Saturday, 3 September 2011

Just to be clear......on neo-liberalism and Ron Paul

Neoliberalism is a label for the market-driven approach to economic and social policy based on neoclassical theories of economics *(see below) that stresses the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade and relatively open markets, and therefore seeks to maximize the role of the private sector in determining the political and economic priorities of the state. The term is typically used by opponents of the policy and rarely by supporters

neoclassical theories of economics:
The term was originally introduced by Thorstein Veblen in 1900, in his Preconceptions of Economic Science, to distinguish marginalists in the tradition of Alfred Marshall from those in the Austrian School.

"No attempt will here be made even to pass a verdict on the relative claims of the recognized two or three main "schools" of theory, beyond the somewhat obvious finding that, for the purpose in hand, the so-called Austrian school is scarcely distinguishable from the neo-classical, unless it be in the different distribution of emphasis. The divergence between the modernized classical views, on the one hand, and the historical and Marxist schools, on the other hand, is wider, so much so, indeed, as to bar out a consideration of the postulates of the latter under the same head of inquiry with the former." - Veblen
So, according to Veblen, whom coined the phrase, the Austrian school is indistinguishable from neo-classical.

So neo-classical includes Austrian school (mises, hayek, rockwell etc) of which Ron Paul is a supposed fully subscribing member.

Therefore......Ron Paul as an Austrian is a neo-classicist, which crudely means a neo-liberal.

So why is he offered as a candidate against neo-liberalism? Because he isn't. At least not in any coherent way as expressed by his cheerleaders, such as Alex Jones and Mike Rivero.

No comments: