PDA

View Full Version : Looking for Grittier books on Economics and Libertarianism




Foolness
09-19-2011, 06:43 PM
Anyone know of books that defy the myth that: "Libertarianism/Fiscal Conservatism is purely ideology in the vein of Communism".

Some particular subjects I am looking for:

1) The Keynesian opposition to modern economics:

I saw a video where Friedman hinted that even Keynes may not be supportive of how far his ideas have been taken close to his death. I wonder if there are any more books expanding on this subject.

2) The Friedmanite Chile situation:

I've heard anecdotes of both sides but I have no idea of the culture in Chile at the time. Not being very familiar with Friedman, I also have no idea when people say the Friedmanites were not exactly following Friedman's philosophy to a tee. Things like shock therapy not being heeded.

3) Stocks/Bonds/Investments:

I wonder if there's a literature written completely from the perspective of ignoring investment strategies and more towards educating the poor on the difference between stocks/bank deposits/lotteries and the fundamental difference and necessity of each of these concepts.

For example: Participating in stocks is confusing. If I'm not wrong, mutual funding is not the most optimal way of putting your money investment in but for poor people the concept appears closest to their idea of a bank where gains are more guaranteed.

4) Economic psychology

Books on behaviour economics does shed on the irrationality of people but I'm looking for something closer to governments and organizations.

For example: There was the 2010 Global Forum video where Schiff says China will wisen up but Siegel kept insisting that Japan never wisened up.

I'm looking both for something that deals generally with why countries act in certain ways as well as specifics on why certain countries act a certain way.

5) Books on where Libertarianism (big L, small l, doesn't matter) started being perceived as fiction:

I could understand where Communism is perceived to have fallen but the more I read about things like the free market, the more I'm lost as to where the idea starts to break down.

I could understand where people who desire entitlement both for themselves and others may disagree on the political imposition that they have to take care of themselves or where people may want order and Libertarianism may come off like Anarchy but even the Wikipedia page seems to only address the philosophical criticism.

Even Socialism and Social Welfare, you could use today's setting as an example of why it can fail and Capitalism, there's the threats of a more tyrannical society hiring wage slaves but the chronological hatred and passive outlook on liberty seems to have few connections both as interpreted by Americans or by other cultures other than purely philosophical disputes.

P.S. There are probably in-between labels mixed in there but I've always hated when things like classical and neo- starts getting adopted as it seems to make knowledge more worded towards only those with education or politically vested interests so the above is purely from a triangle of Libertarian, Republican, Democrat. Please feel free to recommend books that may not apply to the labels of libertarianism.

noneedtoaggress
09-19-2011, 06:50 PM
For A New Liberty, by Murray Rothbard

Best primer on libertarian philosophy I've read...

http://mises.org/books/newliberty.pdf

noneedtoaggress
09-19-2011, 06:55 PM
I could understand where Communism is perceived to have fallen but the more I read about things like the free market, the more I'm lost as to where the idea starts to break down.

I could understand where people who desire entitlement both for themselves and others may disagree on the political imposition that they have to take care of themselves or where people may want order and Libertarianism may come off like Anarchy but even the Wikipedia page seems to only address the philosophical criticism.

Even Socialism and Social Welfare, you could use today's setting as an example of why it can fail and Capitalism, there's the threats of a more tyrannical society hiring wage slaves but the chronological hatred and passive outlook on liberty seems to have few connections both as interpreted by Americans or by other cultures other than purely philosophical disputes.

P.S. There are probably in-between labels mixed in there but I've always hated when things like classical and neo- starts getting adopted as it seems to make knowledge more worded towards only those with education or politically vested interests so the above is purely from a triangle of Libertarian, Republican, Democrat. Please feel free to recommend books that may not apply to the labels of libertarianism.

Socialism/Communism fails because it can't rationally economically calculate, which distorts resource allocation. You need free market prices to rationally allocate resources.

Libertarianism to it's full extent is "anarchy", or stateless, in the sense that there is no single centralized monopoly on force. The core principle of libertarianism is the Non-Aggression principle, which statism violates.

Foolness
09-19-2011, 07:29 PM
The problem with the link is as you say it's a primer and it's again theory.

Not that philosophical theory is bad but it's partially what fuels the libertarianism is a myth perspective.

The same can be said for Socialism. Not that I'm in support of it but mixed with capitalism, the criticism that it can't rationally economically calculate falls apart.

The same once again happens with the statelessness about Libertarianism. It's entirely based on the Non-Aggression principle and convincing people of that.

Anyway, I hope you do not interpret this as philosophical disagreements. I'm simply trying to show the failings of philosophical vs. philosophical perspectives and this is the reason why I'm searching for grittier books. I'm not really looking for primers.

Gumba of Liberty
09-19-2011, 07:36 PM
Not really what you asked for but a great book on the Civil War and the origins of our problems is Yankee Leviathan: The Origins of Central State Authority in America, 1859-1877 http://www.amazon.com/Yankee-Leviathan-Origins-Authority-1859-1877/dp/0521398177/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1316482422&sr=8-1

http://img1.wantitall.co.za/images/ShowImage.aspx?ImageId=Yankee-Leviathan-The-Origins-of-Central-State-Authority-in-America-1859-1877%7C41VQJ6EZNZL.jpg

zyphex
09-19-2011, 07:57 PM
If you want grit and are willing to invest the requisite amount of time, read Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market by Murray Rothbard (http://mises.org/store/product.aspx?ProductId=177). If you read this book, which is long but written in layman's terms and absolutely intriguing, you will understand the entire edifice of economics. Within the book Rothbard critiques many mainstream ideas including Keynesian theories. It was the best investment I ever made, you really learn a ton and I highly recommend it.

Simple
09-19-2011, 08:22 PM
Anyone know of books that defy the myth that: "Libertarianism/Fiscal Conservatism is purely ideology in the vein of Communism".


Have you read Hayek's Road to Serfdom? It spells out the differences between central control and a free market economy.

Jingles
09-19-2011, 08:30 PM
>Grittier books on Economics and Libertarianism
>Grittier

Well in general I would say anything by Walter Block because he likes to test principles to the absolute extreme.

But especially Defending the Undefendable http://mises.org/books/defending.pdf

EDIT: I shouldn't say extreme as much as the things people think would be impossible/wouldn't work/or various situations that are like "Well that works in these cases, but what about X, Y, Z, and etc..." Well and he takes the principles and applies them to all kinds of real life situations in his works.

helmuth_hubener
09-19-2011, 08:40 PM
What exactly do you mean by "Grittier"? Maybe check out Defending the Undefendable if you mean hard-hitting, fast-moving, controversial.

_b_
09-19-2011, 09:45 PM
>Grittier books on Economics and Libertarianism
>Grittier

Well in general I would say anything by Walter Block because he likes to test principles to the absolute extreme.

But especially Defending the Undefendable http://mises.org/books/defending.pdf

EDIT: I shouldn't say extreme as much as the things people think would be impossible/wouldn't work/or various situations that are like "Well that works in these cases, but what about X, Y, Z, and etc..." Well and he takes the principles and applies them to all kinds of real life situations in his works.

Walter Moderate Block ;)

Bordillo
09-19-2011, 10:15 PM
The freakonomics books are really good

Foolness
09-19-2011, 11:28 PM
First off, thanks for the recommendations. Yeah, I have Road to Serfdom and Freakonomics on my reading list but I haven't read it. From what I heard about Hayek's book, it's about theory. The others I haven't read yet.

Freakonomics...I was hoping for something deeper. Haven't read it but have watched the Stossel video and I think it's great but it also uses many indirect analogies to deliver a reactionary point. It doesn't really show the grim difficulty of how to implement the stuff except if you dare hang around with drug sellers I guess. (but still there's no howto of learning how to survive that)


What exactly do you mean by "Grittier"? Maybe check out Defending the Undefendable if you mean hard-hitting, fast-moving, controversial.

No...no... I mean something closer to case studies like some specific event that aren't necessarily ideal situations but because many libertarian aspects were attempted, it showed how the concept is not purely an ideological discourse.

Imagine if Ron Paul won the presidency and years down the line not only did China spend their exports on themselves but major disasters after major disasters happened to the United States of America but because of Paul's success with implementing more libertarian/fiscal conservative policies, the people saw renewed prosperity and someone neutral (say not from Paul's camp or even an anti-RP) wrote a book on what actually happened.

Only the books should be about something that actually happened, not about a what if.

The Chile situation for example - some have said that Pinochet despite the people he killed saved Chile because of the Chicago boys while others like Naomi Klein have used the case as an example of Milton Friedman's failure.

Here's one article about it that I'm currently reading: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/mar/03/chile-earthquake?commentpage=1#start-of-comments

SkarnkaiLW
09-20-2011, 10:13 AM
You may be looking for something more 'hard' as in economic history, application of ideas rather than pure theory by my guess?

You may be interested in the following:
By Burton Fulsom
http://www.amazon.com/New-Deal-Raw-Economic-Damaged/dp/1416592377/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_1
http://www.amazon.com/Industrial-Revolution-Free-Trade/dp/1572460571/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_5
http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Robber-Barons-Business-America/dp/0963020315/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_2
By Thomas Woods
http://www.amazon.com/Meltdown-Free-Market-Collapsed-Government-Bailouts/dp/1596985879/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316535075&sr=1-4
By Robert Murphy
http://www.amazon.com/Politically-Incorrect-Guide-Capitalism-Guides/dp/B001JJBOLA/ref=sr_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316535127&sr=1-7

Hope these recommendations help

You seem to be wanting to look at a very narrow focus, might want to look into scholarly journals rather than public consumption I think.
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/somalia-failed-state-economic-success/
http://www.libertariannews.org/2011/06/30/anarchy-in-somalia/
Something like these maybe? I know there is at least one PHD thesis on Somalia, as well as Anarchic Iceland and Early Ireland.

Foolness
09-20-2011, 11:27 AM
Thanks. I think my problem with scholarly journals is that I don't know how to read them.

I don't have an academic background and whenever I chanced upon a bibliography, I have no way of filtering out those books. Not to mention I'm not a heavy enough reader.

