Greetings all. This is my first post on the LvMI boards, so please be kind. [:)]
Over the past year or two, I’ve done much reading and studying of the Austrian theory and I’ve come to embrace its principles. From time to time, I read opposing views. Some of them are weak and easily refuted. Some are much more difficult to rebut. Not being a scholar, myself, I have trouble sometimes with these difficult questions.
One of these “opposing views” struck me today. For the last few weeks, I’ve been frequenting a blog called The Archdruid Report. The blog is written by one named John Michael Greer, supposedly the Archdruid within the US. He’s located in Cumberland, Maryland. Without getting too much into how I came to his blog or background on him or the druids, I’ll get right into it…
His blog post this week was entitled “Why Markets Fail”. Following his blog lately, I was intrigued by some of his insights and thoughts. He tended to agree with the need for a gold standard, and he seemingly agreed with the majority of the principles of Freedom and Liberty that we here at LvMI hold dear. However, this post is blatantly anti-Austrian. In fact, he even mentions the words “Austrian School” at one point.
There are points of his writing that I think are fairly easy to refute, but don’t feel comfortable doing so for fear of misrepresenting the Austrian views. One point that I think is a little more difficult for me to counter is the concern of speculative bubbles and how the free market deals with them. In his view, it can’t.
There are other points as well. Read the article for yourselves so you get a better idea of what he’s saying. I think one snag that anyone would be up against in refuting his claims is that he believes the finite resource of fossil fuels is leading society down the path of economic ruin. I know nothing about this topic other than what I’ve read on his blog, so I’m an ignoramus on that.
Anyhow, my goal in posting this is to get feedback on how the Austrian School would rebut his claims. Please read the article if you feel led to. Any and all civilized commentary is appreciated. Thank you!
While he says Austrian at one point, the post is directed at neoclassical economics.
Tbh, marxists and libertarians criticize the state quo the same way. They differ in their vocabulary and proposed solutions (though arguably not).
So I would say to just roll with the post where it rails on government created interferences (even if he blames the market instead of the gov). I guess you could point this out.
You could also point to unregulated internationally competitive industries that offer cheap and safe products. They aren’t glamorous though. It will be things like soap and furniture and pencils. These industries should be juxtaposed with larger more profitable ventures which are always protected by government, like automobile manufacturing, banking, medicine. Ask opponents why they think the free market is so evil if they have no complaints about it in the soap/furniture/pencil industries, and why they think government intervention is so good if it produces these giant corrupt juggernauts everyone complains about.
Here I’m pretty sure George Noory has interviewed John Michael Greer a few times. He did one with Ron Paul, and a few with Mish Shedlock and Gerald Celente.. Some of the stuff over there though is way out of this world so to say.[;)]
Thanks Saan. Coast to Coast AM was actually how I found out about this. CtC is a crazy show with some off-the-wall guests sometimes, but Greer seemed to know what he was talking about as far as economics went… until his latest post coming down on Austrians.
For the record, I know his direct beef was with neoclassical economics, but him addressing the Austrian School struck a nerve. It seems like he does, in fact, have beef with the Austrians as well. In the comments, he goes as far as saying that we’re extreme.
Sure, liberty is an extreme idea: you either have it or you don’t. It would be more accurate to say that we’re radicals in the true sense, that we strike at the root.
Skyhooker, that was where I was trying to go with that. Are we radical? Yes, in the very true sense of the term. Are we extreme? I would say not quite. We deal with extreme things such as liberty vs tyranny, etc. But our views should not be spun in a way to make us sound extreme.
I guess I take issue when some confuse the terms “radical” and “extreme”, which I think Mr. Greer has done.
You just need to stay rational. People right now tend to Parrot their authority figures. Our psyches have been bulldozed and we really have no identity except to a group. When people call you radical, or a conspiracy wacko don’t get mad. Let them finish and then begin the questioning. Just be careful power is well power, and they killed Socrates for showing the truth. Test, poke, prod, and develop a strategy to bring people around in a non-threatening way Women are good at this, ask females that you trust for help here. They have more natural talent at breaking down emotional barriers than men do. Don’t use the techniques to gain power though, the consequences suck.
When using the word “failure” anyone can use his own judgement of what the standard of success and failure is. The same idiots that use the term “market failure” could as easily try to drive their cars in reverse on the highway and then write “Why Cars Fail” or “Why Physics Fails” after crashing in which they propose that cars be banned and physics be removed from school curriculum.