The Long March Through FAIR: How Big Can the Tent Become?

[_Gadianton]

The likely reason for this is that large numbers of scholars of the Austrian persuasion are not Rothbardians, and they are not Rothbardians because they are not libertarian anarchists. I do not subscribe to, and strongly disagree with, the Rothbardian wing of libertarianism. It is, in point of fact, one reason I am a conservative, and not a straight libertarian.

According to the VMI:

Murray N. Rothbard Medal of Freedom: In recognition of significant and wide-ranging libertarian leadership, as a scholar or public intellectual, established through the generosity of George W. Connell.

http://mises.org/about/3323

It doesn't appear to be a medal handed out distinctly to "Rothbardians".

At any rate, Droopy, I do value your input here. I am clearly not familiar enough with the movement to make final calls on who's who there. I haven't run across anything critical of Rothbard yet on the Mises site, rather, I've been snowed under by defenses of Rothbard and criticisms of "classic libertarianism" including snooty dismissals of Thomas Sowell (for being too liberal -lol-). But I know you've been affiliated with the group for a long time and if you say that Rothbard isn't in favor with mainstream Austrianism today, I'm not going to say you're wrong, but I look to you to provide me with a couple names of distinguished scholars over there to make your case.

Shake the intellectual pinball machine in your head again, Gad, and see if you can hit a few more bumpers on the way down.

heh. +1

[_Darth J]

Virtually all Christian Reconstructionists have an affinity for Austrian economics.

Virtually all left leaning Mormons have an affinity for the general doctrines of the LDS church, and yet the LDS church has little affinity for much of what they may believe philosophically and ideologically in the political, economic, or social sphere. The head pounding logical fallacy inherent in your argument here should be obvious to you, E.

Has anyone notice how so many defenders of the Church:

1. Insist that evolution is compatible with official LDS doctrine, when official LDS doctrine says evolution is not compatible with the Plan of Salvation; and

2. Insist that only certain political ideologies are compatible with being a "real" Mormon, when LDS leaders have consistently stated that the LDS Church is politically neutral?

[_Doctor Scratch]

It seems more and more, Droopy, that you subscribe to extremist and dangerous ideologies. Once again, I'm prompted to wonder aloud how it is that you're able to carry on your support of the Austrian School and the Von Mises Institute. Do you find things to admire about National Socialism and the KKK as well, I wonder?

[_Droopy]

It doesn't appear to be a medal handed out distinctly to "Rothbardians".

It may not be.

At any rate, Droopy, I do value your input here. I am clearly not familiar enough with the movement to make final calls on who's who there. I haven't run across anything critical of Rothbard yet on the Mises site, rather, I've been snowed under by defenses of Rothbard and criticisms of "classic libertarianism" including snooty dismissals of Thomas Sowell (for being too liberal -lol-).

I do not in any manner subscribe to all, or any specific concepts and positions taken at the Von Mises Institute, and I've long taken note of their criticisms of people like Sowell, Friedman etc. Most of their views on national security I consider to be recklessly naïve and sometimes brain numbing. I understand their arguments, but consider them to be, like many of Ron Paul's ideas, hopelessly misguided. The real contribution of Austrian economics is the whole idea of human action (Praxology) and its meaning for political economy, its theory of money and credit, and the relationship between economic policy and actual economic/social behavior. I have no interest in some of its member's odd criticisms of Lincoln, some of its member's pining away for the culture of the old South, or many of its beliefs on national security and related historical issues.

But I know you've been affiliated with the group for a long time and if you say that Rothbard isn't in favor with mainstream Austrianism today, I'm not going to say you're wrong, but I look to you to provide me with a couple names of distinguished scholars over there to make your case.

I'm not affiliated with them. I read and study stuff from scholars and researchers in that tradition, and I take from it what I consider useful. Rothbard has a strong presence there, but I don't think he is at all preeminent. Von Mises himself believed strongly in the necessity of government, abeit strictly limited and bound by the rule of law. So did Hayek. Anarchism, of the Left or Right, is not my cup of tea.

[_Droopy]

It seems more and more, Droopy, that you subscribe to extremist and dangerous ideologies.

CFR (didn't expect that, did you?)

Once again, I'm prompted to wonder aloud how it is that you're able to carry on your support of the Austrian School and the Von Mises Institute.

Oh please, Scratch. Really. Do you have to make a fool of yourself in this manner? You should have read the entire thread, Scratch, because E has himself already said that his criticism of the tiny Christian Reconstructionist fringe within the Von Mises Institute was not intended to discredit the philosophy as a whole (I'm not sure I accept that assertion, as of yet, but he has made it). He also said that Gad was just tweaking me with this, so go ask them about it.

I don't think, Scratch, that you have the slightest idea regarding Austrian economic theory and its relation to contemporary economic problems, or its theory of the proper role, scope, and prerogatives of the state such that you could hold a serious debate with anyone on the subject, regardless of your standard pontifications above.

Do you find things to admire about National Socialism and the KKK as well, I wonder?

I can't say anything about the KKK, but the Nazis had great threads. You just have to love those SS officer's long black leather overcoats studded with runic symbols and those tall, dark, polished black boots.

The Nazis made the commies look like fashion victims.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Ah, okay. I see from your above post (the one you directed at Gad) that actually you don't support the Austrian School very much at all. You seem to think that, by and large, most of it is utter bunk. Okay, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

[_Droopy]

Ah, okay. I see from your above post (the one you directed at Gad) that actually you don't support the Austrian School very much at all. You seem to think that, by and large, most of it is utter bunk. Okay, then. Thanks for clearing that up.

That's not what I said, dip. Go back and read it again and then carefully recreate here, to the degree that your limited intellectual capacity will allow, what I actually said.

Oh, nevermind, I'll do it for you, yet again:

I do not in any manner subscribe to all, or any specific concepts and positions taken at the Von Mises Institute...I read and study stuff from scholars and researchers in that tradition, and I take from it what I consider useful.

How, from this, do you extract "you don't support the Austrian School very much at all" and "You seem to think that, by and large, most of it is utter bunk"?

Most of Austrian economics is deeply relevant and a powerful analytic tool, both theoretically and empirically. My only beef was with one tiny fringe element within it and with Rothbardian anarchism, which hardly dominates this school of thought.

Really, Scratch, I can read you like a proverbial book.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Droopy,

How do you apply the principles of the Austrian School to your own, personal economic situation? I.e., what is it that you do for a living, and how do you find the principles of North, Von Mises, etc. applicable in your day-to-day economic life?

[_Droopy]

Droopy,

How do you apply the principles of the Austrian School to your own, personal economic situation? I.e., what is it that you do for a living, and how do you find the principles of North, Von Mises, etc. applicable in your day-to-day economic life?

An economic life based upon thrift, industry, and saving for a rainy day, living within one's means, avoiding debt, paying for what one acquires out of existing funds and being very careful about using credit, and productive work as the basis of prosperity and affluence. In other words, pretty much what you would find in Providing the Lord's Way.

[_Darth J]

Droopy,

How do you apply the principles of the Austrian School to your own, personal economic situation? I.e., what is it that you do for a living, and how do you find the principles of North, Von Mises, etc. applicable in your day-to-day economic life?

An economic life based upon thrift, industry, and saving for a rainy day, living within one's means, avoiding debt, paying for what one acquires out of existing funds and being very careful about using credit, and productive work as the basis of prosperity and affluence. In other words, pretty much what you would find in Providing the Lord's Way.

It sounds like you are exactly the kind of shopper that City Creek Center is looking for!