In some ways, yes, I am looking something more "hard" but at the same time I am searching for something easier. Ones where more neutral writers have dealt and researched with both sides. (Freakonomics would actually be a good example if it was a book about digging deeper and linking issues to liberty.)

Take this review of The New Deal or Raw Deal book:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1OIP6A0TO05UQ/ref=cm_cr_pr_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1416592377&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=#wasThisHelpful

Once that word propaganda flies, it's over. You have to go down a rabbit hole of several books to figure out if this is truth or not. All relating to a issue that mostly applies to Americans and is purely a historical account with no analogy to modern events except for the supposed consequences.

I am not saying I simply want books where people want to do the thinking for me but it would be nice to have something more practical.

The Somalia links for example. They are certainly better but unless you're just trying to make someone agree with your viewpoints, they are still closer to theoretical estimations. There are few details there on how to replicate a Somalian like environment on any environment. You're almost better served looking for clues on how to establish a grassroots movement based on ideology.

Even the article concedes to this:


“If you Rothbardians like anarchy so much, why don’t you move to Somalia?” — misses the point. The Rothbardian doesn’t claim that the absence of a state is a sufficient condition for bliss. Rather, the Rothbardian says that however prosperous and law-abiding a society is, adding an institution of organized violence and theft will only make things worse.

Yes, the statement is correct that it misses the point but only in the context of how people may misinterpret Rothbard as claiming the absence of a state being a condition for bliss.

It ignores the other part of the sentence which is... "why don't you move to Somalia?" which can also be reconstructed into: "Why don't you prove us wrong and all help move to Somalia, improve it and show us how much better Rothbard's views are in such a way that it boosts Somalia into one of the best countries in the world?"

The reality is, and even Ron Paul hints to this, people are impatient. They are not always rational nor are they always interested in deep topics. Sometimes the best way to convince a people is for them to actually have a hint of experiencing the real effects of a situation. Yet libertarian examples are hard to come by.

Example: It's very hard to simply show "free market at it's peak". Often times what people hear are how things are attributed to free markets or how signs are pointing out to something good. They can't even emotionally invest on the subject because unlike communism, libertarians have to explain what a "true" free market is. Something that isn't often on people's minds unlike direct social issues such as the desire to help people or providing economic equality to the poor and needy.

SkarnkaiLW
09-23-2011, 10:24 AM
For good or ill, economics has been tied to politics pretty much from the beginning (was called Political economy for a long time, up until Smith in the british empire) since at least the days of the Mercantilists (ie Gold flowing into King's coffers good, flowing out Bad, exports good, imports bad, etc. basically economics/trade as war.)
As such it is pretty much impossible to come to a truly objective work on the topic. Also there are more than two "sides" in fact apart from the 'freshwater'/'saltwater' distinction, economists argue over everything. Sadly they have replaced the Priests, in terms of function (justifying state actions via supernatural things, like the Keynesian multiplier). Econ is a social science and as such it is not subject to verifiability/falsifiability like the hard sciences. Even history is subject to interpretation and so forth.
Hrm. In terms of the free market at its peak, I would have to say early colonial would be the best, or the 'Wild' west. Even the vaunted 'Gilded Age' was no real bastion on Laissez-faire. Anyways, I wish I could help more, but even econ textbooks are laden with value judgments.

Just had a thought, you checked out Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt? It might be of use.

Foolness
09-23-2011, 03:04 PM
Yep. That's the one I'm currently reading. The book feels like a mises.org archive though.

It's been awhile since I checked mises.org site and the lay-out has changed a lot but from the one or two articles I read on mises in the past, it definitely felt like a book version of it.

I also felt it was still too daunting. The Broken Window one for example, that's a classic tale but unless I memorized the story word for word - I don't know how I can explain that to a beggar or a random stranger at a bar or other meeting place.

SkarnkaiLW
09-29-2011, 08:09 PM
Foolness, sorry its been a while since I posted, been busy with college and the reserves.

The Broken Window is a fairly basic story. In essence its the reverse of the 'paradox of thrift'.
Destruction is not positive, but well.. destructive.
The resources available to society are scarce, and so they should not be wasted (wars, bailouts, 'jobs' programs, etc).
Bastiat is pretty good for witty humor pieces (such as the Candlemaker's petition)

StilesBC
09-30-2011, 12:51 AM
Maybe some of the mises.org lecture series' on video or audio would be worthwhile. I liked Salerno/Klein's Fundamentals of Economic Analysis: A Causal-Realist Approach (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aLYVsCbamk&feature=list_related&playnext=1&list=SP35BC79EC2E54D0AF). There are hundreds of other video lectures at mises.org too.

I think I get what you're after. Something that deals with the more sophisticated oppositions to libertarianism/ABCT, rather than the popular, some would say "strawmen" oppositions that are commonly referred to. And unfortunately, I don't have any suggestions for that. I'm still looking myself. But the one place you're most likely to find them are in academic journals. The debates range across such a wide range of issues that compressing them all into a book would be incoherent and pointless. Moreover, it doesn't usually take long enough to shoot these arguments down because they usually stem from some misconception or preconception about money, credit, profit, rationality, etc.