I haven't touched Economics for Real People or The Demon-Haunted World in months. I just don't have the patience to physically read anything at the moment. Instead, I've been listening to a Lord of the Rings audiobook. I'm about halfway through The Two Towers. Very enjoyable book.
Anton: As I understand Oppenheimer, It didn't happen within a day. In the course of time peasants could accept conquerors as a force that protected them against other invaders, and thus payed a tribute for the service. As time passed conquerors engaged in blood relations with local people which facilitated the process of assimilation.and their recognition as rulers by peasants. Now, to the extent that protection was offered and/or fighting was more expensive than just paying the tribute, such a ‘state’ is inevitable as well as not threatening. So what Openheimer gives us is an account of how mafia arose, not the State. Everyone can see that the state today is far more expensive to maintain that it would to be fight. So, I cannot disprove Openheimer’s thesis, but I just don’t find it likely for a mafia-type regional gang to evolve into the modern state. It just doesn’t click. The Regression theorem is a memetic equivalent of the Theory of Evolution. To say that the former precludes the free emergence of fiat currencies makes no more sense that to hold that the latter precludes the natural emergence of multicellular organisms. | Post Points: 5
Now, to the extent that protection was offered and/or fighting was more expensive than just paying the tribute, such a ‘state’ is inevitable as well as not threatening. So what Openheimer gives us is an account of how mafia arose, not the State. Everyone can see that the state today is far more expensive to maintain that it would to be fight.
So, I cannot disprove Openheimer’s thesis, but I just don’t find it likely for a mafia-type regional gang to evolve into the modern state. It just doesn’t click.
Just finished A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism by Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Currently reading The Constitution of Liberty by F.A. Hayek and about to start The Ethics and Economics of Private Property by Hoppe (after which I'll have read all of Hoppe's 4 most important treatises).
Continuing my Education investigations I recenty finished The Case for Classical Christian Education which is a reasonable defence of the classical model though it lacks detailed argument in parts. It had some good references so I now have A History of Education Before the Middle Ages by Frank Graves.
I'm presently reading Claw of the Concilliator by Gene Wolfe (2nd book in the Book of the New Sun quadriliogy). It's a facinating book although it hasn't hit the heights of the first yet; that said I'm only 60 pages in. And again this isn't a crazy Goodkind/ Jordan rainforest destroyer: the fours books overall are only 1200 pages so it's not a huge investment in comparison to other works. Oh and George RR Martins calls it "one of the great science fanatsy epics of all time".
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.
Yours sincerely,
Physiocrat
I'm about to finish Intellectuals and Society by Thomas Sowell. It's pretty good, but he is quite a collectivist/nationalist hawk.
I am reading an ebook: How to Disappear - Erase Your Digital Footprints, Leave False Trails, and Vanish Without a Trace by Frank Ahearn. A must read book on preventing identiy theft. Written by an ex-identity hacker himself. Should insure greater personal freedom in your lives and that's what Misians want.
There is another book similar to this, but written in 2000. I forgot the title, but it's readily available for free download.
Daniel, could you please tell me in a few words what you think of each book? Thank you
Sorry I am new here. I wanted to reply directly to Daniel's post but somehow couldn't do it.
I just got done with Paul Mooney's Black is the New White -- funny book. Lots of details about Richard Pryor and comedians, and American in general, in the 60s to the present. Lots of Hollywood from a black perspective. Mooney is of course one of my favorite comedians of all time: plenty of info about his own life. I love autobiographies, and this is one of the best I've read this year.
I just started in on two books: Lucifer Principle by Howard Bloom about why people do evil things; from an evolutionary standpoint. And the Portable Hannah Arendt: a sample of her books, speeches, letters, articles and interviews. Both are very good so far.
I haven't been reading much either, recently. I acquired Wages of Destruction, but have so much to read in front of it that I'm not sure I'll ever get to it (I still have to finish The General Theory). I've been too busy writing other people's term papers -- business has been a'boomin'.
I just ordered 70 bucks worth of books from Amazon out of pure boredom. They are as follows:
The Reckless Mind: Intellectuals and Politics (stories of Heidegger, Derrida, and Foucalt getting involved with the State and the unfortunate aftermath of that)
Sick Societies: Challenging the Myth of Primitive Harmony (makes the case that primitive societies aren't as lovey-dovey as the romanticized view many have of them today)
The Evolution of Morality (Life and Mind: Philosophical Issues in Biology and Psychology) (Richard Joyce's take on the subject, should be a good read)
The Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism (a book about how Europe's population has a giant guilt trip for colonialism and how that is damaging their political systems)
What's Wrong with Democracy? From Athenian Practice to American Worship (as the title implies)
Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy by Rene Descartes
Anarchy and the Law edited by Edward Stringham
Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement by Brian Doherty
Written by a warmonger who supported the super-moralized wars on Bosnian Serbs, FR Yugoslavia and Iraq. Certainly people remembering Western colonialism makes it a little bit harder for him to endulge in these hobbies of his.
True, but he did come out against the abuses of the military and places like Guantanamo. Like I said earlier, I'm not even against mercenaries getting engaged in removing dictators, I'm against a) the way the funds are extracted to fund overseas operations and b) blowback since it is done in the name of a State and its population.
What about liberal do-gooders bombing semi-exotic countries for the purpose of feeling good about themselves? Are you in favour of that?
Reading Carl Menger's Principles of Economics.
EDIT: Btw, anybody know if there has ever been a project to put together Menger's manuscript for a new edition of the book into something cohesive?
Just started the Wisdom of Crowds, and finished UPB: Universally Preferable Behavior.
JB Say: Daniel, could you please tell me in a few words what you think of each book? Thank you
Sorry for the delayed response. Hoppe is a stimulating theorist and an excellent writer. His prose is just as clear and direct as Rothbard's, and much more elegant. And while I don't agree with much of Hoppe's system (I'm a pretty thorough-going Misesian), it is much more challenging and rigorous than Rothbard's. I think he's the most profound social theorist alive today, and I heartily recommend anyone interested to take Stephan Kinsella's upcoming online course The Social Theory of Hoppe.
As for the particular books, Democracy: the God That Failed is his most theoretically fascinating work and The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (at least as far as I've read) is the most systematic and instructive. His methodological treatise was intriguing. His Theory of Socialism and Capitalism is not quite as good as EEPP, but the part about "conservative socialism" is very interesting, especially in contrast to his later embrace of the term "conservatism" as something consonant with libertarianism.
I recently finished Will Durant's marvelous The Age of Faith, and am now listening to his book on the Renaissance. Everyone should read this series (The Story of Civilization). Still working my way through EEPP and Hayek's Constitution of Liberty. Hayek, of course, is brilliant.
So how did you find UPB? Am I the only one to find the book failing miserably in its endeavor?
I got a Kindle recently (birthday present), and put a bunch of books on it. Right now I'm reading The Hobbit by Tolkien, Atheism: The Case Against God by George H. Smith, and The Betrayal of the American Right by Rothbard. I decided to shelf Economics for Real People for the time being after I realized I wouldn't be doing it any justice by trying to finish it after not touching it for a few months. I plan on finally getting through The Demon-Haunted World and rereading Economics in One Lesson by at least July.
1. Just finished Hazlitt's Inflation Crisis and How to Resolve it. Lays things out with his usual clarity.
I'd like to point out that he thinks deflation is either good or harmless, except for two places where he talks about a "devestating deflation".
Take it as a riddle and/or quiz if you wish. When is deflation devestating? You can visit my blog for the soon to be written article about when deflation is good, bad, or ugly.
2. Starting Hayek's Road to Serfdom. Yawning already, but it's probably just me.
My humble blog
It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer
Last month, wanting something short following Mises: LKoL, I read William Graham Sumner's What Social Classes Owe to Each Other. Coincidentally, it was right around the time Riggenbach posted his Mises Daily about Sumner and the book. It's a great short work, a nice complement to Herbert Spencer's writing around the same time.
Right now I'm focusing my attention on Anthony de Jasay's Social Contract, Free Ride. As usual, very rigorous and thought-provoking, yet still a pleasure to read. I still have the last few chapters, but he's already laid out his argument for why, using game theory, it can be rational for self-interested individuals to contribute to public goods projects. Jasay is an expert at brushing aside all the confusion and squishy terms plaguing an issue, and there is plenty for him to address in the public goods debate.
However, in early May, I bought Liberty Fund's first volume of their Collected Works of Bastiat, The Man and the Statesman. It contains over 200 letters, in correspondence with personal friends, colleagues and the likes of Cobden, Dunoyer and Horace Say (son of Jean-Baptiste), as well several political articles and editorials. At over 600 pages, it's quite overwhelming at first, but there's a lot of fascinating stuff. I do wish there were a few more letters from his youth (by letter 30, we're at 1844, when Bastiat has officially entered the economics scene), but there's enough to get a sense of Bastiat's intellectual curiousity and growing passion for liberty and truth. And among the articles in the second section of the book are editorials written during the political upheaval of 1848, offering a dramatic look at the liberals' effort to promote economic reforms in light of the February revolution.
I'm only about a quarter of the way through the letters, and so far Letter 16 is the stand out. The following is written in 1829, twenty years before Economic Harmonies, and when Bastiat had only in the previous letter, written a few months earlier, declared his intention to some day write about trade restrictions. It also anticipates both Molinari and Mises:
Yes, as long as our deputies want to further their own business and not that of the general public, the public will remain just the tail end of the people in power. However, in my opinion, the evil comes from further afield. We easily surmise (since it suits our amour propre) that all evil results from power; on the contrary, I am convinced that its source is the ignorance and inertia of the masses. What use do we make of the rights given to us? The constitution tells us that we will pay what we consider appropriate and authorizes us to send our representatives to Paris to establish the amount which we wish to hand over in order to be governed; we then give our power of attorney to people who are beneficiaries of taxation. Those who complain about the prefects are themselves represented by them. Those who deplore the wars of sympathy we are waging in the east and the west, sometimes in the favor of freedom for a people, sometimes to put another into servitude, are themselves represented by army generals. We expect prefects to vote for their own elimination and men of war to become imbued with pacifist ideas! This is a shocking contradiction. But, men will say, we expect from our deputies dedication and self-renunciation, virtues from classical times which we would like to see resurrected in our midst. What a puerile illusion! What sort of policy can be based on a principle distasteful to human organization? At no time in history have men ever renounced themselves, and in my view it would be a great misfortune if this virtue took the place of personal interest. If you generalize self-renunciation in public opinion, you will see society destroyed. Personal interest, on the other hand, leads to individuals bettering themselves and consequently the masses, which are made up solely of individuals. It will be alleged, pointlessly, that the interest of one man is opposed to that of another; in my opinion this is a serious, antisocial error. And, if we may progress from general notions to their application, if taxpayers are themselves represented by men with the same interests as they, reforms will occur by themselves. There are some who fear that the government would be destroyed by a spirit of economy, as though each person did not feel that it was in his interest to pay for a force responsible for the repression of evildoers.
And in a letter written in 1820, we see Bastiat first embracing the economic point of view, having recently read Say's Treatise:
One day when I was in quite a large gathering, a question of political economy was discussed in conversation, and everyone was talking nonsense. I did not dare to put my opinions forward too much, since they were so diametrically opposed to the conventional wisdom. However, as each objection forced me to go up a notch to put forward my arguments, I was soon driven to the core principle. This was when M. Say made it easy for me. We started from the principle of political economy, which my adversaries admitted to be just. It was easy for us to go on to the consequences and reach that which was the subject of the conversation. This was the point at which I perceived the full merit of the method and I would like it to be applied to everything.
Highly recommended for the Bastiat fans out there. And even if you don't have much interest in correspondence or short, sometimes non-economic essays, come on: it's Bastiat! Guaranteed fun. And as with all Liberty Fund publications, the binding and cover are top notch and the type elegant and very readable. It is a (large) beauty to hold.
EDIT: Smiling Dave, I'm with you on Road to Serfdom. I've tried reading it twice, and lost interest both times.
I just finished Liaquat Ahamed's Lord's of Finance, a treatment of the Great Depression, with a particular focus on probably the 4 most influential central bankers of the day (Benjamin Strong of the NY Fed, Montagu Norman of England, Hjalmar Schacht of Germany, and Emile Moreau of France). It was pretty interesting from a historical/biographical standpoint, but it was squarely Keynesian in its analysis of the GD (the Gold Standard may have worked before WWI, but due to imbalances in the amount of money within various countries after the war, it became impractical and incapable of avoiding the vicious deflationary cycles of depression; orthodox men were proven wrong, especially by the irreverent but brilliant young maverick economist who played by his own rules, JM Keynes; the barbarous relic was thankfully thrown off as the world recalibrated itself to the new realities of international finance and the necessities of a more "elastic" money supply, etc...)
I was so tired of the rhetoric by the end of the book I immediately ordered America's Great Depression. The contrast has been enjoyable.
Human Action has been an ongoing project. Really cool book.
I've just started Gordon Thomas's Gideon's Spies: the Secret History of the Mossad. Pretty interesting, though largely unconfirmable (off-record sources etc), look at the Israeli intelligence agency. Reads like a spy novel I guess.
Crime and Punishment
I've started to read this blog, that opened up around a week ago: Free Banking. Recognizable authors (well, at least authors I recognize) are Selgin, Dowd, Ebeling, Horwitz, O'Driscoll, and White. Definately a blog I would recommend bookmarking.
Reading John J. Collins' Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. Wonderfully lengthy book explaining all the archeological, historical, and cultural facts in the origin of the Hebrew Bible. Amazingly well done and detailed, with a lot of further reading material, and not plagued with any theological construct, but strict historical-grammatical understanding of the text, without any hindrandces whatsoever of his beliefs or anything. Great textbook understanding of archeology and history in the Ancient Near East, explaining everything.
Also, Gustav Gutierrez' A Theology of Liberation. This book is absolutely astounding, and amazing in every regard, except for the Marxist references and promotion everywhere. Surprisingly enough, it works without it, too. I swear, just add Mises to it (and you can without losing anything), and you'll see the preference for the poor and the liberation of those in poverty through means that actually work. Everything theologically is sound and amazing, though needs to not touch Hegel...definitely using a lot of what is stated here for a huge treatise I want to write for Christian anarchism.
Also reading various graphic design books, etc. and designing plenty. Happy happy joy joy.
That Collins book sounds awesome EternalMind.
I just finished Hoppe's Economics and Ethics of Private Property. An excellent, stimulating book.
About to start Robert Murphy's Study Guide to Human Action.
currently reading Frank Chodorov's The Rise and Fall of Society. I'm also reading Rothbard's Man, Economy, and State for Dr. Murphy's online course.
Hankster, I have read, Chodorov's The Rise and Fall of Society. I found the book frustrating to read because of the author's turgid writing style. Plus the book presents little that I didn't already know, unless you are new to the Austrian school. The title has little to do with the actual contents. But there is one thing I still remembered: Chodorov explains that bereaucracy and big government is easier to impose, the larger the population base. The larger the ruled population, the less each citizen feels the brunt of poor decision making from the government.
I am about to order "Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy" by Michael Collins Piper. A controversial book that's out of print and expensive in the used market. Basically the author theorizes that the CIA and Israel were behind the assassination.
Joseph Schumpeter's "Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy"
Ron Paul's "Liberty Defined" along with George Orwell's "All Art Is Propaganda" (Critical Essays)
Just got in the mail: "The Manual of Harmonics of Nichomachus the Pythagorean" and "Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control"
For school this summer i have to read "Neuromancer", "Snow Crash", and Alan Moore's "Promethea."
Eating Propaganda
What do you mean i don't care how your day was?!
Al_Gore the Idiot: Hankster, I have read, Chodorov's The Rise and Fall of Society. I found the book frustrating to read because of the author's turgid writing style. Plus the book presents little that I didn't already know, unless you are new to the Austrian school. The title has little to do with the actual contents. But there is one thing I still remembered: Chodorov explains that bereaucracy and big government is easier to impose, the larger the population base. The larger the ruled population, the less each citizen feels the brunt of poor decision making from the government.
I think I liked the book a little better than it seems you did. Yes, not the greatest writing style but as I got into the book it grew on me (or I just stopped noticing). A title along the lines of "Society's Enemy - The State" would have been more accurate.
Last week, I read The Private Production of Defense by HHH. It's a really short and quick read.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
The CIA I get, but what do they need Israel for? Is there a Mossad cell in Dallas Texas that has acess to stuff the CIA doesn't have? It's like saying the Hulk and Bilbo Baggins beat up on someone.
Maybe the author thinks Israel hired the CIA to do the job, that the CIA had no motive other than Israel's cash, and for the few worthless shekels they would get from Israel they up and killed the President of the United States. Hey, it's a living.
Or maybe he thinks that Kennedy was kidnaped to Israel, put to work picking tomatoes on a kibbutz, and some clone was assasinated in his place.
From what I read, Kennedy was exerting pressure on Israel to give up it's nuclear program.
http://www.markdankof.com/mossadmurdersjfk.htm
So the CIA says, "Yes, that's a legitimate reason for us to help you assasinate our President. We would do it ourselves, but you guys know our own country so much better than we do. With your thick accents, you fill fit right in. And you will know where to get guns, all the logistics, everything. Don't let us down. We need you."
And what help did the CIA need from the Israelis? Arrange a bar mitzvah for Jack Ruby's boy, if he had one, and if he was Jewish?
We are talking about the CIA. To pull off something in the United States. Dallas, Texas. The state of Israel was 15 years old, and broke. You couldn't find a dozen people who even spoke English.
What did they have to offer to the CIA?
The Power of Myth by Joseph Campbell
How many of you guys have read a book called Anarchy and Law ? Here's link:
http://www.amazon.com/Anarchy-Law-Political-Economy-Independent/dp/1412805791
Is it worth reading? I'm ordering books soon, so I would appreciate quick answers. Thanks beforehand.
I read that book last summer, it was great. It has a wide variety of essays I think about 40 from some great authors (Hoppe, Barnett, Rothbard, Friedman etc...) I would definately recommend it.
Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell
Final Solution by Michael Chabon
Ambition is a dream with a V8 engine - Elvis Presley