Why Tenure-Seeking Non-Keynesian Economists Hate Rothbard

By Gary North

In a recent article, I described the tenure-seeking and tenured university economists’ attacks on Murray Rothbard.

There is a reason for this hostility: Rothbard embarrasses them. He wrote things like this:

The intellectual arguments used by the State throughout history to “engineer consent” by the public can be classified into two parts: 1) that rule by the existing government is inevitable, absolutely necessary, and far better than the indescribable evils that would ensue upon its downfall; and 2) that the State rulers are especially great, wise and altruistic men – far greater, wiser and better than their simple subjects. 

In modern times, this argument stresses rule by a wise guild of “scientific experts” especially endowed in knowledge of statesmanship and the arcane facts of the world. The increasing use of scientific jargon, especially in the social sciences, has permitted intellectuals to weave apologia for State rule which rival the ancient priestcraft in obscurantism. For example, a thief who presumed to justify his theft by saying that he was really helping his victims by his spending, thus giving retail trade a needed boost, would be hooted down without delay. But when this same theory is clothed in Keynesian mathematical equations and impressive references to the “multiplier effect,” it carries far more conviction with a bamboozled public.

Read the rest here.

(ht Robert Blumen)