The Austrian School of Economics and the Gold Standard Mentality in Austrian Economic Policy in the 1930s (original) (raw)
Related papers
An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought Vol. I and Vol. II
Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, 2003
o say that Murray Rothbard wrote with a polemical flair is an understatement of astonishing proportions. On hearing of Rothbard's untimely death in January of this year, the first thought that came to my mind was sitting in my dorm room back at Grove City College reading For A New Liberty completely engrossed in Rothbard's system. I had by that time already read Mises and Hazlitt, and some Hayek, but it was Rothbard who really excited me intellectually. Rothbard was more than an academic writer with an ability to turn a phrase and an uninhibited ability to skewer his opponents. He was, in my opinion, a scholar who possessed many rare abilities. Rothbard eschewed the academic specialisation fashionable in our times (both in general and even in the specific discipline of economics). He was a polymath. There was something iconoclastic about his work, but that often goes with the territory of a scholar who roams so far from his field of specialization in order to unearth truth. Rothbard read widely, digested most of what he read, and was able to synthesize it into his own system of analysis the Rothbardian project of an interdisciplinary science of liberty. His intellectual interest led him to write books in economic theory (Man, Economy and State, 2 vols.) applied economics (Power and Market), economic history (The Panic of 1819 and America's Great Depression), political history (Conceived in Liberty, 4 vols. A New history of Leviathan (edited)), political philosophy (The Ethics of Liberty), and several popular manifestoes (including What Has Government Done to Our Money? Left and Right, and For a New Liberty). At the time of his death, he was at work on additional volumes on the history of economic thought project (which was projected to be at least three or four volumes in total). Given his personal notetaking techniques and writing habits, it seems unlikely that these additional volumes will now be published so much of his outline for the project remained in his head and saw the light of day only when pen was put to paper for the draft *This book review has been published firstly in Economic Affairs, Vol. 15 n°3 Summer 1995 pp. 14-17.°P
Critique of Austrian Economics From 1930 To 1990
The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics mission statement (Block, Hoppe & Salerno 1998) claims that “This forum is open... to articles expressing cogent criticisms of Austrian economics that are useful in provoking a rethinking and clarification of critical points of its theory, policy, or method. As was the case during our tenure with the Review of Austrian Economics, we will not shy away from controversy, regardless of whose oxen are gored.” The purpose of this paper is to provoke a rethinking of Austrian economics and perhaps to gore a few oxen. I have tried to be cogent.
From Mises to Morgenstern: Austrian economics during the ständestaat
The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 2006
an anonymous referee for helpful comments and, in particular, Nicola Giocoli and Robert Leonard for making unpublished typescripts available to me. Of course, any remaining errors and omissions are mine. Finally, for permissions to quote from unpublished sources I am very grateful to Dorothy Morgenstern Thomas and
The use and abuse of the history of economic thought within the Austrian school of economics
2002
The financial assistance of the JM Kaplan Fund is gratefully acknowledged. I would like to thank the students in my ECON 881 course at George Mason University for comments and criticisms of the argument developed in this essay, as well as Keith Jakee for comments and criticisms on an earlier version. Research assistance from J. Robert Subrick and Peter Leeson is gratefully acknowledged. In addition, I would like to acknowledge the comments of an anonymous referee and the editor on an earlier version. The usual caveat applies.
The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2011
The '70s of the 19 th century have always held a special attraction point for specialists in the history of thought. For economic theory, these are the years of the Great Crossroads when economic theory was at critical breaking point, after which several powerful theoretical streams emerged that were to determine later on the overall course of the evolution of economics. The book written by the French economist and philosopher Gilles Campagnolo (Criticisms of Political Economy, Menger, Austrian School of Economics and the German Historical School, Routledge, New York, 2009, pp. 416) is an attempt to find out exactly what happened in the years of the Great Crossroads. It offers not only historical reading, but also theoretical interpretation to explaining the evolution, mutual influence and intermingling of the above individual schools of thought in the economic science. The present paper is a review essay on Campagnolo's new book.