Why Do Distributists Tend To Have a Poor Knowledge of the History of Economic Thought?

There is a good post over at Ethika Politica about the basics of Distributism. However, as usual, their writers demonstrate how poor their knowledge of the history of economic thought is:

In the last several decades, the involvement of government in economics has expanded exponentially as more and more government programs to support the working classes and the poor have been implemented. The modern Libertarian economists (primarily of the “Austrian school”) are loudly calling for a return to an essentially Laissez Faire model. They claim that we are on the road to all-out socialism. This claim carries some justification, because certain political and economic leaders seem to be advocating things very close to it.

When it comes to free-market political economy, the only name that ever arises in the E.P. community is “Austrian”, “Austrian school”, etc. Now, I suspect this may be because of the heated debates between Thomas Storck and Thomas Woods, and the general rising interest in “Austrian” or Mengerian economics. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the Mengerian school of economics is the only school of free-market thought. What about public choice, as advanced by James M. Buchanan and Gordon Tullock? What about the neo-classical revival? In short, Mengerian economists are free-market economists, but free-market economists are not necessarily Mengerian economists.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.