Murray Rothbard Is The Ray Peat Of Economics

[ecstatichamster]

Dr. Peat probably hates him but he is incredibly brilliant in his domain of history and economics the way Dr. Peat is on health.

I love him and you can find a lot of his lectures, like this:


Fantastic.

 

[Tarmander]

yeah he is great.

You can go to Audio/Video and sort by his name to get a ton of free content by him

 

[ecstatichamster]

yeah he is great.

You can go to Audio/Video and sort by his name to get a ton of free content by him

You probably also like Hans Hoppe, who is brilliant, but nobody is like Rothbard

 

[Steven Bussinger]

Those lectures are fantastic. I was turned on to them by Kyle.

 

[aguineapig]

I like Rothbard if for no other reason than his mannerism. Always chuckling at himself. His wife, I think, said he considered his life a success because he made money and never had to get up before noon or something like that.

 

[Tarmander]

You probably also like Hans Hoppe, who is brilliant, but nobody is like Rothbard

i haven't actually listened to him at all. I will check him out

 

[Beastmode]

Peat recommended Murray Bookchin’s work to me. I haven't read any of his books yet.

Has anyone here?

@ecstatichamster

 

[Hugh Johnson]

Right libertarians are typically psychopaths. Ray Peat actually mentioned this series, when discussing right libertarians, who he was very critical of:

ANDREW: You mean, you are sure that no one will want to go back to democracy?

CNC: No, I mean they won’t be allowed to discuss that possibility. In a covenant… among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one’s own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and removed from society. [218]
​

Journey into a Libertarian Future: Part III – Regulation | naked capitalism

Unlike most political views, right libertarians do not even pretend to have any sort of humanity:

The libertarian US economist Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) wrote in his book 'Ethics of Liberty', that parents should have the right to put a child out for adoption or sell the rights to the child in a voluntary contract. Rothbard suggested selling children as consumer goods in accordance with market forces, would benefit "everyone" involved in the market: "the natural parents, the children, and the foster parents.[32] In Rothbard's view, "the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights." Thus, parents should have the legal right to let any infant die by starvation. However, since "the purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children" he wrote, "the existence of a free baby market will bring such 'neglect' down to a minimum".[32]​

Child selling - Wikipedia

Right libertarianism is typically reduced to "What if the child consents?" meme on the internet, because they are the only people who find child slavery desirable. They are despised by any person who understands their views and is not a psychopath.

 

[Tarmander]

Right libertarians are typically psychopaths. Ray Peat actually mentioned this series, when discussing right libertarians, who he was very critical of:

ANDREW: You mean, you are sure that no one will want to go back to democracy?

CNC: No, I mean they won’t be allowed to discuss that possibility. In a covenant… among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one’s own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and removed from society. [218]
​

Journey into a Libertarian Future: Part III – Regulation | naked capitalism

Unlike most political views, right libertarians do not even pretend to have any sort of humanity:

The libertarian US economist Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) wrote in his book 'Ethics of Liberty', that parents should have the right to put a child out for adoption or sell the rights to the child in a voluntary contract. Rothbard suggested selling children as consumer goods in accordance with market forces, would benefit "everyone" involved in the market: "the natural parents, the children, and the foster parents.[32] In Rothbard's view, "the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights." Thus, parents should have the legal right to let any infant die by starvation. However, since "the purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children" he wrote, "the existence of a free baby market will bring such 'neglect' down to a minimum".[32]​

Child selling - Wikipedia

Right libertarianism is typically reduced to "What if the child consents?" meme on the internet, because they are the only people who find child slavery desirable. They are despised by any person who understands their views and is not a psychopath.

That is kind of nuts tbh, I had not seen any of his stuff on having a child market...

I like Taleb's stuff on scale. You can be a communist within your family, a socialist in your neighborhood, a social democrat in your county...until you get to libertarian on a global scale

 

[Fred]

Right libertarians are typically psychopaths. Ray Peat actually mentioned this series, when discussing right libertarians, who he was very critical of:

ANDREW: You mean, you are sure that no one will want to go back to democracy?

CNC: No, I mean they won’t be allowed to discuss that possibility. In a covenant… among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one’s own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and removed from society. [218]
​

Journey into a Libertarian Future: Part III – Regulation | naked capitalism

Unlike most political views, right libertarians do not even pretend to have any sort of humanity:

The libertarian US economist Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) wrote in his book 'Ethics of Liberty', that parents should have the right to put a child out for adoption or sell the rights to the child in a voluntary contract. Rothbard suggested selling children as consumer goods in accordance with market forces, would benefit "everyone" involved in the market: "the natural parents, the children, and the foster parents.[32] In Rothbard's view, "the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights." Thus, parents should have the legal right to let any infant die by starvation. However, since "the purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children" he wrote, "the existence of a free baby market will bring such 'neglect' down to a minimum".[32]​

Child selling - Wikipedia

Right libertarianism is typically reduced to "What if the child consents?" meme on the internet, because they are the only people who find child slavery desirable. They are despised by any person who understands their views and is not a psychopath.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

That is kind of nuts tbh, I had not seen any of his stuff on having a child market...

I like Taleb's stuff on scale. You can be a communist within your family, a socialist in your neighborhood, a social democrat in your county...until you get to libertarian on a global scale

I like Taleb, even if he is full of it in many ways. Like he does keto, and believes that heavy lifting is anti-fragile. Once you break your back or your metabolism, you become permanently weaker. A lot of logic his just weird and nonsensical. He still makes good points in Anti-fragile and Black Swan.

 

[Fred]

I wonder if there's some liberal depository of seemingly damning quotes that people are drawing from. Whenever I say, "check out Rothbard or Hoppe", I get these obscure quotes thrown back at me (usually WAY too quickly), as if that's a refutation of the person or his entire body of work.
If you had read a little further, you would see Rothbard's caveat, "(Again, whether or not a parent has a moral rather than a legally enforceable obligation to keep his child alive is a completely separate question.)"
Making a distinction between different types of rights and obligations is necessary.
Did you actually read the book?
Rothbard is probably the greatest genius of all-time in the field of economics and, more broadly, human interaction.
That being said, he is wrong about intellectual property... but not much else.

 

[Ashoka]

So, what you mean, ecstatichamster, is that you value them both even though they likely have exceedingly little to do with each other

 

[Steven Bussinger]

I wonder if there's some liberal depository of seemingly damning quotes that people are drawing from. Whenever I say, "check out Rothbard or Hoppe", I get these obscure quotes thrown back at me (usually WAY too quickly), as if that's a refutation of the person or his entire body of work.
If you had read a little further, you would see Rothbard's caveat, "(Again, whether or not a parent has a moral rather than a legally enforceable obligation to keep his child alive is a completely separate question.)"
Making a distinction between different types of rights and obligations is necessary.
Did you actually read the book?
Rothbard is probably the greatest genius of all-time in the field of economics and, more broadly, human interaction.
That being said, he is wrong about intellectual property... but not much else.

You might consider it a kneejerk response.

It is peculiar. I find the idea of such a repository humorous. Likely, these are just canards that get passed around the community, and so everyone knows them after some time. Since these are the only exposure they have to Rothbard, they are easy to recall. Ideological enemies become caricatures, reduced to a few notable (pejorative) features. Every political ideology does this.

When in a perceived stressful situation, energy reserves are precious and need to be conserved. In order to conserve energy, it is advantageous to deal with contradictory opinions or information with a swift moral assassination.

The production of anti-bodies by the immune system to neutralize or eliminate foreign bodies is likely more efficient than using more generalized metabolic resources like thyroid hormone. Prior inoculation against novel information is more expedient than using generalized mental resources like critical reasoning or personal imagination. The most "educated" and "well-read" are the most propagandized.

 

[Ashoka]

The most "educated" and "well-read" are the most propagandized.

Your own knee-jerk response is simply to come to the rescue. This disguised anti-intellectual attitude you hold shows you just speak with your own catalogue of talking-points.

 

[Ben Geldza]

Nice to learn.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

I wonder if there's some liberal depository of seemingly damning quotes that people are drawing from. Whenever I say, "check out Rothbard or Hoppe", I get these obscure quotes thrown back at me (usually WAY too quickly), as if that's a refutation of the person or his entire body of work.
If you had read a little further, you would see Rothbard's caveat, "(Again, whether or not a parent has a moral rather than a legally enforceable obligation to keep his child alive is a completely separate question.)"
Making a distinction between different types of rights and obligations is necessary.
Did you actually read the book?
Rothbard is probably the greatest genius of all-time in the field of economics and, more broadly, human interaction.
That being said, he is wrong about intellectual property... but not much else.

Ok, defend child slavery. Do it. That is what you support after all.

Rothbard is also a pure propagandist, his writings exist merely to provide intellectual cover for predatory capitalism.

 

[Ben Geldza]

Ok, defend child slavery. Do it. That is what you support after all.

Rothbard is also a pure propagandist, his writings exist merely to provide intellectual cover for predatory capitalism.

Capitalism is the best thing

 

[Fred]

Where does he advocate for child slavery?

 

[LeeLemonoil]

Peat recommended Murray Bookchin’s work to me. I haven't read any of his books yet.

Has anyone here?

@ecstatichamster

I didn’t read his books but familiarized with his core principles a few years ago. But I didn’t knew Peat recommends Bookchins work.
But it actually is clear as day that Peat would agree with many a thing Bookchin developed, come to think of it it seems that Peat probably derived much of his ecosocio-political worldview from there.

The Problem is, while Bookchins ideas sound very agreeable to me, you’d need 8 billion Ray Peats or Murray Bookchins to establish such a way of living