Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Democracy and civilization

rated by 0 users
This post has 74 Replies | 10 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 10:33 PM
That article makes no sense whatsoever. According to Hoppe there's such a thing as 'natural elites' - but it turns out they get overthrown by a king ... which was a member of the natural elites.

The thesis is wholly contradictory. If 'natural elites' really existed they would always retain 'natural' power. But of course, this rosy view of government is nonsense and has nothing to do with libertarianism.

The 'natural elites' are an oligarchy, a government, "a gang of thieves writ large".

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 65
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,056
Points 78,245

Usually, such usage of the term "natural" is just a projection of whatever one likes, to the status of a scientific law.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 478
Points 9,180

Juan:
That article makes no sense whatsoever. According to Hoppe there's such a thing as 'natural elites' - but it turns out they get overthrown by a king ... which was a member of the natural elites.

The thesis is wholly contradictory. If 'natural elites' really existed they would always retain 'natural' power. But of course, this rosy view of government is nonsense and has nothing to do with libertarianism.

The 'natural elites' are an oligarchy, a government, "a gang of thieves writ large".

I don't see a contradiction within the thesis - the monopolisation of a privately provided public good isn't absurd. Hoppe references a thourough criticism of exogenous theories of State formation.

Hoppe's view of the State isn't a rosy one either; he points out that once the function of judge and peacemaker bacame monopolised, justice immediately became more expensive from the point of view of the citizenry.

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 10:44 PM
he points out that once the function of judge and peacemaker bacame monopolised,
how ?

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,011
Points 47,070

Anarchist Cain:
Since he wrote a book on how democracy failed...yet is championing how monarchy has all of these great qualities..would that not imply he is for monarchy?
He's saying that given the choice between the two--and only those two--monarchy offers an advantage.

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 478
Points 9,180

However a man of superior wealth and talent would accomplish such a thing.

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Juan:
But of course, this rosy view of government is nonsense and has nothing to do with libertarianism.

I think you have confused Hoppe's analysis with the promotion of a bonafide libertarian societal structure.

Hoppe generally promotes decentralization and differentiation.  It's like his analysis about the time preference of homosexuals.  People conflate that with his being anti-gay.  But he's obviously not, since he will invite someone like Raimondo to speak at his annual conference in Turkey.

I have a post on my blog about what Rothbard called Hoppephobia.  Very few people can get such an emotional rise out of others with direct argument.  I have been trying to learn this approach.  It's a great rhetorical skill.

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 10:52 PM
FAIL. You have one gangster - the wannabe king - fighting against all the other gangsters - how can he win ?

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Male
Posts 478
Points 9,180

The Oppenheimer conquest thesis fails as well, or is as best incomplete.

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 10:55 PM
LS:
I think you have confused Hoppe's analysis with the promotion of a bonafide libertarian societal structure.
I probably wasn't clear enough. I should have said "Hoppe's theory about the origin of government has nothing to do with libertarian theories about the origin of government ".

Also, I don't think that Hoppe's conservatism has anything to do with libertarianism but that's another topic.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 10:58 PM
The Oppenheimer conquest thesis fails as well, or is as best incomplete.
It's not Oppenheimer's theory but a classical liberal theory. Maybe it fails too, but that doesn't mean that Hoppe's theory is right.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Juan:
I probably wasn't clear enough. I should have said "Hoppe's theory about the origin of government has nothing to do with libertarian theories about the origin of government ".

I'm not sure this is an improvement.

Libertarian theories of government as derived by who?

Juan:
Also, I don't think that Hoppe's conservatism has anything to do with libertarianism but that's another topic.

I'm not sure this is even relevant to what I wrote.  His observation about time preference is wrong, but his personal preferences, conservative or not, are not something he supports enforcing on anyone else, so in this regard, they are fully compatible.

Anyway...

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 11:00 PM

Juan:
FAIL. You have one gangster - the wannabe king - fighting against all the other gangsters - how can he win ?

Sometimes he loses, as was the case in England. However instead of restoring the status quo, the nobles continue to run the state for themselves.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Wed, Jul 29 2009 11:14 PM
However instead of restoring the status quo, the nobles continue to run the state for themselves.
You almost have it right - the oligarchs which you call 'nobles' continue to run the state like they always did. .

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 46
Points 1,310

I would say that buddhist monks are arranged in societies.  Surely any given group of buddhist monks at any given temple live in a society?  And for the record, I am pretty sure, though not positive, that monks do not beg, but rather grow their own food in the temple garden.  That might just be ascetic monks in rural tibet though.

 

In fact, it would seem to me that buddhist monks represent a form of anarchism.  Each monk lives his own life and infringes not upon the property of others.  They live governed only by their own thoughts.

 

Further still, I am now inclined to believe that monks have a better "economy" than democratic nations by following my premise that the best economy is the one that satisfies the greatest amount of demand.  Seeing as monks have very low economic demand, they satisfy (to my knowledge) nearly 100% of their demand while even the best "civilized" countries leave much demand unsatisfied.

 

Someone please point out where I have gone wrong as I seem to be rambling now.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 554
Points 9,130
Praetyre replied on Thu, Jul 30 2009 5:29 AM

I would be careful about using Buddhist monks as an example here. While, to be fair, the Yellow Hat sect of Tibetan Buddhism represents only a small (but well known in the West) proportion of Theravada Buddhism and Buddhism as a whole, during these days, it was the monks feudal theocracy that was behind the brutal torture (eye gougings, cutting out of tongues) of serfs on the monks monastery-land that tried to run away.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

Stranger:
No, I can deduce how it can change.

So you can tell me right now what government we will have in the next 20 years? When will the Anarchist revolution happen oh wise Millerite?

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

MatthewWilliam:

I think that what Stranger means here is that by applying economic analysis to politics and governance we will be able to reconstruct history and predict what might happen in the future.

Any one can make an apriori statement about the future of government, however stranger seems to be laboring until the delusion that his theory will be correct that we can never go back to monarchy.

 

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

liberty student:
Very few people can get such an emotional rise out of others with direct argument.  I have been trying to learn this approach.  It's a great rhetorical skill.

It's hardly conducive towards honest, open discourse with an attempt to reach some sort of understanding and conclusion. There was me thinking that's what science was about. Apparently science is aimed at getting an emotional rise out of your "opponent" and then claiming victory.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,011
Points 47,070

What a lovely strawman, Giles. Now try it without a fallacy.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

Juan:
That article makes no sense whatsoever. According to Hoppe there's such a thing as 'natural elites' - but it turns out they get overthrown by a king ... which was a member of the natural elites.

I think the article does make sense, I'm not sure if it's correct thought and I've seen little empirical evidence in support of it. Perhaps some states arose in that way, but I find it makes little sense because his notion of the rise of the state makes it seem largely voluntary. And yet, he criticizes Buchanan and Tullock harshly for making a similar point. Now, besides the fact that I'm not sure if Hoppe understands what Public Choice and the Virginia School are about, it seems to me to be nothing more than an unfair reading of the arguments made by other scientists. See, this is my biggest criticism of the LvMI and many associated with it (excluding some like Salerno, Huelsmann, Klein, Gordon, Thornton etc.), they seem to be more interested in public intellectual work and libertarian "propaganda" than objective scientific analysis.

It's a shame because it reflects badly on Austrian economics. I wouldn't mind if he stayed in the realm of being a public intellectual like, say, Lew Rockwell. But when he presents these theories as science I can't help but be disappointed.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

GilesStratton:
they seem to be more interested in public intellectual work and libertarian "propaganda" than objective scientific analysis.

Well because Austrianism is not a positivistic ideology. It only goes so far in promoting objective truths.

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

Anarchist Cain:

GilesStratton:
they seem to be more interested in public intellectual work and libertarian "propaganda" than objective scientific analysis.

Well because Austrianism is not a positivistic ideology. It only goes so far in promoting objective truths.

What does this have to do with anything? Why is it any time I make a post and you disagree with it you feel the need to point out that Austrians aren't positivists. I know this, but I don't see why this means that Austrians should focus of scientific analysis as opposed to libertarian "propaganda" for a lack of a better word.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

GilesStratton:
What does this have to do with anything?

This is why Rothbard always said that economists should know more history.

GilesStratton:
Why is it any time I make a post and you disagree with it you feel the need to point out that Austrians aren't positivists.

You are asking why Austrianism isn't about objective scientific truths of the world. Bluntly you are asking why Austrians are not logical positivists. Remember methodological dualism and economics is not a natural science.

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

Anarchist Cain:
You are asking why Austrianism isn't about objective scientific truths of the world.

No, I'm not! Austrianism is about objective scientific truths of the world. That objective truths that can be discovered a priori is what Austrians believe economic science should be about, I've not once asked why Austrians are not logical positivists.

Anarchist Cain:
This is why Rothbard always said that economists should know more history.

Why? Or are you just toeing the party line and using the catch phrases handed down to you by Rothbard?

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

GilesStratton:
No, I'm not! Austrianism is about objective scientific truths of the world.

And what are these 'objective truths' that economics can deduce?

GilesStratton:
Why? Or are you just toeing the party line and using the catch phrases handed down to you by Rothbard?

You are in a discipline that could care less about 1863 tax codes in an effort to make 2009 ones.

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

Anarchist Cain:
And what are these 'objective truths' that economics can deduce?

I genuinely hope you're not being serious. But if you are, go read Prices and Production, Man, Economy and State or Human Action.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Thu, Jul 30 2009 10:33 AM

Anarchist Cain:

 

Any one can make an apriori statement about the future of government, however stranger seems to be laboring until the delusion that his theory will be correct that we can never go back to monarchy.

I cannot tell you when you will die, but I can tell you that you will never turn back into a baby. It is impossible.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

Stranger:

I cannot tell you when you will die, but I can tell you that you will never turn back into a baby. It is impossible.

False analogy. If you equate monarchism to infancy then what is Britain? Some baby state that conquered a vast portion of the world? You have no way of telling the political future and you are using ridiculous statements to hide that.

 

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

GilesStratton:
I genuinely hope you're not being serious. But if you are, go read Prices and Production, Man, Economy and State or Human Action.

You said there are objective truths. I want to hear them. You can toss out one or two can't you?

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 5,538
Points 93,790
Juan replied on Thu, Jul 30 2009 2:18 PM
Giles:
I think the article does make sense, I'm not sure if it's correct thought and I've seen little empirical evidence in support of it.
The thesis that one demagogue is able to overthrow the 'natural elites' is hardly plausible. That's why there's no evidence for it.
I find it makes little sense because his notion of the rise of the state makes it seem largely voluntary.
Yes, in that article Hoppe starts with a voluntary government - he just takes for granted that such governments exist(ed). Fine. The question is, how can a such government be overthrown ? Simply by using demagoguery ? By promising 'cheaper' justice ? I don't think so.
See, this is my biggest criticism of the LvMI ..... they seem to be more interested in public intellectual work and libertarian propaganda" than objective scientific analysis.
What you don't seem to be grasping, or are trying to ignore, is that 'economic science' supports the moral position known as libertarianism. If you don't like libertarianism maybe you should forget that economic 'science' exists.

February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church.
Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Thu, Jul 30 2009 2:20 PM

Anarchist Cain:

Stranger:

I cannot tell you when you will die, but I can tell you that you will never turn back into a baby. It is impossible.

False analogy. If you equate monarchism to infancy then what is Britain? Some baby state that conquered a vast portion of the world? You have no way of telling the political future and you are using ridiculous statements to hide that.

 

I could have said that a tree cannot turn back into a seed as well, or that a supernova cannot shrink back into a solar system. The point is that science tells us how things unfold from one step to the next. They do not simply change aspects randomly.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,914
Points 70,630

Stranger:

Anarchist Cain:

Stranger:

I cannot tell you when you will die, but I can tell you that you will never turn back into a baby. It is impossible.

False analogy. If you equate monarchism to infancy then what is Britain? Some baby state that conquered a vast portion of the world? You have no way of telling the political future and you are using ridiculous statements to hide that.

I could have said that a tree cannot turn back into a seed as well, or that a supernova cannot shrink back into a solar system. The point is that science tells us how things unfold from one step to the next. They do not simply change aspects randomly.

Stranger,  are you stating civilizations can't fall apart?  Or States, governments?

"Do not put out the fire of the spirit." 1The 5:19
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Thu, Jul 30 2009 2:24 PM

wilderness:

Stranger,  are you stating civilizations can't fall apart?  Or States, governments?

Of course they can, but the process of doing so is not like the rise of the civilization in reverse.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

Stranger:
I could have said that a tree cannot turn back into a seed as well, or that a supernova cannot shrink back into a solar system. The point is that science tells us how things unfold from one step to the next. They do not simply change aspects randomly.

Economics isn't a 'science' in terms of supernovas or botony. You keep on pumping out these horrible analogies as they were your proof alone that you are correct in thinking you can rationally deduce the future without error. Whatever you do, don't use the cunning 'you cannot degrade non-biogradables' analogy. The logic alone will blow my mind.

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 2 of 2 (75 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS