4 ms·

>libertarians love F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman Well that's where you went wrong already. Surely most libertarians respect these guys, but that's about as fa

by _0ffh 6y ago

>libertarians love F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman Well that's where you went wrong already. Surely most libertarians respect these guys, but that's about as far as you can take it. Some do love them, I suppose. To others they're thoroughly misguided in some of their conclusions, which are seen as much to statist-socialist in nature. See e.g. [1] for a libertarian critique of Hayek. [1] https://vimeo.com/53850513 https://vimeo.com/53850513

nickik 6y ago
Its actually Hans Herman Hesse and the people from the Mises Institute are on the outside. Hesse in particular philosophically speaking is pretty far is no longer even classically liberal in many way. They are decently not representative. They just have the best online media presence.
- _0ffh 6y ago
  Uh, if we accept the premise that modern American right-libertarianism was practically single-handedly created by Murray Rothbard, and that Hans-Hermann Hoppe is actually still quite faithful to his old mentor, I guess we'll have to accept that his positions lie well inside the boundaries of right-libertarian thought. I'm not claiming that all of Hoppe's positions are typical for, or representative of all libertarianism. I just used him as a handy example that the assertion that "libertarians love F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman" is not a given, which is exactly the topic of the lecture I referred to. As an aside, I'm sure the guys at the Mises Institute will be ecstatic to hear that you think their media presence is the best, even though all that sweet Koch money is going to Cato. I think I kind of agree. :)
  - zozbot234 6y ago
    > Uh, if we accept the premise that modern American right-libertarianism was practically single-handedly created by Murray Rothbard Uh, no. The Friedman/Cato Institute folks are/were definitely libertarian and part of the right, and Murray Rothbard has a terrible reputation among them, as someone who was extremely ideological and had very little appreciation for sensible policy or even for good intellectual argument. I'm actually not too familiar with HH Hoppe, but it looks like he too has pretty fringe views. The LvMI does plenty of good work, especially in raising awareness and popularizing economic thinking broadly-construed, but Misesian libertarianism is fringe.
    - _0ffh 6y ago
      Well, Rothbard was one of the three founders of Cato. He's actually the one who suggested the name. After the not-so-amicable parting of ways between Rothbard and Cato I wouldn't have expected them to sing his praises. Why do I seem to keep getting objections to the simple statement that not all libertarians "love Hayek and Friedman"? I mean, really, it's not that great of a claim. And lastly, call Rothbardianism fringe, but it's surely still libertarianism, right? Rothbard's been hugely influential on modern right-libertarianism as a whole, so why the insistence of erasing him from the picture?

by _0ffh 6y ago

nickik 6y ago

Its actually Hans Herman Hesse and the people from the Mises Institute are on the outside. Hesse in particular philosophically speaking is pretty far is no longer even classically liberal in many way. They are decently not representative. They just have the best online media presence.

_0ffh 6y ago
Uh, if we accept the premise that modern American right-libertarianism was practically single-handedly created by Murray Rothbard, and that Hans-Hermann Hoppe is actually still quite faithful to his old mentor, I guess we'll have to accept that his positions lie well inside the boundaries of right-libertarian thought. I'm not claiming that all of Hoppe's positions are typical for, or representative of all libertarianism. I just used him as a handy example that the assertion that "libertarians love F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman" is not a given, which is exactly the topic of the lecture I referred to. As an aside, I'm sure the guys at the Mises Institute will be ecstatic to hear that you think their media presence is the best, even though all that sweet Koch money is going to Cato. I think I kind of agree. :)
- zozbot234 6y ago
  > Uh, if we accept the premise that modern American right-libertarianism was practically single-handedly created by Murray Rothbard Uh, no. The Friedman/Cato Institute folks are/were definitely libertarian and part of the right, and Murray Rothbard has a terrible reputation among them, as someone who was extremely ideological and had very little appreciation for sensible policy or even for good intellectual argument. I'm actually not too familiar with HH Hoppe, but it looks like he too has pretty fringe views. The LvMI does plenty of good work, especially in raising awareness and popularizing economic thinking broadly-construed, but Misesian libertarianism is fringe.
  - _0ffh 6y ago
    Well, Rothbard was one of the three founders of Cato. He's actually the one who suggested the name. After the not-so-amicable parting of ways between Rothbard and Cato I wouldn't have expected them to sing his praises. Why do I seem to keep getting objections to the simple statement that not all libertarians "love Hayek and Friedman"? I mean, really, it's not that great of a claim. And lastly, call Rothbardianism fringe, but it's surely still libertarianism, right? Rothbard's been hugely influential on modern right-libertarianism as a whole, so why the insistence of erasing him from the picture?