1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/11580/hayek-and-the-nobel-prize/

Hayek and the Nobel Prize

February 1, 2010 by

Hayek is not only the leading free-market economist; he has also led the way in attacking the mathematical models and the planning pretensions of the would-be “scientists,” and in integrating economics into a wider libertarian social philosophy. FULL ARTICLE by Murray N. Rothbard

{ 14 comments }

Mrhuh February 1, 2010 at 8:41 am

Who the heck is Dr. Gunnar Myrdal?

fundamentalist February 1, 2010 at 9:02 am

Nice tribute to Hayek, thanks! Of course, Hayek would credit Mises a great deal for giving him a solid foundation in economics.

Ocean February 1, 2010 at 9:59 am

It still frustrates me how little known Hayek is to the general public as compared to Keynes.

Ocean February 1, 2010 at 10:01 am

It still frustrates me how little known Hayek is to the general public compared to Keynes.

The Answer February 1, 2010 at 10:43 am

@Ocean

“Fear the Boom and Bust” a Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

I wonder why Mises.org has not put this up on their site.This video is going viral.

Jeffrey Tucker February 1, 2010 at 10:56 am

The Answer, you fool! We’ve blog it several times and the thread on the forum about this video is a mile long, in addition to linking in on Mises Dailies. Mises.org was a major source for the early attention that this masterpiece received last week.

(Ok, I admit that my opening sentence is not civil. But that’s what you get when you make crazy claims without bothering to check them out.)

Paul Stephens February 1, 2010 at 12:46 pm

Gunnar Myrdal was famous in the 1960′s for writing “An American Dilemma” about the Civil Rights movement and the perennial “contradiction” of Americans loving liberty yet continuing the racist, segregationist, slave-labor economy. I read it 20 years ago or more, but all I can remember is that I was very impressed by it. And the citation also referred to Myrdal and Hayek’s common roots in Enlightenment thinking and discourse.
Myrdal’s son was also an economist/sociologist who did some remarkable field studies of life and work in Chinese Communist villages back in the ’60′s. I’ve read parts of them, too. No doubt a major contribution towards bringing awareness of “the real China” into propaganda-soaked “anti-communist” discussions.
The first Economics “Nobel” (Bank of Sweden) prize went to Ragnar Frisch, in 1969. His family had managed the great Kongsberg Silver mine (Norway) for more than 200 years, and he is credited with inventing Econometrics.
Readers should look up Hayek’s Nobel Lecture, which argues against even granting a prize like this to an economist, and thus politically legitimizing his views. It’s probably on the Mises site somewhere, and on the official Nobel site, as well.

nathan mayer February 1, 2010 at 2:44 pm

I heard somewhere before that it was a bit of a slap in the face to Austrians that Hayek receives this the very year after Mises dies.

Niko February 2, 2010 at 1:54 am

@Paul Stephens:
Myrdal wrote that in 1944. He became famous of Luther King?

Mushindo February 2, 2010 at 9:24 am

Cant fault Rothbard for his unfailing , but sadly unfulfilled, optimism.:

‘ Now that Keynesianism is crumbling both theoretically and empirically, the world of economics should be ripe to consider the Austrian theory seriously again, for the first time in forty years.’.

With the hindsight available to us now, and despite Hayek’s honour, we saw none of this. In the few years since, this outlook sadly did not come to pass. We saw a brief brief lip-service paid to the free market by statists loudly enamoured of the (only slightly less Keynesian) Chicago school. The Fed’s presses thundered on regardless, through the reigns of Reagan, Bush the Elder, Clinton, Bush the Younger, and now Obama, and Austrian thinking remained firmly sidelined for a few more decades. ( Thatcher gave Hayek more credence, but even she couldnt get it right , and in th efinal analysis, her ‘reforms’ only really made more bigger rentseeking opportunities for the beneficiaries of the swathes of remaining institutionalised interventions).

Even now, despite the vibrant web hit rate on Mises.org and the fantastic repository of cogent literature available here, I cant help getting despondent when I see such august publications as The Economist make a policy of ignoring the Austrian school. Even its recent cover story on the need to contain the obesity of government (not to mention its admirable and longstanding anti-prohibitionist position on drugs) give the Austrian perspective very short shrift, if its even mentioned at all. Theyve even recently got a new columnist under the monniker ‘Schumpeter’, but even that column carefully avoids straying into any hint of Austrian thought wehich emerges there is strictly coincidental. (Oh well, I suppose Schumpeter wasn’t a proper Austrian anyway).

And dont get me started on the Financial Times! If I wasnt such a skeptic, I might begin to think there was an anti-Austrian conspiracy operating among the editors of the mainstream financial press. But the cynic in me suspects its just that they (financial journalists and editors alike) just don’t grok economics.

The Answer February 2, 2010 at 10:28 am

Yes,Mr.Tucker,not only were your opening sentences not civil ,they were grammatically horrendus.A simple’ Yes ,we have’ would suffice.The claim was not crazy but merely ignorant,for which I apologise.

Paul February 2, 2010 at 8:54 pm

Rothbard is significantly more critical of Hayek in later writings, specifically on methodology and on the planning issue (the latter change most likely being influenced by Salerno).

To the epistle Paul February 7, 2010 at 12:42 am

you should read murray’s invective to the Volker Fund about Freddie. Is that as you say…

Martin February 20, 2010 at 5:53 pm

There is no such thing like Nobel prize for economy, it is called Nobel memorial a Nobel would be very unhappy, if he could have his say, for such a thing called after him.
Clarity guys, clarity!

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: