Thanks, Mr. Libertarian

Whenever anyone mentions “Austrian economics without You Know Who,” the cognoscenti know exactly who is meant: Ludwig von Mises, of course. This issue arose late in the last century, during a discussion of the phenomenon of the revival of the Austrian School of economics, when it was feared by some that Mises was too radical, too uncompromising. He had to be jettisoned in favor of moderates, such as, for example, Friedrich A. Hayek if the praxeological school was to make any headway, at least in this inside the beltway perspective.

But what about “Libertarianism without You Know Who?” To whom does this reference apply? To Murray N. Rothbard, of course. There are those, just as in the case of Mises, who maintain that Rothbard, also, was too radical, too uncompromising. If libertarianism is to prosper, he too, must be ignored, in favor of more moderate libertarians, such as for example, Milton Friedman.

The present book is dedicated to the memory of Murray N. Rothbard. It is fitting that this its final chapter would be devoted to him too, since the entire volume stems from what I have learned directly and indirectly from this great man. He was my mentor, my guru, my friend, my confidant; without him, this group of essays could not have been written.

I intend to accomplish this task through the intermediation of seven scholars, also devotees of Murray: Wendy McElroy, Lew Rockwell, Joe T. Salerno, Gary North, Ron Paul, Justin Raimondo, and Tom Woods. Each of them brilliantly demonstrates the truly gargantuan contributions of Rothbard to liberty and sound economics, and the fact that in some circles at least, he is unable to receive his justified due.

Tom Woods quotes Robert Higgs, yet another magnificent contributor to the “science of liberty,”[1] who states:

Murray Rothbard’s scholarship spanned an enormous range, including philosophy, methodology, economic theory, the history of economic and political thought, economic history, economic policy, law, and contemporary politics. I was well along in my career as an economist specializing in the economic history of the United States when I began to read his work. Once started, I never stopped.[2]

Woods criticizes the way Rothbard has been treated in many quarters, many calling themselves libertarian, and some, in my view, even deserving of such an honorific. In a truly scintillating presentation, Woods demonstrates how Rothbard has been shoved down the proverbial memory hole, how he has been utterly ignored by those who stand on his shoulders. It is one thing to criticize Murray Rothbard, whether from a libertarian or non-libertarian perspective. That is perfectly acceptable. It is even beneficial, for we all learn from such contributions; we get that much closer to the truth of the matter. But to overlook this giant of liberty, and in the name of libertarianism, is unconscionable and unforgiveable. Thank you Tom Woods for setting the record straight. [3]

According to McElroy:

In forty-five years of scholarship and activism, Rothbard produced over two dozen books and thousands of articles that made sense of the world from a radical individualist perspective. In doing so, it is no exaggeration to say that Rothbard created the modern libertarian movement. Specifically, he refined and fused together:

• natural law theory, using a basic Aristotelian or Randian approach;
• the radical civil libertarianism of nineteenth-century individualist-anarchists, especially Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker;
• the free market philosophy of Austrian economists, in particular Ludwig von Mises, into which he incorporated sweeping economic histories; and,
• the foreign policy of the American Old Right — that is, isolationism.[4]

Each of these points is crucial. Before the advent of Rothbard, if a person favored peace, he pretty much had to be a critic of the market, for the free enterprise movement, such as it was, was almost a totally owned subsidiary of the conservative, interventionist warmongers. Virtually all revisionist historians were at best highly critical of laissez-faire capitalism. Combining Aristotelianism, with Mises, with Spooner and Tucker, with peace and non-interventionism was widely seen as some sort of variant of political-economic schizophrenia, for these disparate strands not only did not belong together, they were mortal enemies. Only in the hands of a Murray Rothbard could these disparate strands be woven into something cohesive, forming the modern libertarian movement. And not only did he “fuse together” these strands, but he “refined” them as well, making important and original contributions to all of them. Thank you Wendy McElroy for setting the record straight.

A similar occurrence took place with regard to the explanation for the Austrian revival of the 1970s, for Murray Rothbard is not only Mr. Libertarian, he is also Mr. Austrian. Some commentators attribute this to the awarding of the Nobel prize in economics to Hayek in 1974. Others maintain it was the conference on Austrian economics held in South Royalton, Vermont, also in 1974, that was responsible for triggering this happy occurrence, since it gathered numerous young praxeologists together. But neither of these could have accounted for the Austrian revival. Nobel prizes in economics rarely if ever start or resuscitate forgotten schools of economic thought. And if the fact that there were several dozen young scholars who attended the South Royalton event in 1974 was the trigger for the Austrian revival, how did they come to be there in the first place? From whence did the large group of academics in the early part of their careers spring, if Austrian economics was at that time moribund enough to require resuscitation?

It is Joe Salerno who gave the correct explanation:

This handful of scattered contributions to Austrian economics forthcoming in the 1950s, however, would have defined the death throes of the school rather than the prelude to its rebirth were it not for the creative genius of Murray Rothbard, which came to fruition in the early 1960s. The revival of Austrian economics as a living scientific movement can be dated from the publication of Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State in 1962, a contribution to Austrian economics and to pure economics in general that ranks as one of the most brilliant performances in the history of economic thought. The book was a two-volume treatise of nearly 1,000 pages written in scintillating English that logically deduced the entire corpus of economic theory step by step from the undeniable fact of purposeful human action. It integrated the insights and theorems of dozens of previous Austrian economists from Menger to Mises into a systematic and comprehensive organ on of economic theory.[5]

Salerno continues:

Rothbard not only advanced but reshaped the praxeological paradigm to such an extent that his name became inextricably linked with the greatest thinkers in Austrian economics: mainline Austrian economics from then on was the economics of Menger, Böhm-Bawerk, Mises, and Rothbard.[6]

As a young attendee at the South Royalton conference (I was 33 in 1974) I can certainly attest to the fact that were it not for the dazzling publications of Rothbard I certainly would not have taken part in this event. And this is true of virtually all other participants, if informal discussions at the time are to be taken into account. Thank you Joe Salerno for setting the record straight.

Lew Rockwell puts this matter very well when he says:

Rothbard was the architect of the body of thought known around the world as libertarianism. This radically antistate political philosophy unites free market economics, a no-exception attachment to private property rights, a profound concern for human liberty, and a love of peace, with the conclusion that society should be completely free to develop absent any further interference from the state, which can and should be eliminated.[7]

Thank you Lew Rockwell for setting the record straight by creating the Mises Institute, which as far as I’m concerned, and of course by saying this I mean no criticism of this world class institution, is Murray Rothbard’s living room writ large. What better monument to the contribution of Murray N. Rothbard could there be but a living, breathing, life affirming, Mises Institute, dedicated to libertarianism, to Austrian economics, and to world peace? I know that whenever Murray looks down from wherever he is now hanging out, he has a big smile on his face.

I’d like to quote Gary North here:

This is how the academic game is played at the top, and the Lachmannians know it. They must seek tenure in lower-tier schools. But the money is good, so they play along. They may occasionally mention Mises in their footnotes, but they rarely invoke Mises’s original writings in defending their positions. They do not cite him as authoritative. They come with new approaches — approaches that are more methodologically acceptable, or at least aesthetically acceptable, to the Keynesian editors of third-tier academic journals. They either ignore Rothbard or else dismiss him. They do not cite his writings.

They have this in common: almost no one has heard of any of them. Inside Keynesian academia, they are barely known. Inside free market academic economics, which is dominated by Chicago School economists, they may be patted on the head and invited to serve on a panel at an academic conference. They are allowed to say a few words in response to the main speaker at one of the less significant sessions. But they remain invisible to their peers most of the time.

This annoys them. What annoys them even more is the fact that the Mises Institute and LewRockwell.com are Rothbardian. These two sites are highly ranked on the various website-ranking sites. These sites get enormous traffic. The Austrian School is known to the general public only through Rothbard-influenced sites.[8]

Ron Paul has always credited Rothbard as being an important influence on his thinking. He once wrote:

It would be difficult to exaggerate Professor Murray N. Rothbard’s influence on the movement for freedom and free markets. He is the living giant of Austrian economics, and he has led the now-formidable movement ever since the death of his great teacher, Ludwig von Mises, in 1971. We are all indebted to him for the living link he has provided to Mises, upon whose work he has built and expanded. … America’s Great Depression was a key book in my conversion to pure free-market, libertarian thinking. The confidence I gained with ammunition supplied by Rothbard encouraged my entry into politics, since I needed the reassurance that my intuitive allegiance to liberty was shared by great thinkers. Rothbard taught me to always keep the distinction between peaceful market activity and State coercion in my mind. It served as a constant guide once I was in office.[9]

Perhaps the person most responsible for clarifying and applauding the path blazed by Murray N. Rothbard is Justin Raimondo, if only because he did so in a full-length biography. Raimondo puts to rest a number of fallacies about Rothbard.[10] Amongst them that “Mr. Libertarian” (Rothbard, that is, of course) had no lasting influence, wasted his time when he left the realm of pure economic theory, abandoned libertarianism, was a leftist, was a paleo-conservative, was a suck up, and much, much more. No, no, no, demonstrates Raimondo, he cleaved to Austro-libertarianism and peace all his life, and made monumental contributions to all of them.

Thank you Justin Raimondo for setting the record straight.

---

[1] A phrase created by Murray.

[2] Tom Woods, 2013. “Rothbard was a hack.” October 25; http://tomwoods.com/blog/rothbard-was-a-hack/

[3] “An evening with Tom Woods,” August 8, 2012; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2IFwEZLx7U

[4] Wendy McElroy, “Murray N. Rothbard: Mr. Libertarian.” May 28, 2008; http://www.wendymcelroy.com/rockwell/mcelroy000706.html

[5] Joseph T. Salerno, “The Rebirth of Austrian Economics — in Light of Austrian Economics,” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 5, no. 4 (Winter 2002): 116–17; http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae5_4_8.pdf

[6] Ibid., p., 117.

[7] Llewellyn H. Rockwell, The Left, The Right, and The State (Auburn, Ala.: Mises Institute, 2008), p. 404.

[8] Gary North, “Tenured Austrian Economists vs. Murray Rothbard,” March 13, 2013; http://www.garynorth.com/public/10768.cfm

[9] Robert Wenzel, “Murray Rothbard Down the Memory Hole at Campaign for Liberty”: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/04/murray-rothbard-down-memory-hole-at.html

[10] Justin Raimondo, An Enemy of the State (New York: Prometheus, 2000).