Have there been any scholars applying Misesian logic and arriving at "leftist" conclusions?
Apparently there's something called "left-libertarians"
If you want to consider people like Hilfrding, Weber, and Shackle on the margins of Austrianism. Of the three I am least clear about Hilferding and iif he retained anything at all methodologically from Menger - but I have seen a paper or two showing how he relates to Schumpeter (another man who could be on the far margin of Austrianism) and Menger his teacher. I could try and dig them up if you want me too.
"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann
"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence" - GLS Shackle
No clue what the answer is on this, but if you want to get super crazy in the realm of Germanic alternative Methodologies
One could try and see the relationship between dialectical materialism and Austrian methodologies. That may be interesting.
There have been attempts to look at Husserl / Heiddeger heurstics and phenomonolgy already from an Austrian perspective
I think the dialectic may yield interesting results. Particulary because I think Stirner (who could also be considered somewhat of a leftist) trumps Marx and may be the 1st "proto" Austrian (or at least the de facto forerunner to it), and along with Mises the most consistent "subjectivist" I know of, while providing a philisophical grounding in ontology and epistemology. But also because the dilaections were working under LTV assumptions which led to catastrophic conclusions - what would happen if you gave them a break and just threw out those assumptions and just looked at the method and logic of it?
Vive - I'm not sure if you're aware but Hoppe wrote an article 'Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis' which does just that.
If I read it, I have forgotten all about it. It would make sense, because I think Hoppe started out Marxist. Anyway, is it about class analysis or the relation of Prax to the Dialectic?
Either way, if you have a link please send it to me.
Well he employs a dialectical approach under Austrian assumptions, and argues that Marx's theory of history is essentially correct except for the error of his 'labour value' assumption. Link - http://mises.org/journals/jls/9_2/9_2_5.pdf
I think the dialectic may yield interesting results.
Chris Sciabarra does treatments of Rand, Hayek and Rothbard as dialectical thinkers. As far as praxeology goes though, he doesn't really touch on it.
they said we would have an unfair fun advantage
Thanks for the link.
Well in theory it should be impossible to come t o different conclusions using praxeology. At any rate, however, conclusions tend to reflect their methodologies. Dialectical Materialism is an extremely collectivistic methodology, and the conclusions that it reaches are, of course, exceedingly collectivistic. Austrianism employs a very individualistic methodology, and its conclusions are, of course, exceedingly individualistic.
Therefore, to my knowledge, there are no common "leftists" who employ a really individualist frameworks, the closest being socialist anarchists, but if they understood the reality of subjective values then the entire ideology would look entirely different soo....
Like I stated / hinted at; I am more interested in the fact that the dialectic may very well be somewhat part of the same geneoloy as Austrianism of some Teutonic tradition that trumps and ultimatly will "ground"in" todays mainstream scientism in its proper place and compartment (which is still a significant comparmtent)..
Furthermore, the dialectic is a method which describes "process" that affirms action via words. If the two most radical results of this are Stirner and Marx - it is worth noting. Stirner is a systematic radical subjectivist, materialist, and arch individualist whose concept of "uniquness" and "property" in the realm of unique action transcend verification and falsification.
And while Marx's conclusions, and some key premises, may be wrong - unlike Stirner, he was an economist. That alone makes him interesting. What if you took Stirner's Dialectic egoism and thought of it in the economic temrs of "dialectical egoistic materialism"? Maybe nothing would come out of it - and it is a topic that is well beyond me, but I find it very interesting.
What do you mean by a leftist conclusion?
Government Explained 2: The Special Piece of Paper
Law without Government
Looser property rights.
Wheylous: What do you mean by a leftist conclusion? Looser property rights.
So stronger property rights is a "rightist conclusion"?! Do you think of us as being "extreme rightists"?! How does it even make sense to talk of property rights being "stronger" and "looser"?
Really, what are you asking? Is it "Are there any non-libertarian praxeologists?" or something else?
Aristippus:Well he employs a dialectical approach under Austrian assumptions, and argues that Marx's theory of history is essentially correct except for the error of his 'labour value' assumption.
Really? Wow. The end of capitalism, too?