Source link: http://archive.mises.org/2574/quarterly-journal-of-austrian-economics-summer-2004-volume-7-no-2/
Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Summer 2004, volume 7, no. 2
Volume 7, no. 2 (Summer 2004)
- PUBLIC GOODS AND PRIVATE SOLUTIONS IN MARITIME HISTORY, by Larry J. Sechrest
Among all those goods which have been offered as examples of public goods, national defense and lighthouses have been among the most frequently cited. In both cases, it is typically claimed that only a government can effectively provide the good. This paper will present historical evidence which demonstrates that such a claim is false. For instance, the 700-year history of privateering—the use of private armed ships during time of war—will show that national defense in the form of warfare on the seas was not, and need not, be monopolized by government. It will also be shown that lighthouses were frequently built and operated by private entrepreneurs, rather than by governments. . . .
- THE FAILURE OF OCA ANALYSIS, by Bogdan Glavan
The theory of optimum currency areas (OCA) is widely used by professional economists to defend a system of independent fiat currencies. Mainstream economists maintain that there are benefits to be derived from a system of fiat fluctuating currencies, although not necessarily from the present international monetary order. The OCA theory is supposed to provide the basis for the preservation of flexible exchange rates between regions using criteria proposed by the theory. This paper attempts to prove: (1) that the OCA theory is nonoperational and irrelevant in dealing with the present international monetary situation, and (2) the basic postulates of OCA theory are internally inconsistent and incompatible with economic theory. . . .
- INTERPRETING CARITAS: DID FRANK KNIGHT AND LUDWIG VON MISES GET IT WRONG? By W. Duncan Reekie
Knight and Mises claimed Christianity, both in its early history and in its modern political role, was incompatible with market economics. Competition to satisfy partners in voluntary exchange, investment, and the achievement of property and wealth received little or no sanction from a religion that preached “no thought for the morrow” and commanded “love of one’s neighbor.” Prompted by their disagreement with the anti-capitalist policies promoted by some contemporary church leaders, they adopted faulty interpretations of early church history and caricatured Christian doctrine, in particular the implications of divine love, caritas. Later writers from both Catholic and Protestant traditions argue there is no incompatibility. Indeed Adam Smith’s concepts of self-command, Propriety and the Spectator can be used to help better approach a proper understanding of caritas. The antagonism of Knight and Mises may have had deeper roots than simply intellectual dissent from socialism. . . .
- THE FORGOTTEN CONTRIBUTION: MURRAY ROTHBARD AND SOCIALISM IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE, by Peter J. Boettke and Christopher J. Coyne
This paper documents and articulates Murray N. Rothbard’s contribution to our understanding of the theory and practice of socialism. We summarize his theoretical contributions and then turn to his explanation of the operation of socialism in the Soviet Union. Moreover, we make and support the conjecture that Rothbard, writing in the 1950s and 60s, anticipated all the major subsequent developments in the economic analysis regarding the problems of the Soviet economy and all the major works in comparative political economy for real-existing socialism in the Soviet Union. . . .