The Con Job of Libertarian "Economics"

Capitalism 2

The rise of the so-called "tea party" movement has given a big boost to Libertarian economics, also known as "the Austrian School," a branch of thought that, although it calls itself economics, is better termed a Utopian philosophy. Ever since Paul Samuelson (and even Milton Friedman), academic economics have tried to define a more scientific framework for economics. In general this has meant applying statistical modeling, and formal definitions to various actors in the economy, including both public and private institutions as well as individuals and groups, that can then be applied to surveys and other data. You cannot ever make economics non-political since class and other interests of course also economic interests. But Samuelson hoped to move the economic debate from the realm of mostly ideology, to the realm of mostly evidence driven analysis.

"The Austrian School" is the opposite of a data or evidence driven framework. Texas Congressman Ron Paul is undoubtedly the most influential American advocate. Instead of paying any attention to data, it accepts as given from God (or nature) the transcendental "organizing" power of the market price mechanism. Its name derives from the identity of its founders and early supporters, Ludwig von Mises, and Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek, both Austrians. the Ludwig von Mises Institute and Virginia based George Mason University are the principle US ideological centers of this trend.

Its principles are as follows:

1. The business cycle is a completely virtuous cycle. Slumps are the price we pay for booms. Recessions are the just punishment for the excesses of previous expansions. The fact that the rich reap the rewards regardless, and the poor are the ones punished regardless, is of no importance to the Austrian school. Every graph of the financial crises showing crashes and bubbles is just God's continuing morality play. Government intervention in this "virtuous" cycle prevents God and/or nature from rendering justice with the "tough love" everyone needs – and thus is evil. The Austrians are always in a state of continual frustration because no nation in the world seems to be willing to wait out financial crises and depressions trusting in the "magic of the market" to fix everything – that mirable dictu, keeps crashing and suffering from persistent instability. Instead of waiting for God's judgement, people – to the amazement of the "Austrians" – still resist walking calmly to the grave from starvation or homelessness!! They say: "if this is virtue, then the Devil has ascended Heaven." Nonetheless, the "virtuous business cycle of capitalism" has a certain seductive power. Not because it offers any solutions, but because it explicitly offers nothing: Welcome to God's Plan.

2.  The Austrian School rejects a scientific foundation to economics. The failure of any political regime to endorse the virtuous business cycle theory of the Libertarians gives rise to all sorts of political backwardness and numbness to reality in its supporters – listening to them frequently arouses a generous desire to help them with a wake-up "dope slap," after such tortured jewels as: "the people are too stupid to understand," or "the people are entitled to nothing," and other too-vulgar-or-racist-to-repeat sentiments. So few believe them, in fact, that they have become hostile to any group or government or institutional level of analysis at all. Instead they advocate strict adherence to "methodological individualism" – analyzing human action exclusively from the perspective of individual agents. Austrian economists also argue that mathematical models and statistics are an unreliable means of analyzing and testing economic theory, and advocate deriving economic theory logically from "basic principles" – read "divinely inspired principles" – of human action. They have even given their methodology a name, "praxeology." Additionally, renouncing science altogether, the Austrians reject experimental and empirical research altogether. They reject testability and falsification en toto. The great virtue (not!) of a theory that rejects testing and falsification is, of course, that it cannot be disproved!

3. The role of the state in Austrian and now Libertarian theory is more confused than its transparently false propositions on the business cycle. The first Austrian, von Hayek, was actually a social democrat and strongly supported standard social democratic policy on the key role of the state in providing services that were market failures. He differed only on whether the post office should be public or private. But latter day Austrians at the Von Mises Institute take this notion for a ride off the sanity cliff, calling for the end of public schools, roads, post offices, Internet, media of any kind, health care, retirement, fire stations, etc, etc, etc.

4. Like many cultish theories, libertarian economics rise in popularity reflects public dissatisfaction with the performance of large institutions in many areas of economic and public life. They often correctly identify corporate corruption as a source of the decay of these institutions, but rather than reform the corruption, they become captured by an attractive, but ultimately doomed, ideology that – due to its futility as a guide to leadership – strengthens the very corruption they decry.

Here is a "parable of the ship" from Mike Huben – a nearly perfect allegory of Libertarian and Austrian School Economics, that should serve you well in any debates:

The owner of a ship noticed that his ship was filling with water. Being an educated man (if not nautically trained) he knew there were many possible causes for water in a ship: leaks in the hull, the bilge pump being broken, waves washing over, condensation, and even the crew urinating in the hold. He heard the bilge pump running, he saw water from waves pouring in the open hatches, but worst of all he smelled urine in the hold! Being sensible, he ordered the crew to shut the hatches and then gave them a lengthy, stern harangue on hygienic use of the head. While he was lecturing the crew, his ship sank due to a combination of causes: large, unobserved leaks in the hull, a bilge pump that was running but not pumping correctly, and condensation that had shorted out warning circuitry.

Illustration by Alexei Talimonov

Post your comment

Comments are moderated. See guidelines here.

Comments

  • The Austrian school is the DUMBEST economic philosophy in the world! These people ACTUALLY don't think empirical studies can PROVE OR DISPROVE what they say; they just ARGUE IT as though it IS true because, "It makes sense" or some sh*t.

    What morons... Is there a SINGLE credible study done that can even BEGIN to verify Austrian theory?? OF COURSE you can empirically test economics just like regular science. What kind of BS is it to say, as Mises once did, that basically, "People can't be studied like inanimate nature." OF COURSE THEY CAN! You can find statistically significant PATTERNS and figure it out, to some extent.

    I'll admit that we probably will NEVER quite fully understand how the economy works... but that's a far cry from saying, "Because of this fact, no one can ever prove anything in economics via studies, so we should just shun them altogether and 'use our heads' to 'figure out' the best system."

    Libertarians are attracted to the Austrian school NOT BECAUSE IT'S PROVEN IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, but because it FITS THEIR ANTI-GOV'T IDEOLOGY. It JUSTIFIES it.

    Posted by Von Mises Was An Idiot, 04/03/2012 7:19am (2 months ago)

  • @Tylor who said "Deductive based reasoning is unscientific? Don't tell that to the mathematicians."

    Pure mathematics is not science mate. Science requires empiricism. Falsifiability. A testable hypothesis. All that jazz.

    Pure mathematicians, like some philosophers, begin from ASSUMED first premises and deduce. That's not science. Science employes inductive reasoning more than deductive reasoning.

    Posted by Graham, 02/03/2012 12:48am (4 months ago)

  • I think you have it backwards. Communism has ALWAYS destroyed peoples lives. It creates permanent poverty. The people under Communism lose rights, freedoms and liberties. It's a failed system. It hasn't created much of anything except, making the party rich. The leaders are elitist. They don't care about people. Never have, never will. My proof is, let's see if this gets posted.

    Posted by Thos Weatherby, 03/30/2011 9:12am (1 year ago)

  • Even worse... Praxeology postulates that only "entrepreneurs" are capable of "truly human action". All the others (suposedly "non-entrepreneurial"...) are mere "organic machines" that respond to some kind of "comsumption impulses"... No family ties, no culture, no national affiliations... In short, an analytical aberration.

    Posted by Guilherme da Fonseca-Statter, 03/25/2011 8:40am (1 year ago)

  • Funny we address them as "the Austrians" as Austria is a flourishing social democracy which, if not stranger to booms and busts in this globalized world, has a first class health care system, education etc. And its capital, Vienna, has been voted the best city in the world to live in for two years in a row.

    Posted by Daniel, 03/25/2011 8:24am (1 year ago)

  • Most of comments that seem to defend the "Austrian" School here also seem to be viewing economics as solely an individual affair, relying to heavily on microeconomics and disregarding macroeconomics.

    There is a lack of understanding of a simple observation Aristotle made 2000 years ago: that is, that the whole is greater than the just the sum of it's parts.

    The economy is something more than just a collection of the individuals involved in it. It is also a collection of institutions, based on a system made of policies, and exerts its own mode of thinking on those involved.

    Posted by Jean Paul Holmes, 03/24/2011 1:54pm (1 year ago)

  • Most of the comments that seem to defend the Austrians here seem to advocate a version of social darwinism that really only proves the analysis in the article to be correct - despite the protests that you have misunderstood the right-wing libertarian economic theories of that school.

    Posted by sinking ship, 03/24/2011 12:52pm (1 year ago)

  • In Austrian Economic Business theory, that this ship owner shouldn't have been in the business in the first place is evidenced by his inability to run his ship safely. His business plan was unsustainable without help from someone else. That his ship sank is a regrettable but predictable result of the initial conditions. The only way to sustain his business would have been to have someone else fund him through education and assistance in maintaining his ship, in effect, pouring more money into the hold (the Keynesian approach), for this ship owner will doubtlessly sink any ship he is put in charge of. Hoping that all survive, it is also hoped that no one else would finance this incompetent and put him in charge of further capital. Unfortunately, allowing the inevitable to occur and others to learn from it is not what you're suggesting.

    Posted by Eric, 03/24/2011 11:23am (1 year ago)

  • This article reminds of the 2010 incident where they privatized the fire department in that town in Tennessee and because the guy didn't pay his fire protection fee the fire department watched as his house burned down. That is the real life result of libertarian Austrian school economics buddy. Read about it here: http://peoplesworld.org/in-tea-party-town-would-fire-fighters-watch-as-houses-burn/

    Posted by House on fire, 03/24/2011 7:51am (1 year ago)

  • Reminds me of a political article of mine years ago: http://www.politicalaffairs.net/defeating-the-ultra-right-know-your-enemy/

    This is a more economic take on the issue, via Alternet: http://www.alternet.org/story/18147/free_market_debunked/

    What the Libertarian politico fails to recognize is the that corporate power is a far greater threat to freedom than mere democratic government.

    For more on that, you may read Erich Fromm's "Escape From Freedom".

    For a stronger economic case, you might pick up John Kenneth Galbraith's "The Affluent Society".

    Or any book on history, circa the late 1800's, 1920's or the late aughts.

    Might I further suggest that, to test Libertarian's notion of the validity of private ownership, they each be given their own, individual Pacific Isle where they might prove us collectivists wrong by single-handedly constructing a modest house (with indoor plumbing and electricity), a car, basketball, and fine china in a year's time? Any takers?

    Dumb.

    Posted by Jean Paul Holmes, 03/23/2011 9:36pm (1 year ago)

1 2 3 4 next »

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments