DOCSLIB.ORG

Fifteen Great Austrian Economists Possible, Andthanks Inparticular

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fifteen Great Austrian Economists Possible, Andthanks Inparticular 15 GREAT AUSTRIAN ECONOMISTS EDITED WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY RANDALL G. HOLCOMBE LUDWIG VON MISES INSTITUTE AUBURN, ALABAMA COVER PHOTOGRAPHS 1. Murray N. Rothbard 2. Frank A Fetter 3. Frederic Bastiat 4. EA Hayek 5. Murray Rothbard and Henry HazIitt 6. Ludwig von Mises 7. EA Hayek and Ludwig von Mises 8. Philip Wicksteed 9. Henry HazIitt 10. Diego de Covarrubias 11. Eugen von BOhm-Bawerk 12. Jean-Baptiste Say 13. AR.J. Turgot 14. Carl Menger 15. BOhm-Bawerk as Austrian Finance Minister 16. WIlhelm Ropke 17. William Hutt 18. Carl Menger (No known picture of Richard Cantillon exists.) For photographs on the cover and throughout the book, many thanks to the Austrian National library, The Bartley Institute, Cambridge University library, Henry HazIitt, The Carl Menger Papers in the Special Collections Library at Duke University, Margit von Mises, Princeton University, JesUs Huerta de Soto, JoAnn Rothbard, and the University ofVienna. 15 The painting of Covarrubias is by El Greco. Copyright © 1999bytheLudwigvonMises Institute. All rights reserved under International and Pan-AmericanCopyright Conventions. Nopart ofthisbook maybe reproduced ortransmitted in any form orby any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information stor­ age and retrieval system, withoutpriorpermissioninwriting from thepublisher. All inquiries shouldbeaddressed tothe LudwigvonMises Institute,518 West Magnolia Avenue, Auburn, Alabama36832; [email protected]. ISBN: 0-945466-04-8 CONTENTS Introduction: TheAustrianSchoolPastand Present Randall G. Holcombe v 1. Juande Mariana: The Influence ofthe SpanishScholastics Jesus Huerta de Soto 1 2. Richard Cantillon:TheOrigin ofEconomicTheory Mark Thornton. ........................................ .. 13 3. A.R.J. Turgot: Brief, Lucid,and Brilliant Murray N. Rothbard. .................................... .. 29 4. Jean-Baptiste Say: Neglected ChampionofLaissez-Faire Larry ]. Sechrest .. ...................................... .. 45 5. Frederic Bastiat: BetweentheFrenchand Marginalist Revolutions Thomas]. DiLorenzo. .................................... .. 59 6. CarlMenger: TheFoundingofthe AustrianSchool Joseph T. Salerno. ....................................... .. 71 7. Philip Wicksteed: The BritishAustrian Israel M. Kirzner ....................................... .. 101 8. Eugenvon Bohm-Bawerk: Capital,Interest, and Time Roger W. Garrison. ..................................... .. 113 9. FrankA.Fetter:AForgottenGiant Jeffrey M. Herbener " 123 10. Ludwigvon Mises: The Dean ofthe AustrianSchool Murray N. Rothbard 143 11. HenryHazlitt: ThePeople'sAustrian Jeffrey Tucker. ......................................... .. 167 12. EA. Hayek: AustrianEconomistandSocialTheorist Peter G. Klein. ........................................ .. 181 13. WilliamH. Hutt: The "Classical" Austrian John B. Egger. ......................................... .. 195 14. Wilhelm Ropke: A HumaneEconomist Shawn Ritenour ....................................... .. 205 15. MurrayN. Rothbard: Economics,Science, and Liberty Hans-Hermann Hoppe ,, 223 Index , 245 Aboutthe Contributors .. ................................. .. 259 III The Ludwigvon Mises Instituteacknowledgeswithgratitudethe generosityofall the donorswhocontributedto makingFifteen Great Austrian Economists possible, andthanks inparticular: James M. Rodney Romill Foundation Reed W. Mower ArthurCinader R.E.Foxt Robert M. Hansen, M.D. EdwardW. Rehak MarkM. Adamo Dr. LarryJ. Eshelman JamesW. Frevert InMemoryofJohn andErlene Hendrickson Russel A. Hoelscher Mr. and Mrs. W.R. Hogan,Jr. JamesKuden JoeR. Lee ArthurL. Loeb Mr. and Mrs. WilliamLowndes, III Roland Manarin Mr. and Mrs. WilliamW. Massey,Jr. Joseph Edward PaulMelville Victor Pankey DonPrintz, M.D. Betty P. Ramsay JamesA. Reichert Mr. and Mrs.JohnSalvador ConradSchneiker Josephine H. Spidell William V. Stephens LawrenceVanSomeren, Sr. INTRODUCTION: THE AUSTRIAN SCHOOL PAST AND PRESENT RANDALL G. HOLCOMBE AT THE END of the twentieth century, the Austrian School of economics is exerting a significant influence both on the development of academic eco­ nomics and on the application of economic theory to public policy. An in­ creasing number of economics professors are sympathetic with the fundamental ideas ofAustrianeconomics, and academicjournalsare taking more account of the Austrian School.1 A half century ago, few academic economists would evenhavebeen familiar with the AustrianSchool, except superficially, and among those who were, most would have disagreed with its methods and conclusions. Today, the ideas of Austrian economics are closer to the mainstream of economic thought, not because Austrian eco­ nomicshas changed,butbecause mainstreameconomicshas moved toward the Austrian point of view. A similar shift has occurred in the public-policy arena. The policy implications of Austrian economics, once rejected as ex­ treme, are now embraced as true. In the process, the Austrian School has becomeincreasinglyvisible as anintellectualforce. Despite the significant advances that Austrian economics has made, it still plays a minor role in academic economics, and only a small minority of academic economists consider themselves members of the Austrian School. The Austrian School of economics is growing, but is not yet a part of the mainstream of academic economics. Its impact on public policy is more difficult to judge, because in many policy areas" other schools of thought arrive at similar conclusions. For example, the Chicago School, led by the ideas of Milton Friedman, often supports public policies consistent with Austrian economics, so the ideas of these schools can reinforce each other. ITwo recent examples are the review article byIsrael M. Kirzner, "Entrepreneurial Discov­ ery and the Competitive MarketProcess: An Austrian Approach," Journal ofEconomic Litera­ ture 35, no. 1 (March 1997): 60-85; and Sherwin Rosen, "Austrian and Neoclassical Economics: Any Gains From Trade?" Journal of Economic Perspectives 11, no 4. (Fall 1997): 139-52. Both of these journals are publications of the American Economic Association, indi­ cating the degree to which Austrian ideas are at least recognized, if not embraced, by the profession'smainstream. v vi Introduction Policy initiatives may find their intellectual foundations in many different schools of thought, but it should be apparent that the laissez-faire approach to public policy so often promoted by the Austrian School is much more accepted at the end of the twentieth century than it was in the middle. Ideas do have consequences, and an appreciation for the workings of the market system, always a hallmarkofthe AustrianSchool, has found its way into the public-policy debate. If the ideas of Austrian economics have made such inroads, one might wonder why, in the academic arena, Austrian economics does not playa bigger role. Part of the answer has to do with academic institutions them­ selves. Most university faculty teach at state institutions, which by itself maybias them toward supporting the state and being suspicious of laissez­ faire ideas. Mostuniversityfaculty have tenure, whichslows the turnover of personnel, and perhaps of ideas. Furthermore, academic ideas find their outlets largely in academic journals, and the editorial boards of those jour­ nals tend to be controlled by the academic mainstream, further promoting mainstream ideas over alternative schools of thought.2 Because publication in academic journals is often a prerequisite for promotion and tenure in a university environment, academic survival often pushes young scholars in the directionofthemainstreammethodsand ideasintheirdiscipline. Austrian economics has fought an uphill battle for acceptance for sev­ eral reasons, but at the same time, the Austrian School has been gaining in strength, and is becomingmore accepted inacademia. A growingnumberof economics professors align themselves with the Austrian School, and even amongthosewhodonot, Austrianideas arebecomingmorerecognized and respected. Interestingly enough, the late-twentieth-century resurgence of interest in the Austrian School has been concentrated in the United States. This is largely due to Ludwig von Mises's migration, and his Austrian eco­ nomics seminaratNewYork University. Onemight go so far as to argue that the modem Austrian Schoolwould not exist were it not for the influence of LudwigvonMisesonhisAmericanstudents.3 Ofcourse, economistsbefore Mises developed the foundation onwhich hebuilthis ideas,andhehadlike-mindedcontemporarieswhoalso influenced the direction ofAustrian economics. By the late 1940s, the AustrianSchool was scarcely wider than Mises and those who studied directly under him at New 2See Leland B. Yeager, "Austrian Economics, Neoclassicism, and the Market Test," Journal ofEconomic Perspectives 11, no. 4 (Fall 1997): 153-65, for aninsightful discussion on the challenges thatanalternative to mainstream ideasfaces inthe academicmarketplace. 3See Karen 1. Vaughn, Austrian Economics in America: The Migration ofaTradition (New York: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1994), for a good discussion ofthe developmentofthe modem Austrian School. Also see Murray N. Rothbard, "The Present State of Austrian Economics," Money, Method, and the Austrian School, vol. I, The Logic of Action (Chelten­ ham, U.K.: EdwardElgar, 1997). Fifteen Great Austrian Economists vii York University. From there, the students of Mises found their own stu­ dents, and by the 1970s the AustrianSchoolhadbeguntoblossom. AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS BEFORE 1950
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economics for Real People
    Economics for Real People An Introduction to the Austrian School 2nd Edition Economics for Real People An Introduction to the Austrian School 2nd Edition Gene Callahan Copyright 2002, 2004 by Gene Callahan All rights reserved. Written permission must be secured from the publisher to use or reproduce any part of this book, except for brief quotations in critical reviews or articles. Published by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, 518 West Magnolia Avenue, Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528. ISBN: 0-945466-41-2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dedicated to Professor Israel Kirzner, on the occasion of his retirement from economics. My deepest gratitude to my wife, Elen, for her support and forbearance during the many hours it took to complete this book. Special thanks to Lew Rockwell, president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, for conceiving of this project, and having enough faith in me to put it in my hands. Thanks to Jonathan Erickson of Dr. Dobb’s Journal for per- mission to use my Dr. Dobb’s online op-eds, “Just What Is Superior Technology?” as the basis for Chapter 16, and “Those Damned Bugs!” as the basis for part of Chapter 14. Thanks to Michael Novak of the American Enterprise Insti- tute for permission to use his phrase, “social justice, rightly understood,” as the title for Part 4 of the book. Thanks to Professor Mario Rizzo for kindly inviting me to attend the NYU Colloquium on Market Institutions and Eco- nomic Processes. Thanks to Robert Murphy of Hillsdale College for his fre- quent collaboration, including on two parts of this book, and for many fruitful discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Division of Labor and Society: the Social Rationalism of Mises and Destutt De Tracy Dorobăț, C
    Division of Labor and Society: The Social Rationalism of Mises and Destutt de Tracy Dorobăț, C. E. Published version deposited in CURVE May 2016* Original citation & hyperlink: Dorobăț, C. E. (2016) Division of Labor and Society: The Social Rationalism of Mises and Destutt de Tracy. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, volume 18 (4): 436- 455 http://www.nsti.org/procs/Nanotech2009v1/6/M72.404 Publisher statement: © 2009 NSTI http://nsti.org. Reprinted and revised, with permission, from the Nanotechnology 2009 [Proceedings of the Nanotech International Conference and Trade Show 2009], p. 534-537, 03-07 May 2009, Texas, USA. This article is available under a Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, No- Derivatives license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/) *this replaces the post-print version which was deposited January 2016. CURVE is the Institutional Repository for Coventry University http://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open The VOL. 18 | NO. 4 | 436–455 QUARTERLY WINTER 2015 JOURNAL of AUSTRIAN ECONOMICS DIVISION OF LABOR AND SOCIETY: THE SOCIAL RATIONALISM OF MISES AND DESTUTT DE TRACY Carmen elena Dorobăţ ABSTRACT: Ludwig von Mises’s social rationalist views on society, first discussed in Salerno (1990), do not appear to have any precursors in the history of economic thought. The present paper highlights the contri- butions of a French philosopher, A.L.C. Destutt de Tracy, to the theory of social development as one precursor of Mises’s theory. I use extensive textual evidence to highlight the important similarities between the social theories presented in De Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy and Mises’s Human Action.
