Of all the GMU crowd, Boetkke has show there is no limit to biting the hand that feeds you. Speaking of hand biting, somewhere… out there.. Giles Stratton is having an epiphany.
So, basically, “we don’t want to be marginalized as crazies, so we’re going to pretend we’re somebody we’re not.”
Well, as you can see, they’re trying.
Really? You sure? [:D]
What are they not?
And what was part one?
Why does this constitute a new part of ‘the libertarian wars’?
They are just changing the name of the blog to something less controversial and more substantial. End of story.
Alhough I do pity it, I do understand where it’s coming from.
There’s a news story in the LA Times where a Cato guy and George Selgin denounce Paul for going “too far” in his anti-Fed views. Title is “Ron Paul’s ideas no longer fringe”.
I’m glad you got that jab at giles at the end, otherwise some people might view this post as a misnomer to the “libertarian wars” & view it as largely pointless, aside from just making noise about someone disagreeing with an etymological preference, or what is an increasing occurrence of “arguing in the semantics abyss” (lulz, for short).
I don’t see why trying to come up with a more specific name for their blog, to reflect a change in focus or preference, is bad, or “biting the hand that feeds you”.
They disagree with the term “Austrian Economics”; no surprise that the Austrian Econ crowd throws a light hissy fit & calls them “childish” from the safety of their blogs.
Besides, I thought The Chicago School was more than enough fuel for this type of disdain? If anyone were to be called “ex-Austrian Econ”, wouldn’t it be them?
Oddly enough, I can still see the Chicago School being referred to as a ‘school’, whereas I can easily see everyone referring to Boetkke et.all as the “ex-Asutrian Econs who got a little confused & wanted to change their name to be Absolutely Fabulous in the press.” instead of “oh, they made ‘x’ - school, diverging & disagreeing a bit with another school of thought, as such as is the nature of developing any sort of theory or intellectual thoughts that has happened plenty of times before”.
The amount of arrogance is subtle but revealing. I find it surprising that no one is simply just shrugging their shoulders & treating this as merely another market process in advancing economics (instead, a mild betrayal, lol), whether it’s purely Austrian Econ or derived from Austrian Econ, & that such market processes might be worthwhile to pursue if people are trying different things, rather than just the same thing over & over (not saying that is occurring with Austrian Econ, but you can only go so far with posting Youtube videos & getting all the comments in the world, internet based fund-raising, & 5 to 9 min spots on MyPundit TV).
TL;DR: I think a lot of people are being hipsters in rejecting them. I will continue to read Coordination Problem, but also out of spite, if this is case.
They are right in their decision, and I do not know what the fuss is about. Honestly, stop trying to create a war where none is intended.
I’m not surprised, Boettke has other plans in mind. Did you watch his debate with Caplan? He just kept saying that Caplan is an Austrian, when he most definitely isn’t. Either way, the Austrian school is what it is not matter what certain individual’s say.
I assure you, your attribution of nonexistent, diversionary machination to me was not the intention of my post [;)]
Well, I cannot be held responsible for a claim that I never made. A strawman on the other hand…
You spin me right round, baby right round like a record, baby right round round round.
We’re just holding off the party until our competitors undergo liquidation.
I watched a bit of video, but don’t have a coherent memory of it. Were there any other highlights in that debate?
Agreed, and I’ll add that it’s not defined by who it appeals to.
I don’t think so.
Well played sir.
Fact: I was inspired to write a rendition of God of War 2
God of Coordination 2: Chains of Kochtopus
*Boettke stands atop of Mount Kochtopus with a megaphone in hand"
Boettke: We’re not one of you guys! (chorus x 10)
The Layman Libertarian: Why? Why have you betrayed me?
Boettke: It is you who has betrayed me! Am I to stand idly by while Kochtopus is threatened? Your hands are already stained by the blood of a god. I will not let Hayek’s fate be my own.
The Layman Libertarian: The GMU crowd is petty and pathetic, and your rule is weak
Boettke: I grow tired of this insolence. I am the tentacle of the Kochtopus! And it is my way that is the way of the Austrians. You must bow to forever serve me.
The Layman Libertarian: I serve Liberty!
Boettke: Then you leave me no choice!
Peter Boetkke readies the Blade of Kochtopus
Boettke: Submit!
The Layman Libertarian: I would rather die!
Boettke heaves a sigh
Boettke: It did not have to be this way my son. This path is of your choosing.
The Layman Libertarian: A choice from the GMU crowd is as useless as the GMU crowd themselves.
Boettke: Even as you draw your last care you continue to defy me! The term “Austrian economics” will now suffer because of your sacrilege… You will never be able to advance the tradition of the Austrian school within the scholarship of esoteric academic circles. The cycle en…
The Layman Libertarian loses interest in Boettke’s rant, and continues with his pilgrimage to Auburn
Boettke: I BANISH MYSELF TO THE DEPTHS OF OBSCURITY! HAAAARRRGGH!!!
Boettke strikes Google with the Blade of Kochtopus
The blow to the infamous search engine fails to undo the “damage” of the Layman Libertarian, and in the process causes Boettke’s blog to be renamed to Coordination Problem
Absolutely believable…except for the knife part. That is just out of character. [:P]
Menger regretted the term Austrian. MIses did too. Hayek was the same. Salerno has written many times that it would be better if it didn’t exist. Pete has variously said the same thing. It is just a word and it means no more or less than it conveys in communication. All words are limited but as things go, the term Austrian is serviceable. My own guess, and this is Salerno’s too, is that we are stuck with it, and that’s fine. It has a long history and isn’t going anywhere. This choice by Pete is a strategic one - based entirely on academic considerations - and should be evaluated as such. My guess is that he will return to the term Austrian in a few years.
I see no more significance to it than this.
Maybe we should change to Swiss Economics because it sounds more peaceful 
Is there any point to this kind of defamation? This is exactly what Boettke is trying to avoid, the connotation that Austrian economics is little more than libertarian-apologetics; instead, he is doing what the GMU economics department has been doing since at least the 70s: good economic scholarship in the tradition of Menger, Mises, Hayek, and Kirzner. You are doing quite a good job in proving Boettke’s point.
I doubt that you know Caplan’s economics as well as Boettke does so I will trust his judgment over your own.
Relax, he is just having a bit of fun.