4 ms·

> Austrian instincts are partly about [...] Am I the only one who finds the word "instincts" used in this context deeply disturbing? We've got many well-intent

> Austrian instincts are partly about [...] Am I the only one who finds the word "instincts" used in this context deeply disturbing? We've got many well-intentioned people in history who acted according to their instincts and beliefs. Some of these invented and practiced eugenics, others tried to create an "agrarian communist society" while killing off some 2 million people in 4 years (I read about Khmer Rouge regime recently) and there are many, many more examples. My question is: what is the difference between modern economics and, for example, eugenics? What protective mechanism have we created to make sure no economist attempts to make as all into farmers, killing off all the people who can read and write? Isn't "democracy" alone a bit weak as a guarantee here?

notahacker 11y ago
What makes you think that "modern economists" are more likely than the average person to (i) want to make us all into farmers and kill off intellectuals and (ii) have any chance of succeeding? All the available evidence would suggest that economists are disproportionately unlikely to favour agrarian dictatorship and no better placed than the average person to succeed. In fact "unlikely to favour large scale social engineering backed by force" is about the only thing Austrian economics has in common with mainstream modern economics...
- duncan_bayne 11y ago
  In fact "unlikely to favour large scale social engineering backed by force" is about the only thing Austrian economics has in common with mainstream modern economics... That's flat out wrong, I'm afraid. Proponents of modern economics are very, very willing to perform social engineering backed by force.
  - notahacker 11y ago
    Depends on what you consider "social engineering" really. Even Hayek didn't think that a developed market economy providing a social safety net (and levying taxes to pay for it) counted. Khmer-Rouge style social engineering involved concluding the problem with modern economies is that people are choosing to work in industries not in the national interest, and a practical solution is to abolish all markets and use the military to relocate people and assign them new roles. Name one modern economist who has reached remotely similar conclusions.
    - duncan_bayne 11y ago
      Are you saying that I'm wrong because no modern economists have advocated policies similar to the Khmer Rouge? We're talking about a spectrum of evil here, with Pot and his cronies a way down one end.
eli_gottlieb 11y ago
Modern economics isn't Austrian. The Austrian School are heterodox, and have largely only become popular among laypeople thanks to political lobbying by, for instance, the Koch Brothers.
- duncan_bayne 11y ago
  Re. Koch lobbying for Austrian economics, even stopped clocks are right twice a day :)
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

notahacker 11y ago

What makes you think that "modern economists" are more likely than the average person to (i) want to make us all into farmers and kill off intellectuals and (ii) have any chance of succeeding? All the available evidence would suggest that economists are disproportionately unlikely to favour agrarian dictatorship and no better placed than the average person to succeed. In fact "unlikely to favour large scale social engineering backed by force" is about the only thing Austrian economics has in common with mainstream modern economics...

duncan_bayne 11y ago
In fact "unlikely to favour large scale social engineering backed by force" is about the only thing Austrian economics has in common with mainstream modern economics... That's flat out wrong, I'm afraid. Proponents of modern economics are very, very willing to perform social engineering backed by force.
- notahacker 11y ago
  Depends on what you consider "social engineering" really. Even Hayek didn't think that a developed market economy providing a social safety net (and levying taxes to pay for it) counted. Khmer-Rouge style social engineering involved concluding the problem with modern economies is that people are choosing to work in industries not in the national interest, and a practical solution is to abolish all markets and use the military to relocate people and assign them new roles. Name one modern economist who has reached remotely similar conclusions.
  - duncan_bayne 11y ago
    Are you saying that I'm wrong because no modern economists have advocated policies similar to the Khmer Rouge? We're talking about a spectrum of evil here, with Pot and his cronies a way down one end.

eli_gottlieb 11y ago

Modern economics isn't Austrian. The Austrian School are heterodox, and have largely only become popular among laypeople thanks to political lobbying by, for instance, the Koch Brothers.

duncan_bayne 11y ago
Re. Koch lobbying for Austrian economics, even stopped clocks are right twice a day :)

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]