    [Show full text]
  • 109-120 Tucker Book Review
    BOOK REVIEWS Libertarianism—A Primer. By David Boaz. New York: The Free Press, 1997. Libertarianism: A Reader. David Boaz, ed. New York: The Free Press, 1997. What It Means to Be A Libertarian. By Charles Murray. New York: Broadway Books, 1997. Reviewed by Jeffrey Tucker* he American anti-statist intellectual tradition includes a wide variety of thinkers, from left utopians to secessionist T agrarians to right anarchists. Seemingly small theoret- ical differences between them can produce hugely different an- swers to the all-important question: what is to be done? Murray Rothbard’s primary contribution to this tradition was to firmly tie anti-statism to a strict adherence to property rights, rights which the state tramples on by its very existence, and rights which are best protected and enforced by private parties. The answer to the question of what is to be done follows clearly: gov- ernment power must be curbed and eliminated, to be replaced by private association. But modern libertarians haven’t always fol- lowed up on this radical Rothbardian project. Some libertarian writers—let’s call them left-libertarians—prefer to concentrate on the personal liberties associated with this political doctrine, while submerging property-centered social theory and a radical critique of the State, especially of the imperial state, within a larger laundry list of other aspects of libertarian policy. David Boaz’s primer may not be the prime example of ap- plied left-libertarianism (the post-Goldwater works of Karl Hess better deserve this moniker) but it nonetheless fits comfort- ably in that category. The reader is left with no doubt about where Boaz stands on lifestyle issues (drugs, sex, speech, etc.) and the policy concerns of the punditry class (how this or that program can be improved), but is left to speculate on precisely how strict Boaz’s utopia would be with regard to the protection of property rights, or how or on what level of society those rights would be enforced.
    [Show full text]
  • “Bad” Greed from the Enlightenment to Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929)1 Erik S
    real-world economics review, issue no. 63 subscribe for free Civilizing capitalism: “good” and “bad” greed from the enlightenment to Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929)1 Erik S. Reinert [Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia and Norway] Copyright: Erik S. Reinert, 2013 You may post comments on this paper at http://rwer.wordpress.com/2013/03/25/rwer-issue-63/ As we look over the country today we see two classes of people. The excessively rich and the abject poor, and between them is a gulf ever deepening, ever widening, and the ranks of the poor are continually being recruited from a third class, the well-to-do, which class is rapidly disappearing and being absorbed by the very poor. Milford Wriarson Howard (1862-1937), in The American Plutocracy, 1895. This paper argues for important similarities between today’s economic situation and the picture painted above by Milford Howard, a member of the US Senate at the time he wrote The American Plutocracy. This was the time, the 1880s and 1890s, when a combination of Manchester Liberalism – a logical extension of Ricardian economics – and Social Darwinism – promoted by the exceedingly influential UK philosopher Herbert Spencer – threatened completely to take over economic thought and policy on both sides of the Atlantic. At the same time, the latter half of the 19th century was marred by financial crises and social unrest. The national cycles of boom and bust were not as globally synchronized as they later became, but they were frequent both in Europe and in the United States. Activist reformer Ida Tarbell probably exaggerated when she recalled that in the US “the eighties dripped with blood”, but a growing gulf between a small and opulent group of bankers and industrialists produced social unrest and bloody labour struggles.
    [Show full text]
  • The End of Economics, Or, Is
    THE END OF ECONOMICS, OR, IS UTILITARIANISM FINISHED? By John D. Mueller James Madison Program Fellow Fellow of The Lehrman Institute President, LBMC LLC Princeton University, 127 Corwin Hall, 15 April 2002 Summary. According to Lionel Robbins’ classic definition, “Economics is the science which studies human behavior as a relationship between ends and scarce means that have alternate uses.” Yet most modern economists assume that economic choice involves only the means and not to the ends of human action. The reason seems to be that most modern economists are ignorant of the history of their own discipline before Adam Smith or Jeremy Bentham. Leading economists like Gary Becker attempt to explain all human behavior, including love and hate, as a maximization of “utility.” But historically and logically, an adequate description of economic choice has always required both a ranking of persons as ends and a ranking of scarce goods as means. What is missing from modern economics is an adequate description of the ranking of persons as ends. This is reflected in the absence of a satisfactory microeconomic explanation (for example, within the household) as to how goods are distributed to their final users, and in an overemphasis at the political level on an “individualistic social welfare function,” by which policymakers are purported to add up the preferences of a society of selfish individuals and determine all distribution from the government downwards, as if the nation or the world were one large household. As this “hole” in economic theory is recognized, an army of “neo-scholastic” economists will find full employment for the first few decades of the 21st Century, busily rewriting the Utilitarian “economic approach to human behavior” that dominated the last three decades of the 20th Century.
    [Show full text]
  • New Working Papers Series, Entitled “Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics”
    Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics no. 74 the other canon foundation, Norway Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance CONTACT: Rainer Kattel, [email protected]; Wolfgang Drechsler, [email protected]; Erik S. Reinert, [email protected] 80 Economic Bestsellers before 1850: A Fresh Look at the History of Economic Thought Erik S. Reinert, Kenneth Carpenter, Fernanda A. Reinert, Sophus A. Reinert* MAY 2017 * E. Reinert, Tallinn University of Technology & The Other Canon Foundation, Norway; K. Car- penter, former librarian, Harvard University; F. Reinert, The Other Canon Foundation, Norway; S. Reinert, Harvard Business School. The authors are grateful to Dr. Debra Wallace, Managing Director, Baker Library Services and, Laura Linard, Director of Baker Library Special Collections, at Harvard Business School, where the Historical Collection now houses what was once the Kress Library, for their cooperation in this venture. Above all our thanks go to Olga Mikheeva at Tallinn University of Technology for her very efficient research assistance. Antiquarian book dealers often have more information on economics books than do academics, and our thanks go to Wilhelm Hohmann in Stuttgart, Robert H. Rubin in Brookline MA, Elvira Tasbach in Berlin, and, above all, to Ian Smith in London. We are also grateful for advice from Richard van den Berg, Francesco Boldizzoni, Patrick O’Brien, Alexandre Mendes Cunha, Bertram Schefold and Arild Sæther. Corresponding author [email protected] The core and backbone of this publication consists of the meticulous work of Kenneth Carpenter, librarian of the Kress Library at Harvard Busi- ness School starting in 1968 and later Assistant Director for Research Resources in the Harvard University Library and the Harvard College 1 Library.
    [Show full text]
  • Cantillon and the Rise of Anti-Mercantilism
    CANTILLON AND THE RISE OF ANTI-MERCANTILISM MARK THORNTON* Resumen: En este trabajo se pretende demostrar que Cantillon formó parte tanto del pensamiento como del movimiento antimercantilista de su época, influyendo en gran medida en el cambio de opinión en contra del mercantilismo que se fue fraguando de 1720 a 1734. Clasificación JEL: B110, B31, N010. Abstract: This article places Cantillon at the center of anti-mercantilist thought and the anti-mercantilist movements in London and Paris between the time of the Bubbles of 1720 and his murder in 1734 and it places his ideas at the turning point between the eras of mercantilism and antimercantilism. JEL classification: B110, B31, N010. «It seems to me that there is a connection between physiocracy and anti-mercantilism, or at any rate between Boisguilbert (1646-1714) and Quesnay (1694-1774), though it is not easy to say just what this connection was.» Martin Wolfe1 «In itself Cantillon’s (168?-1734?) was a contribution of real significance, and it would be difficult to find a more incisive prophet of nineteenth-century liberalism.» Robert B. Ekelund, Jr. and Robert F. Hébert2 * Dr. Mark Thorntorn, Senior Fellow, Ludwig von Mises Institute, [email protected] 1 Martin Wolfe, «French Views on Wealth and Taxes from the Middle Ages to the Old Regime,» Journal of Economic History 26 (1966): 466-483. 2 Robert B. Ekelund, Jr. and Robert F. Hébert. A History of Economic Theory and Method (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975): 44. Procesos de Mercado: Revista Europea de Economía Política Vol. VI, n.º 1, Primavera 2009, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Biographies BIOGRAPHIES 327
    Biographies BIOGRAPHIES 327 ALDRICH, John Herbert Articles 1. “A method of scaling with applications to the 1968 and 1972 U.S. presidential elections.” American Political Born Science Review, 11(March):1977 (with Richard September 24, 1947, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA McKelvey). Current Position 2. “The dilemma of a paretian liberal: some consequences Pfizer-Pratt University Professor of Political Science, Duke of Sen’s theorem,” and “Liberal games: further thoughts University, Durham, North Carolina, 1997–. on social choice and game theory.” Public Choice, 30(Summer):1977. Degrees 3. “Electoral choice in 1972: a test of some theorems of B.A., Allegheny College, 1969; M.A., Ph.D., University of the spatial model of electoral competition.” Journal of Rochester, 1971, 1975. Mathematical Sociology, 5:1977. 4. “A dynamic model of presidential nomination Offices and Honors campaigns.” American Political Science Review, Co-Editor, American Journal of Political Science, 14(September):1980. 1985–1988 (with John L. Sullivan). 5. “A spatial model with party activists: implications for President, Southern Political Science Association, electoral dynamics,” and “rejoinder.” Public Choice, 1988–1989. 41:1983. Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral 6. “A downsian spatial model with party activism.” Sciences, 1989–1990. American Political Science Review, 17(December):1983. Fellow, Bellagio Center, 2002. 7. “Southern parties in state and nation.” Journal of Heinz Eulau Award (best article in the American Political Politics, August:2000. Science Review), 1990 (with Eugene Borgida and John L. 8. “Challenges to the American two-party system: Sullivan). evidence from the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 presi- Gladys Kammerer Award (best book on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Betting on People the Olin Foundation’S Support for Law and Eco- Nomics Was Part of a Larger Success in ­Public-Policy Philanthropy
    4 Betting on People The Olin Foundation’s support for law and eco- nomics was part of a larger success in public-policy philanthropy. The foundation wanted to build up an alternative intellectual infrastructure that could compete with entrenched academic and media elites at generating new ideas for the governance of American society. “What we desperately need in America today is a powerful counterintelligentsia,” wrote longtime Olin president William Simon in his 1978 bestselling book, A Time for Truth. He wanted 50 to bolster thinkers dedicated to “individual liberty...meritocracy...and the free market.... Such an intelligentsia exists, and an audience awaits its views.” Just about every aspect of the Olin Foundation’s philanthropy involved meeting that long-term goal. It was a monumental challenge. Though much of the funder’s grantmaking focused on scholars at col- leges and universities, today left-wing orthodoxies are even more dom- inant on campuses than when the foundation first started to address this problem in the 1970s. Can we consider Olin to have succeeded in fostering fresh thinking that translates into altered public policies? First, it’s important to note that Olin had a few savvy allies in its cause. The earliest efforts in this area were made by the William Volker Fund way back in the 1940s. In 1947, the Volker Fund agreed to help a group of 17 economists fly from the United States to Switzerland for the first meeting of the Mont Pelerin Society, an organization of libertarian economists founded by Friedrich Hayek to promote free markets and refute socialism.
    [Show full text]
  • The Essential Von Mises
    The Essential von Mises The Essential von Mises Murray N. Rothbard LvMI MISES INSTITUTE Scholar, Creator, Hero © 1988 by the Ludwig von Mises Institute The Essential von Mises first published in 1973 by Bramble Minibooks, Lansing Michigan Copyright © 2009 by the Ludwig von Mises Institute and published under the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0/ New matter copyright © 2009 by the Ludwig von Mises Institute Ludwig von Mises Institute 518 West Magnolia Avenue Auburn, Alabama 36832 Mises.org ISBN: 978-1-933550-41-1 Contents Introduction by Douglas E. French . vii Part One: The Essential von Mises 1. The Austrian School. 3 2. Mises and “Austrian Economics”: The Theory of Money and Credit . .13 3. Mises on the Business Cycle . 21 4. Mises in the Interwar Period . 25 5. Mises on Economic Calculation and Socialism . 29 6. Mises on the Methodology of Economics. 31 7. Mises and Human Action . 35 8. Mises in America . .41 9. The Way Out . 45 Part Two: Ludwig von Mises: Scholar, Creator, Hero 1. The Young Scholar . 51 2. The Theory of Money and Credit. 55 3. The Reception of Mises and of Money and Credit . 67 4. Mises in the 1920s: Economic Adviser to the Government . 73 5. Mises in the 1920s: Scholar and Creator . 79 6. Mises in the 1920s: Teacher and Mentor . 91 7. Exile and the New World . 99 8. Coda: Mises the Man . 115 v Introduction he two essays printed in this monograph were written by my Tteacher Murray N. Rothbard (1926–1995) about his teacher Ludwig von Mises (1881–1973).
    [Show full text]
  • The Neglect of the French Liberal School in Anglo-American Economics: a Critique of Received Explanations
    The Neglect of the French Liberal School in Anglo-American Economics: A Critique of Received Explanations Joseph T. Salerno or roughly the first three quarters of the nineteenth century, the "liberal school" thoroughly dominated economic thinking and teaching in F France.1 Adherents of the school were also to be found in the United States and Italy, and liberal doctrines exercised a profound influence on prominent German and British economists. Although its numbers and au- thority began to dwindle after the 1870s, the school remained active and influential in France well into the 1920s. Even after World War II, there were a few noteworthy French economists who could be considered intellectual descendants of the liberal tradition. Despite its great longevity and wide-ranging influence, the scientific con- tributions of the liberal school and their impact on the development of Eu- ropean and U.S. economic thought—particularly on those economists who are today recognized as the forerunners, founders, and early exponents of marginalist economics—have been belittled or simply ignored by most twen- tieth-century Anglo-American economists and historians of thought. A number of doctrinal scholars, including Joseph Schumpeter, have noted and attempted to explain the curious neglect of the school in the En- glish-language literature. In citing the school's "analytical sterility" or "indif- ference to pure theory" as a main cause of its neglect, however, their expla- nations have overlooked a salient fact: that many prominent contributors to economic analysis throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries expressed strong appreciation of or weighty intellectual debts to the purely theoretical contributions of the liberal school.
    [Show full text]
  • Marginal Revolution
    MARGINAL REVOLUTION It took place in the later half of the 19th century Stanley Jevons in England, Carl Menger in Austria and Leon walras at Lausanne, are generally regarded as the founders of marginalist school Hermann Heinrich Gossen of Germany is considered to be the anticipator of the marginalist school The term ‘Marginal Revolution’ is applied to the writings of the above economists because they made fundamental changes in the apparatus of economic analysis They started looking at some of the important economic problems from an altogether new angle different from that of classical economists Marginal economists has been used to analyse the single firm and its behavior, the market for a single product and the formation of individual prices Marginalism dominated Western economic thought for nearly a century until it was challenged by Keynesian attack in 1936 (keynesian economics shifted the sphere of enquiry from micro economics to macro economics where the problems of the economy as a whole are analysed) The provocation for the emergence of marginalist school was provided by the interpretation of classical doctrines especially the labour theory of value and ricardian theory of rent by the socialists Socialists made use of classical theories to say things which were not the intention of the creators of those theories So the leading early marginalists felt the need for thoroughly revising the classical doctrines especially the theory of value They thought by rejecting the labour theory of value and by advocating the marginal utility theory of value, they could strike at the theoretical basis of socialism Economic Ideas of Marginalist School This school concentrated on the ‘margin’ to explain economic phenomena.
    [Show full text]