"THE interventionist policies as practiced for many decades by all governments of the capitalistic West have brought about all those effects which the economists predicted. There are wars and civil wars, ruthless oppression of the masses by clusters of self-appointed dictators, economic depressions, mass unemployment, capital consumption, famines. However, it is not these catastrophic events which have led to the crisis of interventionism. The interventionist doctrinaires and their followers explain all these undesired consequences as the unavoidable features of capitalism. As they see it, it is precisely these disasters that clearly demonstrate the necessity of intensifying interventionism. The failures of the interventionist policies do not in the least impair the popularity of the implied doctrine. They are so interpreted as to strengthen, not to lessen, the prestige of these teachings. As a vicious economic theory cannot be simply refuted by historical experience, the interventionist propagandists have been able to go on in spite of all the havoc they have spread. Yet the age of interventionism is reaching its end. Interventionism has exhausted all its potentialities and must disappear."
"The interventionist interlude must come to an end because interventionism cannot lead to a permanent system of social organization.."
-Ludwig Von Mises, Human Action, In the Section "The Crisis of Interventionism"
Now Mises last revised an edition of Human Action in 1966, and I'm guessing that these very words or something quite similar was written in the first edition back in 49, so I was wondering what everyone thought about the fact that the era of interventionism, which we will say, for the sake of argument started in 1930, has now lasted 80 years, about 40 years since Mises was sure enough to write that. I think it is indisputable it has taken longer than mises believed, but do you think that what he said will only take another ten years or so? And what do you think about the miscalculation in the first place?
What say you?
I think it is indisputable it has taken longer than mises believed, but do you think that what he said will only take another ten years or so?
I doubt ten years, but I think we're closer to the death of statism than Mises was. Socialism, in the true sense of government ownership of the means of production, has been dead for decades. The Keynesian hegemony on academia has been broken, leaving room for alternative schools like the Austrians, monetarists, and real expectation theorists.
And what do you think about the miscalculation in the first place?
Generally unwarrented optimism in the intelligence of mankind on the part of Mises. He makes a similar mistake in "Nation, State, and Economy" where he says that in a democracy the public will learn from their mistakes and choose the politicians and policies that will truly benefit them.
The world is far freer today than it was in the 1930's, but by what degree is up for debate.
I think the United States has to be intreventionalists in order to keep the superpower status that many believe it has. As long as there is an United States of America, there will be American intreventionalist policies. I agree with this quote though:"Interventionism has exhausted all its potentialities and must disappear" but I would take it a step further and say that the State (or at least the power of the State) would disappear, along with its inteventionlist policies, eventually. But when exactly will the US end, I dont know.
My Blog: http://www.anarchico.net/
Production is 'anarchistic' - Ludwig von Mises
Honestly, I don't see it ever ending per se. People will always want to appropriate the labor of others and what they produce as a means to gain power and influence among the less well off, etc. There will always be some form of political arrangements of capital. I think the best we can do is get people to admit that we need to at least figure out the best way not to stifle the free market while accomplishing the goals that people will always want to attach themselves to such as welfare, bailouts, etc.
Phaedros: People will always want to appropriate the labor of others and what they produce as a means to gain power and influence among the less well off, etc.
People will always want to appropriate the labor of others and what they produce as a means to gain power and influence among the less well off, etc.
But will there always be folks ready to work just to be looted? Especially when Chile and Singapore are so, you know, in existence these days
Interventionism will go the way of the dodo as every other inferior social structure has. But of course social evolution takes it time and Mises might indeed have been over-confident back in 1949. Plus lets not forget that Thatcher and Reagan gave the market some breathing room and gave the system a new lease on life.