September 19, 2012 § 2 Comments

Exposing Faux Capitalism

English: Cover of the 2011 edition of The Aust...

The impression given by the 501(c)(3) tax-exempt Ludwig von Mises Institute that claims to hate government so much is that the Austrian School of economics has all the answers for what ails us, economically.

But what do we find with a little digging into what prominent Austrian School economists and devotees themselves say?

From the February 21, 2010 Daily Bellinterview with Lew Rockwell (emphasis mine):

Daily Bell: Is the logical outcome of Austrian economics the disappearance of the state?

Rockwell: Mises didn’t think so; neither did Hazlitt. Sudha Shenoy argues that of all the people who entertained the possibility of society without a state in that generation, Hayek comes closest to embodying the anarchistic temperament. In any case, the man who made the real difference in the Austrian School in this regard is Rothbard. It was he who pushed the theoretical apparatus “over the edge,” so to speak…

View original post 254 more words


§ 2 Responses to

  • John says:

    Major? In that article linked to where Block criticizes North, he even says more than once that his disagreements are minor! As per inflation, Mises came to respect Rothbard’s position on inflation. And who knew that scholars could disagree? Surely that disqualifies all serious schools of thought… As for the state, patents, etc… The “Austrian school” doesn’t have an official position on the state, policies, etc., being a school of economics, so surely there will be disagreements about these issues. your blog posts are disingenuous. I mean, heck, the author here is obviously trying to score points by saying the LMvI is tax-exempt. I don’t see how, since most people involved with LMvI strongly dislike taxes. What’s the point here? Oh, right, doesn’t have a real point, only appealing to the non-thinkers. I was hoping for serious debate on substantiative economic issues from this blog, but I realize it is just an attack blog. God forbid there are minor or even major differences between scholars. Wouldn’t this disqualify Austrian economics as a cult, since cult members typically don’t deviate from the accepted rules? Not that it was said that it is a cult here, but judging by this post and others, I’m sure the author feels that way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading at Recovering Austrians.


%d bloggers like this: