptable as a means of expediting totalitarian rule.
The British Fabian socialists analyzed this controlled state potential and passed the lesson on to their followers. John Strachey a top Fabian (and a former communist) and a cabinet member in the Labor government, (Fabian socialist) explained the Keynesian lesson in Hitler’s economic successes as follows:
By what black magic, as it seemed to most contemporary observers, had the thing been done? As a matter of fact, the Nazis had merely applied, albeit with whole-hearted vigour, measures for the restoration of full employment which now have become commonplace of almost all informed economic and political discussion. They had simply applied those obvious remedies of ‘re-flation’ which follow naturally from Keynes’ critique of the loss of inherent stability in latter-day capitalism.(21)
With the Fabian admission that Nazism was a socialistic form of rule we have the callous observation that Hitler made things work. The fact that this was made to function by planned human sacrifice of millions of humans and massive expropriations of private property is overlooked with coldly clinical detachment by the Fabian mind.
One of the most puzzling paradoxes is the insistant claim by almost all leftists that Keynes was a ‘capitalist economist.’ Since the original leftist projection in 1920 (after Keynes’ publication of The Economic Consequences of the Peace) of Keynes as a follower of classical economics there has been a concerted campaign to present him as the ultimate in scientific detachment.
The follow-up tactic was to pose Keynes’ pronouncements as ‘confessions’ of wrong-doing from inside the ‘capitalist camp.’ This political duplexity and improvised make-believe has beguiled an unbelievable number of bankers, manufacturers and key political figures. The tactic of political impersonation coupled with the utmost contempt for those who have been seduced has been reflected in the United States through such Fabians as John K. Galbraith, Seymour Harris and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
Extraordinary efforts have been made to deny Keynes’ connections with Fabian socialism. There has been an almost hysterical chant insisting that Keynes was anti-socialist and anti-bolshevik. Actually Keynes periodic surfacing as a pro-Soviet partisan is much more recognizable than the records of such notorious Soviet agents as Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White.
Keynes’ tie-in with Fabian socialism is so extensive that it is difficult to compress the record within the confines of a few pages. Even a thousand page book would not exhaust Keynes’ Fabian trail. A few high points will serve to dramatize the depth and extent of Keynes Fabian immersion. In 1925 in an article entitled “The Future” Keynes declared rapturously, “What a debt every intelligent being owes to Bernard Shaw!” This statement was repeated by Keynes in 1932.(22) Shaw along with the Webbs was the high priest of Fabianism in both Britain and the United States. About that time Shaw had just completed his Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism laying down the rules for future socialism wherein all dissidents would be killed mercifully. Keynes retained political intimacy covering the entire period when Shaw became in turn an advocate of Mussolini’s fascism, Hitler’s nazism and Stalin’s bloody rule.
In the 1920’s Keynes set the pattern for devious Fabian permeations. As noted previously Margaret Cole a high Fabian executive, blamed Keynes for leading the younger socialists into the dishonest use of statistics in putting across Fabian propaganda.(23)
Exploiting the political naivete of Americans both Walter Lippmann and Felix Frankfurter in 1919 served as Fabian socialist midwives in the birth of Keynesianism in this country. In that year Frankfurter brought over the manuscript of Keynes’ Economic Consequences of the Peace from England to be published here. In the 1930’s Lippmann and Frankfurter again expedited Keynes’ writings.
In 1933 Frankfurter was ensconced as a lecturer in Oxford University. Fellow Fabian socialist Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. reports that, “Later in the Autumn Keynes had talks with Frankfurter, who was then at Oxford; and in December Frankfurter forwarded to Roosevelt an advance copy of an open letter to the President scheduled for publication in the New York Times at the end of the year.”(24) Thus the New Deal coterie of Fabians arranged a preplanned ‘spontaneous’ open letter that was made to appear as an expression from an independently minded English economist. In the meantime F.D.R. had the copy in his hand well in advance of the N.Y. Times publication date. The Times was privy to this unprincipled scheme to fool the American people and has been in the forefront selling Fabian socialism, writ ‘Keynesian’ ever since.
