History of Economic Thought – 1 of 6 – Ideology and Theories of History – Murray N Rothbard

Murray Rothbard died before he could write the third volume of his famous History of Economic Thought, which would cover the birth and development of the Austrian School, through the Keynesian Revolution and Chicago School. With this six-lecture course, however, the History of Economic Thought is complete.

1. Ideology and Theories of History

History is not an inevitable march upward, as concluded in the 1830s. That determinist view put the stamp of approval on everything past and present. It permeates economic history. It ignores the great moral choices. History is a race between state power and social power.

The Whig theory of history implied that you do not lose any knowledge. It always just builds. Yet that is not true for history, science, or economics. Economics collapsed with Adam Smith. Most economists denied the role of price in determining cost. Few understood time preference.

Rothbard thinks Hegel is a nut.

The first in a series of six lectures on the History of Economic Thought.

This lecture as a Podcast: http://enemyofthestate.podomatic.com/

Sourced from: https://mises.org/library/history-economic-thought-marx-hayek

Source: History of Economic Thought – 1 of 6 – Ideology and Theories of History – Murray N Rothbard – YouTube

http://www.readrothbard.com/history-of-economic-thought-1-of-6-ideology-and-theories-of-history-murray-n-rothbard

TRANSCRIPT

00:00
first the first thing I start out
00:01
whether it’s a controversy of history
00:05
can be the theory of history really
00:07
begins in the early mid 19th century and
00:09
it’s sort of taken over and it’s still
00:11
with us America is still dominant
00:13
despite criticisms in the 30s and 40s
00:16
basically what the Whig theory of
00:18
history says a history and never will
00:21
march upward into the light of the word
00:23
step by step the world always progresses
00:25
and this progress is inevitable now
00:29
they’ll figure themselves kind of
00:30
lovable there were moderate classical
00:33
liberals I guess in our favor and the
00:35
enemy when they coined the theory in the
00:37
1830s 40s and 50s there’s a certain
00:40
amount of justification for it in the
00:42
sense that there and these they look
00:44
back on the past things seem to get
00:45
always getting better and better
00:46
there’s an increasing freedom and
00:48
increasing civilization standards of
00:50
living and science and knowledge and so
00:52
forth and so on and so they came to he
00:54
unfortunately made this impressionistic
00:56
conclusion to us into a doctrine and
00:59
saying that all this is inevitable we’re
01:02
we’re if we’re this is 1870 rule is
01:05
better off in every way in 1860 at
01:07
separate cetera this implies heavily
01:10
that everything that what that it was at
01:12
any stage of the game was right it was
01:15
the best possible at the time and
01:17
therefore they think that is now is
01:19
right or at least it’s the best possible
01:21
for this for this a park at service
01:23
please this is essentially determinist
01:25
and saying and Everett ability and also
01:28
puts the stamp of approval on everything
01:30
in the past and present real it amounts
01:32
to
01:32
but it says things like well slavery was
01:35
bad of court but slavery of course now
01:37
is that my perspective the slavery in
01:39
the old days was good because it was
01:41
better than whether the pre slavery
01:42
thing was now of course they have pile
01:46
of dark ages where everybody admits
01:48
things got worse from about the 5th to
01:51
the 10th century AD collapsing the
01:54
collapse the Roman Empire but they
01:55
certainly say Rolla was one was one
01:57
glitch non-repeatable glitch in the
02:00
onward and upward march of progress but
02:03
we have now that is now that the looking
02:05
at her perspective of 1986 the idea
02:09
everything’s always getting better as
02:10
much shaky air on base like nothing were
02:12
plenty of century of many
02:13
the century of genocide but still in all
02:16
that wake theory of history is
02:17
flourishing and it’s gotten even more
02:19
hard-nosed so to speak more locked in
02:23
and we see this for example getting to
02:25
economics conceit is unfortunately among
02:28
you know what we can call the Freeman
02:29
Ida Buchanan I theory of history
02:31
everything in the past first of all
02:33
league the analysis of history is very
02:35
cryptic economist and dealing with
02:38
history usually and these days usually
02:42
or for example in North Thomas book an
02:45
econ the history of Europe covers I
02:47
don’t know six hundred years and about a
02:49
few equations sort of yeah convince her
02:52
this everything a couple of invasion and
02:54
and this is this is explicitly great to
02:57
the core now that the idea is that
02:59
anything that existed must have had a
03:02
good function must have functionally
03:03
must have had was good to it if they
03:05
figure they had form an important
03:06
function now for example in sociology
03:09
the famous Parsons the poor Sounion view
03:11
sociology which is looking at all
03:13
society social systems whatever
03:15
everything got function everything fits
03:17
in well as first you can look at things
03:19
are having a functioning like I guess
03:21
the slave master at a certain function
03:23
point it was it a good function that’s
03:25
never ashes David if it was human
03:27
whatever existed sure it exists that
03:29
ethics is I think not really mention but
03:32
it’s really impressive and personally
03:34
derived from the fact that it existed in
03:35
the listener for a certain period of
03:36
time it’s sort of like actually saying
03:39
existence theory of ethics but they
03:41
lasted for a while must have been okay
03:43
the fact that murder is lasted for a
03:46
long time since the beginning of the
03:47
beginning of mankind first slavery it
03:50
said of them necessarily make it good of
03:51
course doesn’t make it even functional
03:53
where we gonna go this way
03:54
function from whose perspective and
03:57
perspective of a robber of a robbed
03:58
right this is this weak theory history
04:01
terminates the incan our main history in
04:03
particular the worst example I know are
04:06
was kind of interesting example I can
04:08
one on policin to distinguish public
04:09
choices of you Canaanites written a book
04:12
called mercantilism is a rent-seeking
04:13
society now they don’t pretend it’s a
04:16
short boat therefore tend to any
04:17
historical research at all they admit it
04:18
and this there’s about front about that
04:20
they take Hector’s great book on
04:23
mercantilism and simply
04:25
engage in exegesis of it picture is
04:27
magnificently we wrote this book about
04:29
80 years ago have been some advances
04:31
since then but that’s a criticism we
04:34
don’t deal with that I’m interested in
04:36
more is that is the echo and policin
04:37
method of analyzing stuff they say the
04:40
market ilysm is essentially a clearly
04:43
much movement ideology was a rationale
04:45
for picking monopoly privileges and part
04:47
of our merchants and the bureaucrats a
04:49
separate section I agree with that
04:51
except for the fact that use the word
04:52
rent-seeking which I’m extremely
04:54
critical of this is something out to get
04:57
back to later on but let’s say it’s
05:00
arise from the recording and theory of
05:01
rent which is still ex panicle
05:03
permeating and spool unfortunately
05:05
dominant based on the idea that rentals
05:07
it as a differential which can be easily
05:09
tax the way since it’s a surplus a
05:12
non-productive surplus being therefore
05:14
can be taxed it’s like saying that if
05:17
Dustin Hoffman is making 2 million
05:18
dollars a year and Jose o Chand other
05:20
actors making twenty ten thousand
05:22
dollars a year the difference is
05:23
differential and hustling Hoffman’s
05:25
might have 99 thousand or whatever can
05:27
be taxed away without decreasing his
05:29
our-our and his productivity or our
05:31
enjoyment of it but the important thing
05:34
is when they get to here they are they
05:36
say they interpret a quarter of them to
05:38
the Buchanan Heights and steel erectors
05:40
can we pull over and how now but we use
05:42
the even though he’s in a storing of
05:43
economics or believes that he cannot
05:45
make theory I have no influence
05:46
whatsoever on and that’s you got about
05:48
none whatsoever there’s a behaviorist
05:50
interpretation ideas at Miller forth on
05:52
history at all it’s pure economic
05:53
interest so interpreting mercantilism it
05:56
works fine with this but then the echo
05:58
on the Tollison have the question how
06:00
did mercantilism disappear why does free
06:01
trade come in if everybody seek him out
06:04
they privileged you know the usual
06:05
public choice stuff about consumers are
06:08
not interested and and the Annis
06:10
privileged seekers are always interested
06:12
how did this get how do you rid of this
06:14
why isn’t it locked in forever a Steiger
06:16
claims they doesn’t want them forever
06:18
now so searching around for explanation
06:21
of the obvious explanation for anybody
06:22
who thinks the ideas are important is
06:24
that the free trade movement came out of
06:25
a mass movement it’s this thing of
06:28
merchants lower classes intellectual to
06:30
set aside by free trade moving which
06:31
swept which struck the water might be
06:33
ideological movement which got rid of us
06:35
of this web of privilege
06:38
echo Nutella fer can’t say that because
06:39
I think ideology unimportant so what
06:41
they say is they base it all this and
06:43
coarsely this is the escape hatch
06:45
worldview canaanites for public choices
06:47
throughout history transaction course
06:49
it’s like a thousand money yeah like the
06:51
magic talisman anything I have a mystery
06:53
transaction cost as if it would be I’m
06:55
playing a rule everybody’s life is the
06:58
minimize transaction course and so the
07:00
main value and everybody’s holding it
07:02
heart I really don’t care about fine
07:03
action course me back well you’re right
07:05
that that so this idea why why you’re a
07:09
free tray and lays a fare succeeded
07:11
replaced mechanism is that the bikini to
07:14
forget this as the king was replaced by
07:17
Parliament it became too costly to lobby
07:20
Parliament normally special privileges
07:22
trying to lobby Parliament King is this
07:24
one guy a lobby him it’s easier
07:25
transaction course of a row the lobby
07:28
500 guys in problem becomes too
07:30
expensive therefore they stopped
07:31
lobbying I sort of fell back of free
07:32
traders put the mirror so to speak of
07:35
any any silly explanation of any
07:37
historical of that I don’t know of
07:39
reaches rock-bottom the first place is
07:43
though evidence of the cheaper
07:44
transaction course he seems to his
07:46
humors one King very simple or Lobby as
07:48
a heard court if you have a absolute
07:51
king he’s got lots of books and old and
07:53
mistresses and everybody up vying for
07:55
power it’s probably just as expensive
07:57
this is high transaction cost along be
07:58
the king as it was in Parliament he
08:01
certainly presented no evidence that it
08:03
was cheaper and suddenly person this is
08:05
the fact that we imported ideological
08:06
the thing which sweeps aside special
08:07
privilege in history’s ideology like the
08:10
fact the public choice people playing
08:12
ideology is irrational because you’re
08:14
you’re not diverted to a 24 hours a day
08:16
it’s only I doubt ideology yet some
08:17
people are devoted I ologies we know
08:19
full well right now the ayatollah
08:22
khomeini etc obviously the Khomeini
08:24
movement has not found a cost-benefit
08:25
analysis regarding interest I don’t
08:29
deeply felt passionate ideology okay we
08:32
swept aside only the most invested
08:33
interest rather than a favorite of the
08:36
results look I mean we’re simply saying
08:38
an ideology is extremely important in
08:40
history and they’re by the way I think
08:43
higher active forces far superior and
08:45
the famous I think one of the best
08:46
things I ever wrote was intellectuals
08:47
and socialism which I commend everybody
08:49
here the influence how ideas are
08:50
influenced an influence in history they
08:53
start out with theoreticians and they
08:54
permeate down to N equals secondhand
08:56
dealers and ideas and I think very good
08:58
term journalists and activists and they
09:01
start permeating through the general
09:02
public and then if you put it in the
09:05
value across better the terms you can
09:07
say that ideology then becomes a deeply
09:10
held value in a part of people
09:11
superseding even transaction costs
09:14
something which you’re devoted to you
09:16
wrote your life to make anybody living
09:18
our life and minimizing transaction core
09:20
area right well I should also say the
09:23
Marxists are also oddly enough weight
09:26
theorists so then a special conflict
09:28
version so even though the Martians
09:30
don’t believe in a step-by-step linear
09:32
approach upward it’s a dialectic
09:34
approach awkward this is the sort of
09:36
zigzag approach and women watch this too
09:38
they fall back in the historicist
09:40
viewpoint a slavery in their days before
09:43
marches very anti-slavery now be some
09:45
forms of slavery not their own but play
09:48
we in the old days was good but is
09:49
better than whatever the other thing was
09:51
our system we live is better than slave
09:52
races they to have this wig Theory
09:54
historicist theory and the revolution
09:58
becomes inevitable and by the way this
10:00
is why Marxist and Moxie zone of English
10:02
called
10:02
Marx always a semi Marxist by the way to
10:06
detect aggressive and reactionary and if
10:07
you ever any of you ever thought about
10:08
the use of the term the Marxist the only
10:11
of the highest moral are the only moral
10:14
truth we have favored the inevitable
10:16
revolution and we’re being too
10:18
inevitable laws of events and so these
10:21
are the progresses no the progressives
10:23
of people who aren’t in the next phase
10:24
of the never lost our whole development
10:27
like the Revolution
10:29
Paula Perry revolution we actually those
10:31
were those were post to it then was the
10:33
whole template lesson from reactionaries
10:35
a term which is used was an effort
10:36
implicitly ethical basis is really
10:38
questioned who’s in tune with a coming
10:40
of medicine who isn’t who’s who’s in
10:42
touch with site dice of a coming site
10:44
guys who’s not in touch with it it’s the
10:46
only standard by their ship ever pointed
10:49
out one of this Kepler them socialism
10:51
knockers same on the cockiness
10:52
introduction was second edition he said
10:55
who should had a claim of socialism with
10:57
inevitable but for very different
10:58
reasons a Marxist he claimed basically
11:00
is inevitable for one reason for the
11:02
middle as
11:03
capitalism reads and intellectual who
11:05
subvert it and then you’re right he said
11:08
that people say that because I think
11:09
that socialism is inevitable means I’m
11:12
favor of it quite the contrary
11:13
why can’t you say why can’t you look at
11:15
your boat favor we’re in a canoe I can
11:17
do is we can you think it was sinking in
11:19
everywhere you doesn’t mean your favor
11:20
you can try to fight against them
11:21
postpone it as long as possible
11:23
well you’re right according to Marx is
11:26
of course the another one means it’s
11:28
going to the good ok conclude about the
11:32
Whig theory of history League I think
11:34
the major of deeper underlying problem
11:36
is if the people will have free will and
11:38
have freedom to make choices history is
11:40
not really determinist one of the term
11:43
Lafleur’s of history and then further
11:45
your the great the ignores the great so
11:48
the ignores free choice ignores the
11:49
great moral problems the sweet choice
11:51
involve moral choices and it does then I
11:54
realize that history the great moral
11:55
drama economic advance of conflicts of
11:58
retrogression
11:59
of good versus evil etc etc and I wind
12:02
up with my own doctrine about history
12:03
the year following Albert Jane knock
12:05
history is essentially a race or a
12:07
conflict between state power and social
12:08
power not put it somewhere social power
12:10
is the network of voluntary interaction
12:14
of the economy of civilization whatever
12:17
anything is voluntarily interacting they
12:19
call social power and state power of
12:21
course of the state always trying to
12:22
repress a cripple of tax that looted
12:24
whatever a separate separate of history
12:26
becomes a race in these two forces okay
12:31
to get down to a subset of this or an
12:33
application of this the history the Whig
12:34
theory of the history of science
12:36
I’m coming economics in a minute Rick
12:39
you’re a history of science by which way
12:41
is very similar force the Whig theory of
12:43
history period the Whig theory of
12:45
history of science was dominant Publius
12:47
Phil gamma in high school textbooks was
12:49
dominant until the 60s essentially seven
12:53
that’s science the growth of knowledge
12:54
is an armor and upward that’s by step
12:57
approach Pamirs 0 and minus 0 to 2 now
13:02
now while implication of that one
13:04
implication is you don’t have to read
13:06
the history of science once you’re an
13:07
antiquarian in other words if you’re a
13:08
physicist a Nike ed6
13:10
the mid point reading some person is
13:12
making 30 unless you’re interested
13:13
special conditions of what half of the
13:15
hemp whether you can’t learn
13:16
from it in other words you never lose
13:19
any any you never lose any knowledge
13:21
theory is at every step of the way
13:23
science patiently tests its assumptions
13:25
and premises and discard those which
13:29
turn out to be unacceptable force and
13:31
add those which are acceptable so
13:33
everybody’s always testing there
13:34
patiently testing their axioms or
13:35
whatever funny and he be advancing
13:37
therefore we don’t lose any no loss of
13:39
knowledge the current textbook then
13:41
incorporates over the best of everything
13:43
everything from the word years are all
13:44
hella present this is the theory in any
13:46
right here the famous Kuhn doctrine I
13:49
think comes in very neatly famous
13:51
paradigm theory Thomas Kuhn called a
13:53
structure scientific revolution which is
13:56
he came out late sixties it’s miss he
13:59
fact that a revolution that basically no
14:00
earlier early sixty he affected a
14:03
revolution in history of science could
14:06
have had a lot of flack on his
14:07
philosophy of science which he claimed
14:09
he doesn’t really have in other words
14:10
I don’t I think it’s not interesting is
14:12
it he’s not interesting is philosopher
14:14
he is interesting is a historian and a
14:15
sociologist of science how does five
14:17
actually it evolved and what essentially
14:19
what he says is that instead of if
14:21
linear step-by-step stuff first of all
14:24
nobody ever test that basic axiom ever
14:26
and which obviously true once an axiom
14:29
were a paranoid he put it instead of set
14:32
of basic beliefs and it followed the
14:34
doctrine then people just test the this
14:36
apply that device personal matters and
14:38
puzzles as he calls it come up and every
14:41
anybody who challenges amazing paradigm
14:42
is consider is not a scientist thought
14:44
that he’s refuted I think it’s out of
14:46
Lee out of the dialogue he’s had it and
14:48
so this peg Ron for a while until now
14:51
he’s anomalies pop-up and I was told a
14:53
theory begins not obviously not to fails
14:55
and explaining a lot of stuff and then
14:57
there’s a crisis situation as he calls
14:59
it was confusion and competing paradigms
15:01
come up and some new parent I can follow
15:04
up solving puzzles better it then they
15:05
used to take over and establish with a
15:08
new paradigm and they forget it unless
15:09
this stuff now he’s a lecturer said that
15:13
no pound on is any better than the other
15:14
I don’t think that’s true but any rate
15:16
the interesting thing what happens here
15:18
is the you lose knowledge even if this
15:19
power on is better than that often stuff
15:22
gets lost along the way
15:23
one example of course we choir we don’t
15:26
know we didn’t know it’s a very recent
15:27
much we fireworks
15:29
now now it’s like flamethrowers but we
