Or is it Austrian libertarians?
Several weeks ago I was putting together a post on various
topics. After I had a good draft, I decided
not to publish it – most of it was just me whining. One section I found worthwhile, and turned it
into a post about culture and why
culture matters to some libertarians.
This is a post about another section: the intersection of libertarian
theory and Austrian economics, and why those drawn to one are so regularly
drawn to the other. I suspect this road
has been travelled before; I only will offer a modified version of what I
concluded.
What kind of
libertarian are you?
One who believes the non-aggression principle grounded in
private property.
While I’m at it, let’s
cover the Austrian ground
I think more so than Austrian, I would describe my economics
as free-market. Of course, the Austrian
School comes infinitely closer to this ideal than any other school of economic
thought (of which, frankly, there is only one other school of economic thought
– some form of central planning and interventionism).
How would I define free market economics? The non-aggression principle grounded in
private property. Funny how that works.
Conclusion
The non-aggression principle grounded in private property –
I cannot think of a much better definition for each of libertarian theory and
Austrian economics.
"Funny how that works"
ReplyDeleteThus does capitalism mean anarchy, and vice versa, and anarcho-capitalism is a redundant term. They are one and the same principal, justice, in two different contexts.
Igor Karbinovskiy
I asked Robert Wenzel this question on my radio program a few months back, and he had a very good answer to it as well I thought.
ReplyDeletebm:"Of course, the Austrian School comes infinitely closer to this ideal than any other school of economic thought (of which, frankly, there is only one other school of economic thought – some form of central planning and interventionism)."
ReplyDeleteSomething about this article has been bugging me since I first read it. After some reflection, I do not believe that you stated anything explicitly with which I take issue.
I’ll be pithy. The Austrian School of economics is not defined by its conclusions, but rather by its methodology. In this regard, its methodology really has nothing at all to do with libertarianism.
I do not believe that you *defined* Austrian economics as “free-market” in your article, but rather I guess that a naive reader might think you did, or at least he might find it to be implied.
Given that most people prefer peace and prosperity to the alternatives, the conclusions reached by Austrian methods do indeed dovetail nicely with libertarian preferred outcomes. That each school reached its conclusions by differing methodologies might be seen as a strengthening case for those conclusions.
It seems it is always the little things with me.
dpong
gpond
DeleteIn this, I am no student or puritan. In the end, conclusions reached via Austrian methodology are quite often free-market.
And when I define free market, it is the same definition (more or less) that I could use for the term "libertarian."
Nothing more - but then, this is why I will never be asked to teach a course at LvMI (well, this and the fact that bionic doesn't want to show his face)!