When American Fabian socialists within the New Deal found need to organize another ‘spontaneous’ point of pressure the deception was pulled off again. Schlesinger boasted that when Keynes visited the United States in 1934, “Keynes found others in Washington more receptive. Steered around by Tugwell, he met a number of younger men and told them to spend—a monthly deficit of only $200 million, he said, would send the nation back to the bottom of the depression, but $300 million would hold it even and $400 million would bring recovery. A few days later he sent Roosevelt the draft of another New York Times article entitled ‘agenda for the President.’ ”(25) The sequence of multi-layered trickery was carried off with the dispatch of a smooth confidence game. First Keynes conspired with Fabians in Washington to establish policy pressures from within the administrative bureaucracy. This was done behind F.D.R’s back. Next he conspired with the president to plant a so-called independent article. F.D. Roosevelt went over this material with Keynes beforehand. Next Keynes arranged with the leftists in the New York Times to put over this piece of manufactured news onto the public as an exclusive feature. In this intricate maneuver everyone was deceived in some measure, except the Fabian socialist center.
The intertwining deceptions became a habituated reflex among Fabian schemers. Their success in duping those in high finance to serve leftist purposes is phenomenal. They developed psychological skills especially tailored to get the pompous and opportunistic collectors of fame and glory to dance to the leftist tune. These clever intriguers became highly skilled in the black art of planting ideas in the minds of those self-admiring egocentrics who occupy positions of influence. The diaries and private letters of the founders of Fabian socialism are filled with self-congratulatory gloatings over how the selfish and power-hungry in high places, are seduced into carrying out Fabian policies under the illusion that these are their own independently thought out concepts.(26)
Marriner Eccles, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board under F.D.R. and an official of the vital National Advisory Council on International Monetary and Financial Problems under President Truman is a classic example of a Fabian manipulated policy maker. Eccles was duped into thinking that his Keynesian Economic projections were the product of his own brain. While his autobiography is full of barbs as to the lack of intelligence among the banking and industrial community, his own involvement shows an amazing degree of obtuseness. Eccles was so anxious to show up his own peers that he fell under the spell of the same dupery that he practiced on those in the business world.
Eccles was a Western banker who inherited a tremendous fortune and managed to control a massive interlocking complex consisting of banks, real estate, utilities, minerals and industries. In the early 1930’s the word passed among the Fabian socialist idealogues in the University of Utah that Eccles was ripe for a Trojan horse role while dressed in the garb of ‘international banker.’ A reading of his autobiography clearly shows that he was impelled by continuous pressures and brain washing applied by Fabian socialists who ‘just happened’ to wander into the Utah territory. The deliberate scheme to set Eccles up as sort of an economic ‘Judas bull’ and fashioned to bludgeon his fellow capitalists into Keynesian paths, is a raw example of a time worn strategem that had been tried out on wealthy dupes in England many times before. One could list a dozen examples of other so-called American business representatives of that time, who carried the Fabian package in the shelter of their personal copyright. They sounded and acted as if they were all shaped by the same cookie cutter. Keynesianism was the new name brand for the old Fabian recipe.
The record shows that Eccles was bounced along between such Fabian socialists as Adolph Berle, Isidore Lubin, Paul H. Douglas and Leon Henderson. Included in this pressure group was Lauchlin Currie who later fled the country when faced with the charge of being a Soviet spy.(28) However, the chief convincer was Stuart Chase who sold Eccles on the theories of John M. Keynes in 1933.
Chase was the crafty manipulator who just a few months before issued a book advocating a reign of terror against capitalists via firing squads. Chase’s book, incidentally, was published by the presumably staid Macmillan Company. The first sentence of the book declares, “John Maynard Keynes tells us that in one hundred years there will be no economic problem,” and the last sentence proclaims, “Why should Russians have all the fun of remaking a world?”(29) It became must reading among New Dealers who enthusiastically embraced the title of the book as their own name.
Chase pulled Eccles along by his ego and ensconced him in Washington among the Fabian wolf pack using him as front runner for socialistic utterances. Thus Fabianism had another of its perfect Trojan Horses effectively disguising its leftist motives. In recent years Stuart Chase has sunk his roots in the Rockefeller controlled giant, Standard Oil of New Jersey. Ensconced as policy maker Chase has pulled the strings that stimulate the Rockefeller political reflexes.
Stuart Chase listed the sixteen categories of capitalists slated to be killed after the Fabian take over. Five of the sixteen proscriptions fit Mr. Eccles performances in the investment field. They were: 1. Loaning of money at high interest rates to small borrowers. 2. Speculating in securities. 3. Speculating in land and natural resources. 4. Speculating in commodities. 5. Promoting of products through high pressure advertising gimmicks.
On the basis of the above Mr. Eccles would be a candidate for execution at least five times under Stuart Chase’s socialist ground rules.(30) Since Stuart Chase in recent years attached himself to the Rockefeller financial complex it is interesting to note that they qualify for at least ten of the categories that invite the firing squad. Thus many of the very wealthy seem to be almost morbidly attracted to those who intend to destroy them. It makes an interesting study in human incongruity.
We are all familiar with the victims of communist or nazi butchery who were forced to dig their own graves. In the case of Eccles and others of his ilk they rush to embrace their own potential executioners. Through people such as Eccles the Fabians were able to get a strangle hold on the Federal Reserve system and were able to siphon off billions of American dollars onto foreign soil. The siren song of Keynesianism has been the catalyst binding the willing dupes to the hard core socialist schemers.
Keynes’ card-carrying record as a Fabian socialist is clear and unmistakable. This fact alone is remarkable because the usual procedure by the Fabian leadership is to disguise their prominent political operatives under non-socialist and even anti-socialist colors. In England the knowledge of Keynes Fabian connection has long been an accepted fact. It is only in the United States that the Fabians have been able to successfully cast Keynes in the role of an independent non-socialist.
For many years editions of the Fabian News bore announcements of Keynes’ lectures at Fabian socialist functions. Although Keynes found permanent sanctuary within the British Liberal Party his real influence was within the Fabian dominated Labour Party. A prominent Fabian leader admitted that, “J.M. Keynes’ theories were far more powerful inside it (Labour Party) than elsewhere.”(31) And John Strachey, veteran Fabian within the Labour Party, in commenting about the second Labour Government of 1929 admitted, “We young people in the Labour Movement were in touch with him (Keynes) and we were convinced that whether he was right or wrong, an attempt to combat unemployment with some sort of Keynesian lines was the one hope for the Government.”(32)
Keynes was admittedly an associate member of the influential New Fabian Research Bureau which was wildly pro-Soviet.(33) During the early 1950’s the Home Research Secretary of the Fabian Society openly admitted that J.M. Keynes was a Fabian.(34)
In 1935 Sidney and Beatrice Webb had published a two volume work ghosted for them by the Soviet Foreign Office and were fully immersed in glorifying the Soviet Union. At that time Keynes visited them and complained that his General Theory wasn’t selling well. Soon the Fabian juggernaut began to pass the word through in Britain and the United States. The intercession on the part of his fellow Fabians worked like magic for Keynes. Soon his General Theory became a best seller and the campaign was on to peddle the socialist line via the Keynesian label. Thus the question whether Keynes was a Fabian can be coupled with the question was Stalin a Bolshevik? Some observers ask the question in compound form;—Was Keynes a pro-Bolshevik Fabian?
The defense will immediately greet our thesis with the declaration that Keynes’ moral conduct has nothing to do with the validity of his teaching and advocacy. The left-wing continually claims scientific objectivity and impartiality for its minions regardless of their ideological faith or their depraved conduct.
One could conceivably concede that an individual with an addiction to something odious could advocate something of merit if he would recognize to himself that his problem was indeed a perversion and a threat to society. However, Keynes and his entire circle operated in the firm belief that their depravities were superior to the accepted norm of morality. Sexual molestation of children was adorned with a philosophic justification that denounced heterosexual society as stupid and tradition bound. Underscoring this animalistic nest of perversion, and drugs, was a general leftist belief in socialism.
Already the New York Times has sent out journalistic feelers that perhaps it is time to abandon Keynes as a symbol of the Fabian process.(35) However, their fear of public arousal due to the scandalous disclosures in the Strachey-Keynes letters has proven to be groundless. The American public has been apathetic and even indifferent to (the fact that the main economic theory governing our society was conceived in a mind depraved through sexual perversion. It is our contention that Keynes is no more qualified to furnish a healthy economic theory than a gangster chieftain would be to furnish the guidelines in the pursuance of criminology.
1 Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto, Introduction by Harold Laski, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Fabian Society. Foreword by the Labour Party. Allen and Unwin, London, 1961, pp. 144-45. (An earlier version with an introduction by Laski was published by the Fabian Society in Great Britain in 1921. In 1933 the League for Industrial Democracy—The American Fabians—republished the British edition with an introduction by Norman Thomas which stated at the outset:
The Modern, world wide Socialist movement has antecedents far back in history, but in its present scientific formulation it began with the appearance of the Communist Manifesto in 1848.
Later Thomas proclaimed,
It is only the very greatest of the leaders of the historic religions of mankind who can vie with Karl Marx in the hold their names have over the affection—yes, the reverence of men.
In concluding Norman Thomas in speaking of the Communist Manifesto, declared:
It still remains, however, as a charter of a great working class struggle for its own emancipation and the achievement of the classless society.
It is important to note that both Laski and Thomas were also avid supporters of the so-called non-socialist theories of J.M. Keynes.
3 Ibid. (Contrary to common opinion the income tax is an ancient device used from time immemorial to extract wealth and to control populations, particularly by despotic systems.)
4 John Neville Keynes, Scope and Method of Political Economy, Macmillan, London, 1891, p. 69
6 Sidgwick was referred to in the Fabian socialist Encyclopedia of Social Reform as supporting the “views of the men sometimes called Socialists of the Chair. . . .” (p. 1238). Marshall’s socialism will be dealt with in further detail in the next chapter.
7 American Fabian, Dec. 1895, pp. 13, 16.
8 Holroyd, Lytton Strachey, Vol. 1, p. 250.
Beatrice Webb, Our Partnership, Longman’s Green and Co., London, 1948.
“James B. Strachey, the psychoanalyst, brother of Lytton Strachey. As an undergraduate of Trinity College joined the Cambridge University Fabian Society in 1908.” p. 526.
10 Anne Fremantle, This Little Band of Prophets, Mentor, p. 230.
11 Harrod, Life of Keynes, p. 249.
12 Harrod, Life of Keynes, p. 224.
14 V.I. Lenin, Selected Works, Moscow, U.S.S.R. Vol. VIII, p. 289
SO WHEN YOU FEEL YOUR LIVING IN A SOVIET STATE WITH THEIR TICK BOXS AND SUBSIDIES YOU’LL KNOW WHERE IT CAME FROM ………………..COMRADE BROWNSKI AND HIS FABIAN FASCIST TEAM OF PERVS’
http://keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch10.html
EASY TO SEE HOW SEXUALISING CHILDREN CAME ABOUT- THE FABIAN UNITED NATIONS AND FABIAN GOVERNMENTS ACROSS THE WEST SPREADING THEIR COMMIE FILTH- AND FOLK TOO STUPID TO KNOW STILL VOTE THEM IN…….
TRUEISM- WE GET WHAT WE DESERVE!!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.