15:31
always found that out when we get
15:32
another flame throwers 1900 nobody knew
15:35
a Greek fire have been in ancient Greece
15:37
another example force is like this
15:39
Stradivarius Shalaka lever is nobody can
15:43
duplicate and because they can’t you
15:45
can’t test everything can’t figure out
15:47
accomplished secret formulas in other
15:49
words which get lost
15:50
well these are obvious sort of great an
15:52
example the friend of mine is in history
15:53
of science says there’s certain royal
15:55
18th century optics which we forgotten
15:57
on which we know less in certain areas
15:59
of objects than they did in 18th century
16:00
and then you’re right when we get to the
16:03
social science of philosophy of course
16:05
is much more true even if vitamine other
16:08
fans should say before leaving this is
16:09
the thing our guys never changed them
16:12
shipping the new paradigms usually where
16:14
the old guys will stick to them till he
16:15
died
16:16
the people would not the new paradigms
16:18
the younger people graduate students
16:20
college students Epico not locked in the
16:22
intellectually locked under the old
16:24
paranoid a famous example are Joseph
16:26
Priestley the Great King late 18th
16:28
century libertarian and physicist who
16:30
invented oxygen and refused to believe
16:32
it was really oxygen he said no no if
16:33
you want you so locked under if logistic
16:35
theory so it’s only deep logistic ated
16:37
air if you still refuse to acknowledge
16:39
the implications our own invention one
16:42
discovery credible a right so this is
16:44
very typical this is why by all a
16:46
strategic way if you’re on I’m leaping
16:48
here you’re an Austrian shouldn’t spend
16:51
your time trying to convert
16:52
Paul Samuelson or Milton Freeman these
16:56
guys are not gonna be converted I walked
16:58
into their paradigm if people you
17:00
convert of people who are just coming up
17:01
blue people people on the fence
17:03
graduates through these are people agree
17:05
converted you know waste your time I can
17:06
work Samuels so or Freeman or whether
17:09
the other paradigm people are so the
17:11
rules for the so easily come people
17:13
coming up to speak obviously it’s pretty
17:15
clear than a social science of economics
17:17
philosophy etc is even more of this is
17:19
because there’s less testable stuff
17:21
obviously so that if this is true in
17:23
science physical sciences I think it is
17:24
there a more true in social science
17:27
economics is up where you can really
17:28
lose knowledge very drastically because
17:30
if you can replace a good paradigm a
17:32
lousy one time in other words that’s
17:35
what I’ll do that in physics probably if
17:37
they do it or not but certainly very
17:39
easy to do in philosophy until any get
17:41
on
17:41
make some flavor for very easy for a new
17:44
paradigm get forget establish for one
17:45
reason another there’s nothing to do
17:47
with this truth value could be fashion
17:49
it could be politics would be the king
17:50
could be selling the old power people in
17:53
the Lubyanka whatever it’s there are
17:56
sorts of reasons why so in other words
17:59
reading history of economics quarter for
18:00
exotic for even more stuff it’s not just
18:02
the interest for a story see how people
18:04
theory develop the victors also find out
18:07
the truth because somebody 1850 might be
18:10
better than somebody writing now and
18:12
Wi-Fi usually is an economics philosophy
18:15
and whatever so this is the whole
18:16
history restore them becomes and the
18:18
social sciences and philosophy and much
18:20
more exciting Enterprise seem to me than
18:22
physics the guiding again the guiding
18:26
philosophy in the history of for what
18:29
history of economics now to get into
18:30
that the guiding doctrine has been
18:33
really again even though it keeps me
18:35
obviously untrue and almost every
18:37
textbook it’s a big text a whole
18:39
Margaret would be this any group they
18:42
talk about anymore where they’re talking
18:44
about any will as something positive to
18:46
contribute to the building of economic
18:48
whatever even though the fully
18:49
contradictory you know one one good
18:50
another thing mehdi resonating
18:52
difference they’re not nutty they’re
18:53
part of a great dialogue ok so any group
18:56
then takes their place and so what were
18:58
you talking about french the scholastic
19:01
the fish
19:02
classicists the austrians the Keynesian
19:05
is a too short the oil great guys all
19:07
somehow contribute to the rate is great
19:09
edifice as a result of this course the
19:11
historian of economic photo does this is
19:14
non-controversial
19:16
put unquote nice guy but he likes
19:18
everybody
19:19
tolerant but i can you better roll and
19:22
see make that much difference under
19:25
Matic and all the other odious language
19:28
these people are I think me these things
19:31
along with worthless because it’s truly
19:33
a good historian even as a way approach
19:35
can sum up of an each group says of each
19:37
person said but it’s not really enough
19:38
they’re thinking that’s going to be
19:39
critical should find out is this guy
19:41
wrong are up to what extent is Iran’s
19:43
you right what’s going on here
19:45
especially in economics from philosophy
19:46
worth as much as the cut-and-dry thing
19:48
we now have a laser beam before we only
19:50
had
19:50
roaming two sticks together you’re by
19:53
the way them probably the worst example
19:55
of the sort of thing Leo Strauss Ian’s
19:58
doctrine and the street-level thought
20:00
Leo Strauss was a German refugee came
20:04
University of Chicago and set up a what
20:06
can only be called Cola Koch group of
20:09
Strauss Ian’s and all very
20:11
self-consciously Strauss in their will
20:12
it follow the master and all things we
20:15
had separate cetera
20:16
Strauss Ian Rousey has taken a few what
20:19
they call great thinkers I’m gonna
20:21
criticize that too then the concept of
20:23
taking the great thinkers to take a few
20:24
great thinkers more or less arbitrary
20:26
selected how many know the great thing
20:27
as well everybody says they’re great
20:29
Machiavelli aerosol will do we whatever
20:31
we’re talking about Hobbes
20:33
and then they say since this guy a great
20:35
speaker he must have been consistent
20:37
right why must he be consistent well
20:40
he’s a great figure who am i a schnook
20:42
rookie professor to challenge the
20:44
greatness of this guy okay
20:45
if the the assumption of this guy’s a
20:48
great beggar not be like in his system
20:50
which are mostly driver Ryan consistent
20:51
cardigans are gonna be Paige I won’t put
20:53
on Kane cover against a long time there
20:56
must have if what looks as if he
20:57
contradict him somebody couldn’t disease
20:59
a great thinker and therefore that
21:00
system so we have to look for the deep
21:02
inner consistency
21:04
leviticus is easy is mouth almost like a
21:07
stralla g it’s no humor ology strauss
21:10
will say if you take the fifth book of
21:12
Machiavelli’s Prince compared with a
21:13
fish book of the world’s then you get
21:16
this this is number magic you see they
21:18
get the five you look for the big thing
21:20
which really explain what he’s saying
21:21
it’s really bizarre so that’s the young
21:27
we give them going hog-wild up you need
21:30
desperately actually fix everybody’s
21:32
great mother inconsistent as well as
21:34
contributing to it edit to subscribe so
21:38
we have to realize it seems to me is a
21:40
just the opposite that’s many people
21:42
think there’s a great other thinkers are
21:43
lousy some of the velum truth others
21:45
second error and therefore analyzing
21:48
historians economists people either
21:51
separating who these guys are
21:53
to what extent were they correct will
21:54
dismiss level a bad what extent are they
21:55
push economic nor wrong detour etc etc
21:59
that’s true there’s a simple vice of
22:03
presence
22:03
we’re for you attack everybody for not
22:06
having read human action in your tank
22:08
jar Aquinas been having regular action
22:11
with this school go present them a very
22:14
few people do that think it’s a straw
22:15
man I don’t know if anybody really does
22:17
that the real advices the other way
22:18
around it realize the same thing
22:19
everybody is great everybody’s true in
22:21
some sense just the state of
22:23
paraphrasing are my favorite quotes
22:25
Moscow Royal when he seven remember miss
22:28
prism an important point of Being
22:29
Earnest was asked whether certainly her
22:31
novel she’s written a three-volume novel
22:33
of it but it had a happy ending or not
22:35
she drew herself up she said the good
22:37
and happily the bad unhappily that is
22:39
what fiction means firstly I would say
22:43
when lord acton that the earliest orient
22:46
the praise the good and denounce the bad
22:47
as medium history anyway acting says the
22:51
muse of the Astoria is not clear but
22:52
Rada Memphis Clio
22:54
the official Greek means of myth so the
22:56
muse is really about a map of the
22:58
Avenger of innocent blood and he went on
23:00
to say the Astoria must be a judge and a
23:02
hanging judge of that
23:03
to like the ruins of history hopefully
23:07
upward my talk about history if that’s
23:08
basic methodological or philosophical
23:10
approach and Skinner ISM I don’t mean
23:13
BFC evil BF Skinner the behavior I mean
23:18
Quentin Skinner Clinton Skinner is a
23:21
Cambridge struggle theorist we’re at a
23:23
magnificent book which I recommend
23:24
everybody found libertarian it’s not
23:26
free markets are marvelous book on
23:27
political thought who foundation as a
23:30
modern political thought their
23:34
Reformation on the Renaissance and
23:35
Reformation the first volumes on
23:36
Renaissance thinkers and humanists the
23:38
second Reformation Luther Calvin etc and
23:41
it’s just magnificent because what he
23:42
does is not only is the analyze each of
23:44
these guys and ask the sort of questions
23:45
I think are important
23:46
plentiful fearing religious theory etc
23:49
he also does he field in history proto
23:53
floor history economic thought to the
23:54
standards thing you have three either
23:56
five guys right a tipple of book entry
23:59
protocol be three french thinkers them
24:02
from Bing Bing Bing or five wait level
24:05
fear with our solid Machiavelli it’s so
24:06
like Strauss it’s that knowledge
24:08
necessary assuming or break or
24:09
consistent all right we have five five
24:12
great thinkers are a history of economic
24:14
thought
24:15
our approach for example Smith Ricardo
24:17
Marx marshal Cain with a Five Guys five
24:20
economist I think this is a rotten way
24:22
of approaching history of thought first
24:25
place all these political thinkers and
24:27
economic thinkers were involved in
24:29
movements on the floor of their also era
24:31
they’re also doing there when it’s funny
24:33
say anything there
24:34
they have certain intention to use the
24:36
word is in a certain way have a certain
24:38
author’s intention in order to standard
24:40
on touch understand who they’re talking
24:41
to who the deal who lifts friends all
24:43
her enemies are done with who they’re
24:44
reacting against in other words the
24:46
estar for context of what their mother
24:48
sank Skinner there is a detail critiques
24:51
of each of these feelers and he doesn’t
24:52
slight that but he also talks about the
24:53
so-called lesser people and also how
24:55
they uh who they’re reacting us and how
24:57
the influence spread the morning
24:59
university after the other at the one
25:00
country after the other you really got a
25:02
good sense of the sweep the street so
25:04
the political the political text of
25:06
purple for not just isolated text
25:08
sitting up there we worked on the whole
25:11
sweep of modern history and history of
25:13
thought well you can’t really understand
25:16
these iLab figuring out who the other
25:17
people aren’t who they are reacting
25:19
against and secondly a lot of the super
25:21
or lesser people are just as good as
25:22
this is important the big shots in fact
25:25
some ways even better than they usually
25:26
pure often they they take the Masters
25:29
doctrine during the consistent framework
25:31
on a political level for example in
25:33
American history Jefferson those twenty
25:35
or so by here by Jefferson whatever than
25:37
the great guy by the Jeffersonian is a
25:38
much better he was there more
25:40
consistently definitely selling out
25:42
Percy when he was in power but the
25:44
Jeffersonian is usually didn’t they’re
25:45
usually attacking him for selling out
25:46
when you deal with a leading
25:48
Jeffersonians making an ranbir often
25:51
pale or at supper you got a much
25:52
quartered core doctrine he do if you’re
25:54
only dealing the leadership so anyway
25:56
I’m favoring the whole Skinner approach
25:59
there’s a very good book
26:01
unlock I just mentioned somebody here by
26:04
amateur – craft just came out called
26:06
wrote revolutionary politics and the two
26:09
treatises on government and when
26:12
Ashcraft does and he talks as those in
26:14
really affects this method but he does
26:16
is he cuts my lock nullius is what his
26:19
thought wasn’t and the contact of
26:21
revolutionary libertarian struggle which
26:22
they were engaged in he in the level
26:24
everybody from eleven was on it shows
26:26
how he’s related the center directly
26:28
from the liberal arts when
26:29
this is a group it also explains why
26:32
locking a lot of famous for being a real
26:34
scaredy-cat unless he would he wrote
26:36
everything not only anonymously kept
26:38
everything in a locked drawer and silver
26:39
and so on
26:40
look this sort of pathologically why
26:42
haven’t I scared whether the scared
26:43
rabbit scared rabbit is an exile for ten
26:46
years of life his friends role being
26:47
arrested and shot a good reason to be
26:50
scared anyway this is one aspect of it
26:53
my mentor and history Joseph Dorfman was
26:56
something like this in American history
26:57
of American economic thought instead of
26:59
dealing with three people five people
27:01
you everybody I mean just they had
27:03
everything in there’s five volume
27:05
compilation he was much better a
27:07
historian and he wasn’t economist but
27:09
because the economics theory wasn’t that
27:10
sound the other hand really got
27:12
everything in there it got the whole
27:13
fact before you he was really doing the
27:17
same sort of thing in an American
27:18
thought I admit of course that this
27:22
means that song is engaging a lot of
27:24
work much easier to take three texts
27:26
speed guys in this program is much more
27:29
difficult of finally other people are
27:30
but that’s the way life is as neat as
27:33
one sees the safe you know he gives the
27:35
claim of historians like Europeans
27:36
aren’t you know about eight languages
27:37
and for everybody not blanching there
27:39
and look stupid seminar so well nobody’s
27:41
fortunate being historians don’t learn
27:43
hate languages let me write so I think
27:46
this is very important to get the lesser
27:47
so for lesser people involved in this
27:50
thing as well as the three or four top
27:51
five top guys okay getting to the
27:55
historiography of economics sort afford
28:00
II hope you write Russia already relic
28:01
out our articles and my article it’s
28:03
galactica Nam makes it whenever a PITA
28:05
just sort of condense it a little bit
28:06
the key thing in history regular
28:09
historiography orthodox historiography
28:10
economic for what starts as follow I’m
28:13
sure you’re all familiar with this much
28:16
you’re marking the list
28:17
running around talking about specific
28:19
things like sure they’re to the
28:21
government keep billion on in realm
28:22
which is like sure we have Paris aside
28:23
receptor and then 1776 emerging like
28:27
Athena out of the round Zeus or whatever
28:29
that I’m Smith’s
28:30
a lot of its out of his head to eat do a
28:32
modern economics free-market economics
28:34
the old business right and that’s it
28:36
then you have think of Ricardo and you
28:39
have Marx and whatever sort of somehow
28:42
deriving from it then you have marshal
28:44
Austrians whatever marshal not Kane
28:46
that’s about it
28:47
but anyway Smith becomes then Lili are
28:49
the originator as to the extent of some
28:52
of your beloved people here in
28:53
Washington where around Smith PI’s
28:55
there’s only a tribute to the founder
28:58
Regan of ergonomics way they’re fair
29:00
whatever this is pure baloney from start
29:03
to fetch this mess this is one of the
29:04
things what pushing the counter talk
29:07
Carolina’s first people to mention it to
29:10
articles shrimp atonal wrote a couple
29:13
year to after encounter in the famous
29:15
book which really sort of set the same
29:16
forth the history of economic analysis
29:20
it’s uh unfortunate schibetta did not
29:23
live to complete it so badly written
29:25
even more badly organized and many ways
29:27
almost incomprehensible his he’s
29:30
definitely a revisionist in this other
29:31
words he believes the life existed
29:33
before Adam Smith economics exists of a
29:35
quorum Smith and better not only exist a
29:37
bit better in other words the counter
29:39
power Don contains the correct one is
29:42
what you have is hundreds one hundred
29:46
many hundreds even thousands years of
29:47
sound economic analysis engaged in by
29:50
the Scholastic’s
29:51
the Middle Ages down through the late
29:53
the Spanish scholastic 16th century they
29:56
from Aquinas even before lad founded
29:59
elite Spanish scholastics that’s about
30:01
several hundred years and then a French
30:05
tradition in the 18th century continuing
30:08
that in France and Italy and in 18th
30:12
century leading with fantastic flowering
30:14
of economic thought modern economics for
30:15
Catalan Torgo particular and you have
30:18
everything there you have but lately
30:20
affair much more pure and much more
30:22
sound on this Adam Smith and that fact
30:24
or dollop and we’ve read my little
30:26
pamphlet it’s really a pre Austrian
30:28
every sense he’s got pipe rather than
30:30
there’s got the he’s got the one by
30:32
working a theory of capital has got the
30:33
whole business about aspect that rule
30:35
diminishing returns up the whole push
30:37
mere we have this big flowery we cannot
30:40
make throw analyze a fair thought when
30:42
we hand in hand and then they are we
30:44
have a collapsing with Smith sugar is
30:48
properly a syphilis about so if you read
30:50
between the lines meticulous then still
30:51
obvious a total contempt for specimen
30:53
for good reason
30:54
Ricardo not a great thing I mean Thank
30:57
You Ricardo of shine through the book is
30:58
almost a major feature in the book that
31:00
pops up every fifty or hundred pages
31:02
oddly but ship it is first of all it’s
31:04
called bizarrely he he likes John Stuart
31:06
Mill how obscure II can’t figure out it
31:08
was only bringing back Ricardo so anyway
31:11
if you can’t look for much consistency
31:13
in champeta but this fundamental
31:14
paradigm is consistently though it was a
31:17
big blow and came out or philosophy
31:19
commas we gonna historical flourish at
31:22
about Schumpeter book we’ve I agree
31:24
Frank Knights example review of it can
31:27
understand why mighty Pope Catholic
31:29
and of course night if you know about
31:31
night with has style anti-christian Lily
31:34
went ape and the Christians question
31:37
passe and Catholic particularly Catholic
31:39
so you’ve not exactly equipped to be
31:41
very objective Sicily came out the night
31:44
used to do the tours course in graduate
31:46
economics there any nuns of priests in
31:48
the class he just insult the Catholic
31:49
Church until they left then say now we
31:52
can begin really really a weird dot
31:54
keeper so I commend Carrick a moral
31:57
statement in Caddo nieces this is about
31:59
Smith and making waste and rubbish of
32:01
two thousand years of economic thought
32:03
I’ll get it to that anyway the counter
32:05
thesis the gala economic basically is
32:08
that the slashing of emphasized utility
32:11
and scarcity as the key determines a
32:13
value in a production or whatever by the
32:15
way the neoclassical smear against the
32:18
Austrians is the only interested in
32:19
utility or the man are not supplies of
32:21
course is rubbish the whole point is as
32:24
you know you have a if you put the meat
32:28
in the familiar two-dimensional diagram
32:29
you have quantity with a good on the
32:31
x-axis and then you have utility or
32:33
whatever on the y-axis in some way you
32:35
know it’s ordinal like ordinal some way
32:38
we were very broad about it the way what
32:41
we’re saying is as the mission utility
32:43
of good and the intersection of that the
32:46
demand curve with the supply will will
32:50
be the economic value of the price of a
32:52
product so it’s not that supply is
32:54
unimportant
32:55
what you’re really saying is they have
32:56
subjective demand which then impresses
32:58
itself on economic system values
33:00
everything which is there all the stuff
33:01
which is there is being evaluated by
33:04
people you have people really value any
33:07
of things out
33:08
there which are being evaluated the
33:10
things that are supplies my important to
33:12
have supplies of a vertical vertical
33:14
curve not the confusing situation it’s
33:17
just that well Austrians of course and
33:18
the Scholastic’s deny the role of
33:20
support cost and determining price
33:23
number the point of course is only
33:24
affects price by determinate pumping
33:26
determines scarcity and gets back to the
33:28
or the supply of a product and and as
33:31
counterpoint sound a shrimp a two points
33:33
and later on the river and rice such as
33:35
a whole bunch of other revisionists on
33:36
scholastic front the entire view that
33:39
economists had of scholastics for a
33:42
couple hundred years of totally or wet
33:43
and was the view basic views I’m sure
33:45
your read is the plastics believe it
33:46
just price adjust price was the course
33:49
of reduction plus a guaranteed profit or
33:51
and or keeping your station in life
33:53
whatever your station is for the station
33:56
and humble your keep keep being humble
33:58
this is probably all wetness all these
34:00
guys have shown her over and all these
34:01
people shown in detail
34:03
very few scholastics has a stock from
34:06
two or three and these were minor fringe
34:08
people the mainstream is classic for it
34:10
was you totally scarcity in a free
34:12
market those are just price with a
34:13
market price now it’s true they want
34:15
total libertarians I’m like a sale at
34:18
the first place they didn’t like the
34:20
idea of individual bargaining I thought
34:21
the market had to be a market so this
34:23
far if you and I agree on some price and
34:26
it’s not the market price they would say
34:27
that’s unjust on second more they are
34:29
not against price control for the pipe
34:31
in quotes supers could also be just but
34:34
that’s very far from saying is that
34:36
something else has replaced the market
34:37
basically they were from market people
34:39
and very keen market analysts the only
34:43
thing I want to say about Scholastic
34:44
personal he’s one of the best of them
34:46
magnificent character here does all of
34:48
the you wrote about it about fourteen
34:51
hundred who is not only a great market
34:54
analyst and the inventor of
34:54
sophisticated utility theory you and
34:56
down a marginal utility theory who’s
34:58
also an extreme spiritual Franciscan or
35:01
rigorous Francisco know those extreme
35:02
poverty person the Franciscan movement
35:06
started out as Pro poverty and then
35:08
there’s the with a pledge of poverty
35:11
that is a consistent church began
35:12
accumulate money from donations or
35:15
whatever they they began to have second
35:16
thoughts and we gonna be more realistic
35:20
by the old Frank I notice the rigorous
35:22
Twain you’re pressing with we’re high
35:23
walvis that you guys are being up
35:24
selling out the Franciscan doctrine
35:26
presses in heritage and all of you is
35:28
extremely the leaders of the province
35:30
saw a group of extreme poverty people I
35:33
mean emaciated obviously San Franciscans
35:36
even rear effects is going to eat much
35:37
well at the regulars Francisco I mean
35:39
strawberry poverty-stricken song like a
35:41
movie character you know very skinny
35:43
wandering around and he’s a great
35:45
sophisticated market analyst it’s
35:47
amazing I want a great anomaly history
35:48
of thought the only thing as scholastics
35:52
were weak on was that was caught usually
35:54
usually question think it’s really the
35:56
Scrat of them eventually and they had a
35:58
real problem that could understand time
35:59
preference and fo nobody until torgul
36:02
really understood it you can’t blame
36:03
them that too much I could understand
36:06
why you should charge interest on our
36:07
risk alone and they understood about
36:10
profit interstate about opportunity cost
36:12
they got the whole thing down just
36:13
extreme time preferences their major
36:16
weakness even when that other is still
36:18
traffic managed to sophisticate the
36:20
whole thing under they just avoid the
36:22
whole business of brilliant maneuvering
36:24
through allowed usually anyway but the
36:27
main maneuvering of course was evasive
36:29
and therefore was open the pack rather
36:33
counter thesis is that the it’s not an
36:35
accident is my first relative was very
36:37
interesting about speculum I now think
36:39
is brought to it and I think getting
36:41
deeper into it that seasoning no
36:43
accident that the only liberal theory of
36:46
value of people when was in the history
36:48
of quarry have a thousand years of
36:49
school aspects of similar years
36:50
consumption theorists utility theorists
36:53
all of a sudden the utility the labor
36:55
theory pops up the court of the counter
36:58
is no accident of a Calvinist going monk
37:00
Alvarez that labor theory value
37:01
flourished Calvinists believing a divine
37:05
obligation for labor in other words live
37:07
was an end in itself those Catholics
37:09
tend to be Catholic finger tend to be a
37:11
favor of consumption moderate enjoyment
37:13
and labor as a means to an end which is
37:16
more off the economic way of looking at
37:17
it so to speak
37:18
whereas SoCalGas tend to be anti
37:20
enjoyment and want to keep consumption
37:22
limited to minimum remove the fury of
37:25
continuing labor I’m not saying every
37:27
Calvinist is like this or every Catholic
37:28
I think this is a word that’s a broad
37:30
the summary things pretty accurate if
37:32
you look for example it
37:33
Gatlin we have Catholics and Calvin’s
37:35
living side by side caviar is attacking
37:37
the Calvinists of being bluer you know
37:41
standoffish unfriendly etcetera etc and
37:44
a camera’s attacking a Catholic is being
37:47
lazy shiftless drink a lot they probably
37:50
both right anyway but the thing is
37:53
that’s the sort of difference yeah this
37:55
seems to go through throughout Catholic
37:59
centre to be much more relaxed so to
38:01
speak as I see the real the first real
38:03
libertarian value person really Smith
38:05
was not John why I denied it was John
38:07
Locke I think I’m kind of labor theory
38:09
of property is very very different from
38:11
labor theory value simply mean how do
38:13
you get non only resources into private
38:16
ownership but way to do it cousin teams
38:18
of course a homestead theorists mixing
38:20
your labor with a soy Lu then becomes
38:21
your private part I don’t think that’s a
38:22
labor theory of value at all it’s total
38:24
misconception and by historians of
38:26
course get the whole thing mixed up
38:27
because we know about natural law on the
38:30
cation Catholicism and versus absolutism
38:33
it’ll go into that a bit the natural law
38:37
tradition Aristotelian stoic tradition
38:39
which was then picked up by our Aquinas
38:41
in the Scholastic’s especially after
38:43
Aristotle was rediscovered me the man by
38:46
use of Reason can can discover a natural
38:49
law or laws of reality which is who laws
38:50
of ethics and which also put a firm
38:54
limit on the state and one state may not
38:55
invade this sphere rights or individuals
38:58
to of each individual I think an edition
39:02
of that so that’s one sense which
39:04
Catholicism kind of firm check on state
39:06
power throughout the Middle Ages and
39:09
later and the other that’s the important
39:11
thing is the Catholic Church with
39:12
transnational check on state rule I
39:14
think I don’t want on the limit I think
39:16
it’s the only case in history where the
39:17
church and state were not the same in
39:19
the words in most civilizations church
39:21
and state where they get refused
39:22
together be kind of mighty rule mighty
39:25
Alliance of throne and alter the
39:27
conservatives like to put it in other
39:28
words the other king and the king is
39:30
taxing people accepting of the church
39:32
and the church is telling people to obey
39:34
the king and are getting part of a loot
39:35
and we’re getting a good good chunk of a
39:38
loop you have state and church or
39:40
pressing on public taxing and
39:41
controlling etc etc and most
39:43
intellectuals throughout history have
39:44
been later than churchmen the idea of a
39:46
lay intellectual comes in
39:47
only last couple hundred years we have a
39:49
fusion of state and church every power
39:51
powerful instrument for despotism and
39:52
state power I think this is the only
39:55
case in history where the state and
39:56
church were separate in the words of the
39:58
Catholic Church with transnational and
40:00
therefore kept a severe limit on the
40:02
power of each King as a matter of fact
40:05
particularly and I hereby recommend a
40:08
marvelous little book by Jean Beckler
40:10
French economic historian called the
40:11
origins of capitalism why did capitalism
40:14
relies only in Western Europe obviously
40:15
have been trade in every civilization
40:17
real capital is really market phenomena
40:19
cetera really comes with only in Western
40:21
Europe and what is it that noted so and
40:24
essentially pinpoints the fact that
40:26
power is the centralizers feuless this
40:28
course instead of being simple empire
40:30
simple despotism so each powers limite
40:32
have independent principalities have
40:35
villages which has autonomy power many
40:37
senses a few men women with has a
40:39
tongueless power and you have a
40:40
transnational church to check individual
40:43
state we have very little state power
40:45
either externally or internally those of
40:47
these checks which allowed the market
40:49
the flourish in effect the marvelous
40:51
phrase here ISA vector so the expansion
40:54
of capitalism orders its origins and its
40:56
raised on better at a political anarchy
40:57
the extension capital template leaders
41:00
all arguments raised on debt with a
41:01
peripheral anarchy and particularly it’s
41:05
no coincidence according to Beckler but
41:07
the really real expansion of campos in
41:09
comes in 11th century the so-called
41:10
renaissance of the 11th century which
41:12
coincides with literally the seventh
41:14
magnificent smashing the power of the
41:17
state for investiture a pound of like
41:18
King Lear Kincaid reports always trying
41:21
to grab religious power so then the V
41:24
for the positive Reformation all this
41:25
Moss comes to an end
41:27
in other words first place many of the
41:30
policy churches become state churches
41:32
the Anglican Church port means total
41:35
state church Calvinist winger usually
41:37
what happens with religious groups tend
41:39
to be in favor of tyranny with our own
41:41
majority in favor of religious freedom
41:43
another minority and something but the
41:46
kalos is the same thing when they would
41:47
technically were in Geneva and
41:49
Massachusetts are pretty rigorous
41:51
smashing sin was the women are minority
41:54
of course since they came fight
41:55
libertarian be brought in the little
41:57
town
41:58
inclusions and a thing of the Catholic
42:02
so in a Catholic countries even they had
42:04
a slippage as the church itself lost a
42:07
lot of influence in France in particular
42:10
the progressive absolutism tremendous
42:14
relative absolute of course reaching of
42:16
people early the 14th and week 17th
42:18
century and continuing on for the French
42:19
Revolution what happens when France well
42:22
you have to groovey cameras were very
42:23
much against the the establishment the
42:25
state state tyranny and the Catholic
42:28
League you’re at the extreme Catholics
42:29
are also against it and what happened
42:30
they have series of so rebellions and
42:32
battles of both the extreme Catholics in
42:35
the and the calva coming out with late
42:36
libertarian political theory of course
42:38
of it when having the centrist takeover
42:41
usually when often what happens is full
42:42
of politiques moving and restoring the
42:45
called moderate only moderate or
42:47
something weren’t in favor of religious
42:48
they’re just killing each other they
42:50
didn’t care that much about religion
42:51
especially why but there wasn’t we’re
42:53
not moderate it says they want a total
42:55
state power total power of a king and
42:56
forget about religion or the collision
42:58
becomes an instrument of the king and so
43:00
the politics winning over and then you
43:03
have in France the Catholic Church
43:05
becomes only it gets on the influence or
43:06
crypto Calvin a screw Cola gentleness
43:08
who are such really so really Camelot’s
43:11
and sheeps quick seem sort of thing to
43:13
speak and really take over the French
43:15
church and they’re very Pro absolute
43:18
death yes yes the King right an old
43:20
things is suffering so that was the one
43:21
of the reasons why the Catholic Church
43:23
is not limit the power French the growth
43:25
of French absolutism and then also had
43:27
another complication in Protestant
43:29
country had scholastics he were Brosius
43:31
with server free market sort of free
43:33
market type of the Dutch count pitch Cal
43:35
– not really
43:36
Dutch Protestant I should say scholastic
43:38
and the Scotland influence Scotland and
43:41
the Scottish enlightenment which put
43:42
leaf Adam Smith with also scholastic
43:45
product and scholastic or neo Calvin
43:47
scholastic
43:47
comes it comes complex with it basically
43:49
it relations in the Arminian camp in
43:52
there we will camp in Harlem
43:56
while we’re doing with ballet one of the
43:58
things about natural law I should say
44:00
initiative limiting setting up a sphere
44:02
for individual rights and limiting the
44:04
government it also supplement numbers
44:06
you really really believe your natural
44:07
or you believe it our natural limits
44:08
demands omnipotence we are individuals
44:10
on Vepr you don’t believe natural
44:11
anything goes and do anything can
44:13
conquer the world whatever without any
44:15
ill consequence another reason I think
44:17
one answer was important I just want to
44:20
mention absolutist or an Anglican anyone
44:22
Tudor and Stuart in 16th 17th century
44:24
and we’re going to England course the
44:26
British Church Anglican Church was the
44:28
street state church they looked at a
44:31
simple correspondence theory one of most
44:33
more bizarre theories in my experience
44:35
for absolutism so others from those
44:37
attacked by lack of it beautiful example
44:40
of this here it’s called by analogy or
44:42
by correspond the argument by
44:44
correspondence namely there a higher
44:47
hierarchy of power throughout the world
44:49
God the Angels men and critters I say
44:56
critters animal with things like that
44:58
and I’m a vegetable right so this is the
45:01
power that is top power and then come
45:03
the others a subordinated each once
45:04
before the other and in the same way and
45:07
I get this relaxing there each
45:11
individual has a head which runs things
45:14
on a heart and limbs more at the head is
45:19
ruling the other and see the idea of a
45:21
man rebelling against God of course an
45:23
evil and simple and possible except
45:25
earth and saying where the audio wings
45:27
are hard rebelling up ahead is equally
45:29
simple and impossible then you have in
45:31
the family inside a family same thing
45:34
the father of course of a broad white
45:36
head like figure the mother or the wife
45:39
and the kids
45:40
of course subordinate notice the
45:43
political is like social employed and
45:44
vocational it and then of course with us
45:47
the state came somewhere you’re powerful
45:50
no gays
45:51
middle-class searched at separate
45:55
foreigners whatever this is the in the
45:59
census this is a big on your first royal
46:01
absolute if it’s not argument most of
46:02
those fine convincing compel light and
46:06
the the right-wing notions of cue circle
46:10
none of the guys owns of cue circle has
46:13
a view of consent everybody i consent
46:15
everybody have natural rights of consent
46:17
and somewhere and someone or absolute
46:18
right except some shadowy time in
46:20
history they gave the surrender only
46:21
rights of the king and perpetuating i
46:23
can’t get it back that was the two
46:26
circles argument for absolutism the
46:28
firmest have no that’s a sellout
46:29
once you install a right to consent
46:30
you’re you’re in a slippery slope
46:31
believe directly an anti-government and
46:34
the stuff he was right
46:35
hobbes promising that moderate compare
46:39
the two circle how many the liberal
46:42
deviation is from the to circle he
46:43
believed that yes everybody cemented all
46:45
the rights of a king in order to keep
46:46
the peace and suffer but the king is
46:48
really coming at you with like donna
46:49
just about to shoot you or you ever like
46:51
to run away hoses can swim concession or
46:53
right perfect two circle for them you
46:55
know you have no like the violation
46:56
there you’re buckin the kings of salt
46:59
and then of course there’s a
47:01
libertarians or classical liberals of
47:03
level wars and lockets after who
47:04
essentially county a Calvinist or
47:06
positon dependence we talk a lot about
47:11
religion so far but so far it’s been
47:12
fairly familiar the labor theory of
47:14
value Tony and spear city and naturally
47:16
law now I’m coming another section
47:18
another part which is not as familiar
47:19
other aspects of religion of theology
47:21
which also extremely important I want to
47:24
mention with fam Newsweek
47:26
last week timid text short strip for
47:29
religion they talked about high school
47:31
tax or late school text history world
47:34
history and Margaret was a dropped out
47:35
for example he’s linear old culture text
47:39
for sixth graders management when it was
47:41
discussed Joan of Arc but I mentioned in
47:43
God religion on her canonization another
47:46
was twenty page around Tanzania but none
47:47
other positive affirmation and here’s
47:50
Rose is about that in front of my lion
47:52
College text of readings a mediaeval
47:54
ancient history and modern history the
47:56
campin anything about religion Anna tea
47:58
specially being spoiled your guess but
47:59
anything about it is considered
48:01
controversial and they’re forced to be
48:02
killed
48:04
okay that’s really bizarre because
48:06
religion is if work all 400 of action at
48:08
least until the 19th century and
48:10
probably the whole 20th and so we’re
48:12
talking about the history of anything
48:13
especially history of thought the lean
48:15
religion has to leave most of the stuff
48:16
bad leave a bad use of exhibit and the
48:19
ideals a motive that ever me it’s really
48:21
crazy you don’t have to be Pro religion
48:24
of Christianity to realize this has been
48:26
extremely important and the not to talk
48:27
about it but the absurd I’m not a
48:29
theologian I want to end of the theology
48:30
preserve I must say I find theology
48:33
fascinating because it’s sort of a
48:34
deductive system something like proxy
48:36
ology that propose the axioms are
48:38
different but much once you have the
48:40
axioms you can spin on with the whole
48:41
thing out and you can throw about
48:43
coherent deductive systems versus
48:45
incoherent I think anyway the two things
48:48
I want to talk about which are very
48:49
obscure is seemingly not not important I
48:51
think very Whitehall history of thought
48:53
and economics thought the two things
48:57
which get left out even by people know
48:59
about natural moron absolutism in or lap
49:01
one is creatology or the science using
49:07
science has a wisdom you know not
49:09
physical measurement science of the
49:11
creation of the universe why did God
49:14
create the universe the Lord
49:15
seemingly for some of us in a seemingly
