True, these guys (having come later, and often writing in direct response to Marx, a contemporary) are easier to think of in the context of post industrial econ

True, these guys (having come later, and often writing in direct response to Marx, a contemporary) are easier to think of in the context of post industrial economies. IDK, Molinari. I do know Bastiat, but I can't recall anything that speaks directly to the reality of an economy made up of mostly large firms. He's pretty early though, and the world wasn't like that yet (even though Marx saw it coming, I think). The "Austrians" (particularly Hayek, IMO) do address this world of megafirms a lot more than earlier writers (again, makes sense considering the times). This is getting a lot closer to modern theories, with Hayek directly defending "capitalism" (free market systems, and here we really have the modern ideological framework in a similar form to today's). They (Hayek & Mises anyway) had much more modern, abstract theories. Hayek described the economy as an information system, with price signals as its source of information flow. This certainly is a defense (one the the most interesting and convincing, IMO) of free markets, but we're back to the modern definition. ..It's fairly tangential to Marx' definition, and harder to argue for from a traditionally ideological/liberal perspective. IE, it's fairly tangential to and disconnected from the "liberals" of the british enlightenment or the american revolution.