08 Apr 2010

Admiral Ackbar on Martin Wolf

Conspiracy, Economics 4 Comments

“It’s a trap!”

Martin Wolf is the guy who asked an apparently innocent question about whether the Austrians had the best business cycle theory. It was Wolf’s post that led to the Krugman and DeLong critiques of ABCT. Hey that’s cool, Mr. Wolf is just giving the Austrians a fair shake, right…?

Bob Roddis sends me this from Wikipedia:

Martin Wolf (born 1946) is a British journalist. He is associate editor and chief economics commentator at the Financial Times. He was awarded the CBE (Commander of the British Empire) in 2000….He has been a forum fellow at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos since 1999. … He is a regular participant in the annual Bilderberg meetings of politicians and bankers.

Oops. Arnold Kling and I just stepped in it.

It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? The international elites realize that the one threat to their schemes is economic education. Therefore they must suppress Austrian economics, especially knowledge of the Austrian theory of the business cycle.

So Wolf runs it up the flagpole, knowing the predictable criticisms of Krugman et al. In fact, Krugman is in on it; that’s why he was uncharacteristically polite.

The point is not to foster a debate. The point is to draw out everyone who really understands Austrian business cycle theory, to throw in the database.

There is another interesting twist to this, showing that my worldview as of three hours ago was totally inadequate. Up is down, left is right, apparent  neo-Keynesians are in fact triple agents. Given Wolf’s nefarious feint, the optimal response is clear.

4 Responses to “Admiral Ackbar on Martin Wolf”

  1. Bob Roddis says:
    at

    Mr. Wolf is apparently going to learn everything he can about Austrian Economics FROM COMMENTS TO HIS BLOG POST! And we’re not winning him over:

    Martin Wolf | April 8 4:29pm

    For those interested (and reasonably open-minded) Paul Krugman has waded into this: http://krugman.blo…and-the-austrians/.

    I have to say that, so far, the posts by Austrians fall into what I have found a consistent pattern: the absence of any rigorous argument combined with arrogance and a conviction that the apocalypse is both inevitable and desirable. But I am going to try to keep an open mind so long as I can.

  2. JimS says:
    at

    So is it a conspiracy, or is that too strong a word?

    Are these people who seek to extend the state’s powers evil or ignorant? I forget who said it, but one of our Austrian school fathers cautioned us that those who seek central planning and expansion of state powers are most sincere in their hearts and minds and not to chastise them as wrong hearted or evil. I would agree that chastisement or a mean spirited attack would not get us anywhere desirable. I would concede that most statists are relatively altruistic in their desires honestly believing that state guidance is preferable, but I do believe, or would liike to believe, that a minority element has less than the best desires at heart by using the state’s power for insidious goals . A case in point; I know environmentalists who would rather have a naturally dead environment than one that is healthy with cattle or man’s management. Some are honest in this belief, for many, it is a end run around property rights to enforce their vision of socialism.

    I guess the question is; is this a concerted effort by Keynesians to discredit the Austrian school? Do they truly view it as threatening? Or is it simply a spirited debate? I truly sense the Austrian approach to be far less menacing, far more friendly, an approach of reasoned debate, which is one of the reasons I am drawn to it

    JimS

  3. Evan says:
    at

    The internet has truly been a game-changer with regard to popular political and economic thought. Because it has democratized the media, the gatekeepers in the msm and academia can no longer set the agenda and bury stories and views like they could before. I think that it’s great that they’re starting to realize this and finally seeing a need to defend their collectivist schemes, because they certainly won’t be able to stand up to rigorous intellectual scrutiny against more freedom-based ideologies.

  4. fundamentalist says:
    at

    It’s fascinating to me that the economists who failed the worst at predicting the latest crisis respond by attacking the only economists who predicted it. Mainstream economists have no intention of learning from their mistakes. All this will do is marginalize mainstream economics even more. Today, no one pays attentiion to mainstream economists but politicians, and politicians do so only because they need someone with academic credentials to give respectability to their ridiculous schemes. Economists are the ones who shout the loudest and proclaim the beauty of the imaginary clothing of naked politicians. As such they are just useful idiots.

    As Mark Skousen reports in his book, “Structure of Production,” most financial experts ignore mainstream econ and follow essentially Austrian economics without knowing much about it. An article in the recent Journal of Austrian Economics tells a similar story.

    I’m more convinced that the way for Austrian econ to increase in influence is for Austrians to make as much money as possible from the foolishness of Keynesian econ as possible. Financial people everywhere are praising Austrian econ. If we can make money and help other people make money from the inflationary policies of the state, then we will win the minds of the majority of people and render Keynesian policies less effective at stealing the wealth of the people.