This is in three indexes: reviews, revisionism, and austrianism.
Endres honestly recognizes some strengths in Rothbard's work, but explains the major failing to be Quentin Skinner's described "mythology of doctrines": finding hints or glimmers of the true doctrine throughout history and damning those without them.
4 comments:
Yes indeed, the major failing in Rothbard's work, according to Endres, is that it "expressly parades his [Austrian School] perspective unashamedly from the outset". Endres then proceeds to repeat this objection about 50 times through the rest of this article. BTW, just FYI, the title of Rothbard's work happens to be "An AUSTRIAN Perspective on the History of Economic Thought", not "The Only Truly Objective and Unbiased [Endres] Perspective on the History of Economic Thought".
And if it was named "The Stupid Perspective on the History of Economic Thought", Joanna would think it invalid to complain about the stupidity.
Mike, yes, as a matter of fact, it is utterly lame to complain about stupidity of a book openly intended to be stupid. I guess you must really hate Douglas Adams.
Mr Huben,
Firstly, Rothbard's magnum opus is most definitely Man, Economy and State not An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. And since when can the origin of any kind of ideas be proclaimed stupid? There are histories of economic thought from many perspectives the fact that their perspective does not agree with yours does not make them any less accurate to the people adhering to those views.
Post a Comment