Austro Libertarian

Winter • 2019

A Magazine for Liberty

AUSTRO LIBERTARIAN

STRATEGY IDEAS INTERVIEW

Reflections on libertarianism On the distinctions and unity A conversation with Peter Klein and civilization: Frank Meyer’s between economic reasoning on entrepreneurship theory from defense of freedom and virtue and political theory an Austrian point of view page 16 page 24 page 29 EDITOR’S LETTER

How does one introduce a print magazine in the digital era? Clearly, we ought to steer clear of grandiose visions of future success, or fantasies of changing the world. Such non-utopian realism fits us; for, with our Austro-Libertarian ideology we combine a certain demeanor of caution and prudence. It’s not just our politics and economics, but our social and cultural outlook, that is resolutely anti-Jac- obin. Leftists of all stripes are sure to dismiss us as reactionaries.

In any case, one clear aspect of our endeavor suggests that there is still a market for substantive critical commentary, for long-form reflection on the world as it is. We realize that memes are the contemporary pamphlets of revolution, and we respect our brethren who labor in the meme-factories across the West. And yet, here we are. Say a quick prayer for us. We don’t know what we’re doing.

Well, this isn’t exactly true. We recognize a handful of trends and developing mentalities that have inspired this effort. For starters, there’s a growing desire to temporarily tune out, often from sheer exhaustion, social media and the daily barrage of blogs and repetitive articles — to hold something in hand once in a while.

Beyond this, there is increasing appeal to the idea of the “post-political.” Obvi- ously, politics enters our minds. We are, after all, lorded over by a swarm of supercilious buffoons who operate under the profoundly inaccurate label of “rep- resentatives.” We therefore heartily endorse the growing mentality of existence beyond the political. And thus, we intend to balance our coverage of the political with the cultural, and with meta-analysis.

We envision a quarterly printed publication that covers a broad range of sub- jects— economic theory, political and legal theory, social frameworks, history, and cultural analysis. Our economics, which we hold as a value-free science, are Austrian; or more specifically, Mengerian, Böhm-Bawerkian, and Misesian. Our political theory is rights-based; Libertarian in the Rothbardian, Hoppean, anarcho-capitalist strain. Our social outlook is biased toward the traditional, toward the established, and the natural order of things. We offer the perfect blend, by our own standards of judgement, of appreciation for the past and acceptance of the progress enabled by the rise of capitalism in the West.

C. JAY ENGEL

Chief Editor and Founder of Austro Libertarian Magazine

4 CONTENT

THE WORLD 10 01 AS IT IS In the ageless campaign for liberty, the libertarian engages the world around him, guided by his ideals, but working in light of his surroundings.

LEFT AND RIGHT 02 16 Against the statism of modern conservatism and the hedonism of pop-libertarianism: finding value in the thought of Frank Meyer.

THEORY: IDEAS AND IDEALS 24 03 Distinct fields of study, yet related to each other: the case for uniting Austro-Libertarianism into a single label.

OUR BELOVED 38 MOVEMENT 04

The Austrian School, like any other traditional of social thought, has its schisms and deviations.

DISSENT! 44 05 THE PATH FORWARD On the importance of challenging the narratives of our time with intelligent thought and becoming better quality dissenters.

6 A CONVERSATION WITH PETER KLEIN

Professor Peter Klein on entrepreneurship, the insights of the Misesian tradition, and the role of profit seeking in a world of uncertainty. 29

DONATE

FOR EVERY DOLLAR YOU DONATE YOU WILL FEEL LESS GUILTY ABOUT YOUR EXCESS CAPITAL.

AUSTROLIBERTARIAN.COM/DONATE

77 "To think of everything as political, to conceal everything by using this word, to place everything in the hands of the state, to appeal to the state in all circumstances, to subordinate the problems of the individual to those of the group, to believe that political affairs are on everybody's level and that everybody is qualified to deal with them - these factors characterize the politicization of modern man, and, as such comprise a myth."

— Jacques Ellhul Just Don't Call it Fusionism Frank Meyer’s Defense of Freedom and Virtue

BY: BEN LEWIS

istorian Thomas Fleming once observed that “memory is not history.” What Fleming meant is that the way we re- member things is not necessarily the way they happened. This, apparently, is as true of the ascription of terms as it is the recollection of events.

A case in point: one of the most recognizable lines of 20th century conservatism is the title of Richard Weaver’s 1948 book, Ideas Have Consequences. In fact, despite the impressive quantity and quality of Weaver’s writings, his entire corpus seems to have been reduced, if the internet is any guide, to this single phrase. The irony is that “ideas have consequences” did not come from Weaver, but from his publisher, and that Weaver did not care for the line to which he almost solely owes his fame.

A similar fate has befallen Frank Meyer. Meyer, a prominent figure in postwar American conservatism, is best known for his attempted “fusion” of traditionalist conservatism and libertarianism. Even today, Meyer’s name is nearly synonymous with “fusionism.” But just like Weaver, the term most commonly associated with Meyer was not his creation, but rather came as something of a pejorative from his colleague and critic, L. Brent Bozell. While Meyer certainly did attempt to harmo- nize traditionalism and libertarianism, he disavowed the fusionist label, saying that he was not attempting to fuse two disparate elements together, but was simply attempting to show that “although they are sometimes presented as mutually incom- patible, [they] can in reality be united within a single broad conservative political theory, since they have their roots in a common tradition and are arrayed against a common enemy.”

Meyer worked out his libertarian-traditionalist thesis over the course of two dec- ades, from 1955 until his death in 1972, in dozens of articles and in his 1962 book, In Defense of Freedom. The progression of Meyer’s analysis, from polemicist to seri- ous theorist, offers a glimpse into the internecine conflicts that racked conservatism during the early years of its post-World War II resurgence. More importantly, his work holds valuable insights into the resolution of the enduring tension between freedom and virtue

16 28 A CONVERSATION WITH PETER KLEIN

Professor Peter Klein on entrepreneurship, the insights of the Misesian tradition, and the role of profit seeking in a world of uncertainty.

Peter Klein is the Carl Menger Research Fellow at the Mises Institute and Professor of Entrepreneurship at Baylor Univer- sity. He is an Adjunct Professor of Strategy and Management at the Norwegian School of Economics. He earned his PhD in eocnomics at the University of CA in Berkeley and is a former Associate Editor of The Collected Works of F.A. Hayek.

While this was previously transcribed from a podcast that was done in 2017, it has yet to, and perhaps won’t for some time, attain the audience it truly deserves. Dr. Klein is a de- light to talk to, and his insights are for the ages.

29 C. JAY ENGEL: Before we get too deep into the substance PK: Yes. The way a lot of people in everyday discourse or in the busi- of questions related to entrepreneurship theory, give me an ness press use the term entrepreneurship is in the first sense that you overview of how you became interested in entrepreneurship. I mentioned– the entrepreneur is a self-employed person or who doesn’t read recently a working paper that you had put up, which was work for someone else or who creates a new venture. So in that sense a collection of reflections on your contributions to entrepre- Steven Jobs was an entrepreneur in the early 70’s or early 80’s but at neurship theory. You talk a little bit about your own history some point he flipped and became a CEO executive; maybe when Ap- and it is interesting that you actually came to be aware of the ple reached a certain size. Austrian School before you even began your undergraduate studies. So how did you become interested in entrepreneur- But what I am interested in is not how we classify individuals as entre- ship theory specifically? preneurs or not. But rather, as you said, understanding the role or the function that entrepreneurship plays in an economy or in a society. If PETER KLEIN: That’s a great question. People ask me you look at most of the classic contributions in the entrepreneurship sometimes that type of question because I don’t have the literature in economics, both inside the Austrian School and outside same background as a lot of researchers in the entrepreneur- the Austrian School from people like Joseph Schumpeter of Frank ship field. Entrepreneurship is an applied topic; it’s a business Knight; they really weren’t talking about all business owners or self- phenomenon. A lot of people who study entrepreneurship are employed people. When Mises said the entrepreneur was the driving themselves former entrepreneurs who are maybe looking for force of the market, he meant that it is the entrepreneurial role or func- some theory or framework to understand better the kind of tion that moves the market forward. experiences that they’ve had. I teach in an entrepreneurship program, and we use a lot of experiential learning with our Now, different scholars have defined that function in slightly different students and with companies and entrepreneurs we consult ways. Schumpeter famously identified that the entrepreneurial func- with and so forth. tion as that of introducing novelty or innovation into an economic system. So whatever person or agent it is in a particular case, there’s But I came at it from the other perspective. I was already in- this force that sort of shakes up the old system, challenges the old ways terested in economics and how an economy works and what of doing things, and comes up with new practices and new products makes an economy grow. From my readings in the Austrian and services. That is the nature of the entrepreneurial function (ac- literature, I realized that the entrepreneur was obviously a cording to Schumpeter). Now whether that takes place in a small or pretty important agent. Mises has this famous line where he large business, whether it is done by an individual or not, that was a describes the entrepreneur as the driving force of the market secondary consideration for Schumpeter; the key was that we need economy. All of the other economic theories that I had been somebody introduce something new into the system and we’ll call that exposed to in school– the sort of mainstream, mathemati- entrepreneurship. cal microeconomics and Keynesian macroeconomics and so forth– they never even mentioned the entrepreneur once. If I’ve worked a lot with the sense of entrepreneurship developed by you look at the leading economics textbooks at the undergrad- Frank Knight, an American economist who in some ways was the hos- uate level, most of them don’t even have the word entrepre- tile to the Austrian School on some issues, but in his treatment of neur in the index. It’s not just that they don’t have a detailed uncertainty and entrepreneurship I think he is close to Mises. Knight discussion of the entrepreneur, they don’t even have the word. said that the function of the entrepreneur is to bear uncertainty. Some- body has to be responsible for making decision and deciding how as- So I thought, there has to be some economists out there who sets will be used and so forth under conditions of deep uncertainty. are actually interested in entrepreneurship and who think the The entrepreneurial role is to exercise that kind of control over decision entrepreneur plays a vital role. And so, of course, historically making and resource allocation under conditions of uncertainty. that has been the Austrian School. The Austrians have been the only school of economics left that takes entrepreneurship And by the way, even based on thinking about those two ways of defin- seriously. I was trying to figure out how entrepreneurship was ing entrepreneurship, it’s easy to see for those who have been exposed the foundation of markets and growth and prosperity even to mainstream economics.. what’s missing from mainstream econom- though I didn’t start out with a practical interest in the “do- ics is anything about innovation and novelty, and anything about ing” of entrepreneurship. deep uncertainty. If you can model the entire economic system with a few simple equations, you don’t need Schumpeter or Knight, there’s CJE: Colloquially, we think of entrepreneurship as a self- no role for innovation or certainty bearing in that model. So it’s no employed person or someone that engages in non-hourly wage surprise that most mainstream economists completely forgot that the work or perhaps a person who “strikes our on their own.” But entrepreneur even existed. when you talk about entrepreneurial theory, especially within the Austrian tradition, it’s actually a role that’s being played; a logically necessary component of the market process. Can you comment a little bit on the definition of entrepreneurship as we are going to employ it?