49:17
trivial question actually pregnant with
49:19
fantastic political implications with
49:22
one slight difference in axiom another
49:24
thing about theology is active system
49:25
one seemingly unimportant difference the
49:28
axiom can cause tremendous differences
49:29
in political conclusions or social
49:31
conclusion why God created the universe
49:33
and both of these areas rather white but
49:38
and create collagen the other one my
49:40
conclusion is purely as a layman of the
49:42
Orthodox Christian position of the least
49:44
is most is the safest let’s put it that
49:45
way
49:46
fiat ology eschatology mainly the
49:51
science of the last days how will the
49:52
world comes up to an end and when and
49:54
the creatology the science of the first
49:57
days
49:57
this might seem to some people from
49:59
secularists irrelevant but not around
50:02
remarks it’s extremely important but
50:05
before I get that I just want to say
50:06
what actually is relates to the
50:07
creatology and particularly create
50:09
college but key one of the key things
50:11
which Christianity brought in the world
50:12
believe there any other religion as
50:14
individualism of the supreme importance
50:17
of the individual
50:18
and I think that’s the individual stamps
50:20
on the image of God because is it her
50:23
salvation because of extreme importance
50:25
and and moral choices in the rest of it
50:26
the Greeks even though I reveal the
50:29
Greeks are great rationalizing oil add
50:30
the Greeks or polis oriented so that
50:33
where they care about not the individual
50:36
but the post that the state commune the
50:37
city state and so on Plato and Aristotle
50:40
are talking about virtue and what know
50:43
what the virtuous licker they’re talking
50:44
about the life through the city-state
50:45
not enough regionally they don’t care
50:47
about the individual the city-state the
50:49
camps so it’s a collectivist doctrine to
50:53
the city-state now some of my friends
50:55
like Doug Rasmussen some Neil are Satine
50:58
to trying to claim that they’re really
50:58
really they really meant the community
51:00
and at the state vide that’s this I have
51:01
to be proven shown this in detail but I
51:03
really think this is a city-state also
51:06
not unrelated or facto most these guys
51:07
were slave owners and slavery was course
51:10
guarantee by the city-state knows if
51:12
you’re a part of a small slave owning
51:13
cast you got plenty of time to discuss
51:16
philosophy remember the Slayer doing all
51:17
the work and a smaller that’s only a
51:20
slaveholders voted and so forth so on
51:21
you tend to identify yourself with a
51:23
polis if the poet is you and then you
51:25
know 500 other guys a thousand other guy
51:27
it becomes understandable why they slip
51:30
them in this collectivist mode and then
51:33
other parts of Pina colleges will see is
51:35
a species oriented even more
51:36
collectivist man as a species or
51:40
collective species rather than as an
51:41
individual I think I think Christianity
51:44
is unique and bringing individual into
51:45
focus a key element of concern and of
51:48
more choice and salvation or less
51:50
magnificent I think could not be
51:53
overstressed creatology seemingly
51:57
obscure or unimportant you’ll have asked
52:00
Christian position is the God creating
52:02
universe out of pure love that is
52:04
perfect almost by definition creator
52:09
universe are pure love and that’s it
52:11
saying the safest approach whether it’s
52:13
correct or not I leave the theologian
52:14
certainly the safest approach the other
52:16
approach I don’t know what to call it
52:18
I’m kind of named for you I’ve just
52:19
caught the mystic of mystical approach
52:21
this is view this is the Orthodox
52:23
Christian approach the list of approach
52:26
is the God created the universe out of
52:29
felt need others what Mises what a call
52:31
felt uneasiness God was lonesome okay
52:34
right God gone over that was imperfect
52:37
and needed creation the universe so what
52:41
are the implications of this the
52:42
implications are that the way this works
52:45
in the picture is that at the beginning
52:49
God and man reunited it’s very difficult
52:52
for me to make sense out of this I’m
52:53
trying my best
52:54
got a man United assess that they fuse
52:56
together
52:57
there was no man missing man haven’t
52:59
been created yet but in some sense they
53:00
were United who had unity but God is
53:03
imperfect then God creates man this sets
53:05
up this is important it’s progressive
53:08
God then can develop his perfection and
53:11
mankind evolved his perfection of what
53:12
God and man are both imperfect but man
53:15
imperfect notice is the man of the
53:17
species work of each individual dies
53:19
pretty soon because we’re talking about
53:21
a collectivist man as species
53:22
collectivist man is imperfect God has
53:26
been perfect
53:26
they both in history human history is a
53:29
process by which God and man develop
53:33
become more more more perfect so this is
53:36
good there’s also a bad side of this
53:38
that’s I didn’t man is now separated
53:40
from God for the first time alienated
53:42
and this my friends are the coal origin
53:45
of the famous were alienation which I am
53:48
sick out of you aren’t this is raelia
53:50
nation is not means feeling unhappy does
53:53
not mean you don’t like the state in
53:55
like your parents alienation for these
53:57
guys majors the fundamental separation
53:59
from God which with whom we have
54:00
previously been United we in a
54:02
collectivist sense Tom because I wasn’t
54:03
you know I would gone 20 million years
54:05
ago whenever it was fundamentally a
54:08
nation is a bad part and a big part of
54:10
the as the development then finally so
54:13
we have we saw all for this unity and
54:16
then we have a separation of alienation
54:18
and then we have a final recombination
54:21
of history will be everything here we
54:23
are of course in eschatology will be a
54:25
reunion of man and God and a one big
54:28
mighty climactic reunion which will
54:31
leave which would be the perfection of
54:32
man professions are also reunion a man
54:35
of the species the individuals nothing
54:38
individual pre people are just or years
54:40
of yeah just atoms in this whole thing
54:41
so Manigault be united or some kind of
54:44
close
54:44
species species unity each individual
54:47
also benighted what every other
54:47
individual one blob one species blob
54:51
which also be an item of God one mighty
54:53
species blob basically the end of
54:54
history history will come to an end
54:56
there’s also eschatology to obviously so
55:01
this is collectivist and it means that
55:03
neither God is working through history
55:04
history becomes an important process by
55:06
which these things are happening also
55:08
you start here you have they have a a
55:11
German before I’ll say bowing in other
55:13
words don’t stick up already I’ll pay
55:15
them any transformation or the negation
55:18
the payment Hegelian mark so Edward I’ll
55:21
pay you on you one stage somehow
55:23
magically is transformed into another
55:25
one and the Foundation’s finally hell
55:27
accommodation is always three by the way
55:29
three is a key three stages first three
55:31
stages the Thursday to be a mighty
55:33
fantastic want everybody the blobs are
55:35
united to each other there’s a great
55:39
phrase can’t refrain from reading that’s
55:42
one of my favorite writers of all time
55:43
at GK Chesterton
55:45
he’s he’s talking about the social
55:47
theory and a Byzantium Theosophists from
55:50
Omaha’s Catholic position of this
55:52
mystical we also his viewpoint we’re all
55:55
individuals are dragged into each other
55:58
and you have a final super blob so this
56:02
is a baboso this is the alienation is a
56:04
dialectic this is the claim of dialectic
56:06
were one stage of history is transformed
56:09
imaginary transformative its opposite it
56:12
was something very different than
56:13
finally transform of a final final
56:15
climactic cause some of them big shots
56:18
on one of the things by about this is of
56:20
course the problem of evil of solve the
56:22
problem of evil of course as you all
56:23
know probably if God is good and
56:25
omnipotent how come you have evil in the
56:27
world this is a famous theological
56:30
problem by the way my favorite solution
56:32
this is an Orthodox one by HL Mencken go
56:34
to my favorite writer Megan said well
56:37
God was created by committee of God’s
56:39
each of whom are omnipotent and
56:40
benevolent they just being committee
56:42
they screwed up
56:44
village to me charming Robin one thing
56:48
it does is that several different
56:49
solutions for the problem of evil in
56:51
other words the Orthodox Christian
56:52
solution is the mass created individual
56:54
created works pretty well who can’t read
56:56
either choose good or evil but this
56:59
solution says the mystical solution
57:00
there is no evil or seeming evils really
57:02
part of a good process the process of
57:04
dialectic which ends up in a mighty and
57:07
mighty blob the future and the blobs so
57:10
though evil in the world but our goal
57:11
today and share anything that happens is
57:13
probably an emerald profitable they said
57:15
so like a wig theory in some crazy way
57:17
and it winds up with Urban’s final
57:21
diffusion and all processes are
57:22
inevitable me to that now some of the
57:25
big shots in here so pinus are probably
57:27
the first one a third century roman
57:29
clayton this sort of feel tightness and
57:33
then christians take this out our
57:34
christian platelets attrition paulo put
57:37
– another big name in this is John
57:39
Curtis original I don’t know if you want
57:42
to get more on this as a marvelous book
57:43
of course my classic Kolakowski called
57:45
main currents and Marxism which is the
57:47
first volume which deals with a
57:48
philosophic lives of Marxism the Polish
57:52
immigrant in England John Curtis
57:55
original who’s a Scotch Irish late 9th
57:59
century philosopher living in Paris and
58:02
the famous Christian mystic of a 13th
58:04
century meister eckhart my three Johann
58:06
at that Court so these are some of the
58:08
big names in this development mr. go
58:10
fill up the sword and then hey go I’m
58:12
not gonna go out first of all I haven’t
58:14
finished my study of Hegel from my book
58:16
the second one only I’m not doing one
58:18
thing I’m not gonna go into his hay roll
58:19
with any great life but Hegel gaily
58:22
isn’t really develops this with Hegel
58:24
himself becoming God was God becoming
58:26
sort of brought into grace of Hegel at
58:28
the end of history at the end of the
58:31
dialectic got a halo fusing he Hegel
58:35
coming honestly I just think he’s not
58:37
let’s face it any right so how about
58:39
I’ll put a lotta galleons no world still
58:41
armed just one quote from halo I think
58:43
it’s storming here enlightening and 11
58:46
appalling and he started pulling him
58:47
riding down the street it’s not from the
58:48
point of victories and Prussia he writes
58:51
a friend of his he says I saw on a
58:52
pulley in the center of the world
58:54
riding through town it doesn’t even
58:56
wonderful sight
58:57
see concentrated in a point sitting on a
58:59
horse an individual and invidual over
59:01
one of the world and masters it now what
59:04
Heiko core world historical figures who
59:06
quest moon history and he felt of the he
59:09
hit her father died lack of history with
59:10
ending in his own since he was the
59:12
bigshot philosopher full of new Prussian
59:14
state Tesla philosophy University Berlin
59:18
the newly created state versity and
59:20
therefore that said that’s the heezy
59:22
civic end of history Fatah give the
59:27
science of the final days Orthodox
59:29
Christian viewpoint developed by saying
59:32
Agustin and Phil followed by Catholic
59:34
Lutheran’s Petra pushes obviously
59:38
Christianity’s messianic Jesus will
59:39
return a second Advent and put an end to
59:42
history that’s accepted by every by the
59:44
question is in what sense or what form
59:46
particularly what about the millennium
59:47
is mention of the Bible well what about
59:50
a thousand years of a kingdom of God on
59:51
earth where does that fit in when Jesus
59:54
comes as a day of judgment in history is
59:56
over the a millennial us the Orthodox
59:59
Christian position in Spain Augusta on
60:02
as the Millennium is simply a metaphor
60:03
for the Christian Church and that’s it
60:06
but there’s no real king of honor than
60:09
the more concrete steps and Jesus will
60:12
return the second Ave that at some time
60:13
as own climates and a pedestrian that’s
60:15
if you forgot about the millennium other
60:17
word when iam so drops out and I’m just
60:19
a little concerned we my name is out of
60:22
politics individual salvation becomes
60:24
the important thing so history did not
60:27
become a process of where the Millennium
60:29
is organized for the speak and then with
60:31
millennium is outside of history there
60:33
are two other laying the foot that many
60:35
sub valiance within each wing two other
60:37
wings disagree with us one of the
60:39
so-called premillennial was mainly that
60:41
heaters will return and established king
60:45
or honours for a thousand years of them
60:46
for another history we have priyah the
60:48
sentences Jesus before the Millennium so
60:52
history then is a process by which the
60:54
thousand-year kingdom will be
60:55
established in some way we were the
60:57
books of the Bible which are
60:58
particularly interesting in this book of
60:59
Daniel the book of Revelation arthelene
61:01
focuses for these three people
61:03
every time the pre millenias usually
61:06
look for signs of the advent and there
61:07
were signs of actually ablative armor
61:09
millennium McGee’s returned the
61:12
millennium before money probably lots of
61:13
protecting cuz seven years of hectic
61:15
stuff going down those big Wars and all
61:18
sort of thing conflicts so P murrah it’s
61:21
usually look for signs of this
61:22
development usually in times of turmoil
61:24
Ward’s upper they would pop up and say
61:26
AHA money in this Jesus battle of return
61:29
during the Reformation the 17th century
61:31
Wars and such revolution but
61:34
outcroppings of the premillennialists a
61:37
problem politically was they’re looking
61:39
for signs the signs are things like the
61:41
beasts the dragon the Scarlet woman the
61:44
return of the Jews to Palestine of that
61:45
conversion of Christianity in separate
61:46
separate who the beast is the for
61:48
exegesis for people more murder than I
61:50
am in this in these matters but the
61:52
problem is that the other these people
61:54
were committed a certain dates that the
61:55
timetable of prophecy i sir isaac newton
61:58
for example for the physics were the
61:59
bell really unimportant his real
62:01
contribution trying to figure out how
62:02
long the royal isn’t one will come to an
62:04
end by biblical exegesis they’re looking
62:08
for signs and usually picking specific
62:10
date the most famous of which were the
62:11
middle rights we’re very popular popular
62:14
in england 1830s and what a story
62:17
speculate that the influence marks i’m
62:19
not sure there’s no evidence for this
62:21
but certainly around at the time other
62:23
words the middle right sided Jesus will
62:25
return on October 22nd 1844 hey what the
62:30
problem of specification of this sort
62:32
very much by economic forecasting right
62:35
what do you do in a public twenty thirty
62:37
turn around right now and then their ego
62:38
second Advent it’s a big problem for
62:41
profit of the store so Miller ISM became
62:43
discredited usually what they do is a
62:44
seraph sorry my calculation is slightly
62:46
off to relieve 1864 something like
62:49
rabbit but basically the moral rights
62:50
went to around had it and it was
62:54
succeeded by a new theory to establish
62:56
essentially current known as
62:58
fundamentalism now premillennial
63:00
fundamentalism let’s theory
63:01
dispensationalism
63:03
invented by John Nelson Darby the
63:04
English in pre mill which is that see
63:07
the thing is you can’t have this pine
63:09
table timetable stops when the Christian
63:10
Church is established
63:12
pushing churches they call this a big
63:14
parenthesis and so the prophecies or the
63:17
pine table stops
63:18
glory resumed its will at some date
63:20
which might be soon but we don’t know
63:22
so this gets them off the hook so to
63:24
speak you don’t have to predict a
63:25
specific date they’re looking for signs
63:28
now politically the pre males are not
63:30
that important
63:31
except there is a problem but you think
63:35
I’m getting the great war between good
63:36
and evil talk from about to arrive
63:38
you might be tempted to try to speed it
63:39
up a bit and you know if your fingers
63:42
near a nuclear button on your primo
63:43
premillennial might be tempted I just
63:46
sort of speed the time payroll boy
63:48
outside of that there’s not too much for
63:51
of implications for this so I get there
63:54
a post millennialist that we get the
63:55
plug on vocational first Mills believe a
63:58
man has to establish the king or honor
64:00
its first in order for Jesus to arrive
64:02
key a key difference right in other
64:04
words this is essentially don’t worry
64:06
about the morning the a millennialist
64:08
here yet
64:09
Jesus establishing already have vise
64:11
assistance for cadre my faculty the
64:15
dominant view of the pre-trib to your
64:17
question one of the three become a seven
64:18
years of heartache in the tribulation
64:21
the Orthodox view among premillennial us
64:23
is the Jesus arrived just before the
64:25
trebla and rapture is up there the good
64:27
guys for heaven but they can just stand
64:29
alone with Jesus see the jerks being
64:30
scrolling down below and then returned
64:32
after the Armageddon does establish the
64:34
kingdom God on earth this is the
64:36
Orthodox pre-trib you learn many mid
64:38
triggers and poster I hate to be a post
64:39
trimmer and for a bad time at the Trib
64:42
first Lindsey was and with the post
64:46
Mills believe a man has to establish a
64:48
thousand years of King’s honor in order
64:50
for Jesus to return this places on land
64:52
heavier with theological
64:53
responsibilities and almost always not
64:56
in every case but in most cases
64:57
historically primo vermin raging
64:59
speeders because the government of a
65:01
shortcut do you have the other words if
65:03
Jesus comes and brings Armageddon then
65:05
the bad guys will slaughter an arm again
65:07
but if man has to establish the king of
65:09
goners first me the bad guys have to be
65:11
some way eliminated I mean human means
65:14
either by slaughtering the bad guys as
65:17
one perversion or else gradually by the
65:18
government sort of spiteful element
65:20
version but at any rate the post nail
65:23
gun was always turn of the state to be
65:25
the great instrument of bringing on a
65:27
king of God this is where
65:29
is what I becomes extremely important I
65:31
think basically an illegal Eric Eric
65:33
Voegelin is a famous Christian clever
65:35
fearless dude I’ve recently the Austrian
65:37
Swiss nothing originally many right here
65:39
oh so student Mises seminar what that
65:42
what anything that means but for you’ll
65:45
ins bara turkey writings has basic theme
65:48
while guiding theme was don’t eminent
65:49
eyes the s-curve tone great complex way
65:52
of saying I think something very
65:53
important don’t eminent eyes the
65:56
s-curves home sort of dramatic way of
65:59
saying something important mainly if you
66:01
bring eschatology in order to be Bain
66:03
millennium into human history you’re in
66:05
trouble the Orthodox Christian view a
66:07
millennial fueled the last days King of
66:10
God or whatever is up in heaven so you
66:12
don’t worry about on earth so to speak
66:13
if you bring it down a bit aren’t going
66:15
to or if you imminent ties it let’s make
66:17
it imminent within the earth then human
66:20
affairs within human history have all
66:22
sorts a problem that people are kind of
66:23
stamp out to send like fire and
66:25
brimstone a separate subject and that I
66:27
think is I think is an important insight
66:29
my boy once but it’s sort of jargon
66:31
formulation okay thank you very much

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *