Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T02:54:23.363Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rothbard's Austrian Perspective: A Review Article

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2009

Paul B. Trescott
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Murray Rothbard's untimely death has deprived the economics profession of one of its most colorful, iconoclastic and therapeutic personalities. He helped to inspire a legion of dedicated followers to make Austrian economics a significant element in the intellectual and moral spectrum of economics. The Austrians never wavered in their criticism of Soviet-style economic organization, correctly arguing that such systems were working badly. Even so, can a sub-set of economists who eschew mathematics and econometrics win respect from the mainstream? The volumes under review (Rothbard 1995) certainly make a valiant effort in that direction. Rothbard's survey of economic thought extends from “the beginning” to Karl Marx and C. F. Bastiat. Occasional references indicate more was intended. Rothbard is critical of the “Great Man” focus of much of mainstream history of economic thought, and even more critical of the “Whig interpretation,” which sees the evolution of economic thought as progress toward the current near-perfect ideas and practices of our leading graduate schools.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , Fall 1995 , pp. 316 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ekelund, Robert B., and Hebert, Robert F.. 1990. A History of Economic Theory and Method, 3d ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Eltis, Walter. 1993. Classical Economics, Public Expenditure and Growth, Edward Elgar, Brookfield.Google Scholar
Gilmour, Robin. 1967–1968. “The Gradgrind School: Political Economy in the Classroom” Victorian Studies, 9, 207–24.Google Scholar
Johnson, Paul. 1988. Intellectuals, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1848. Principles of Political Economy, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1965.Google Scholar
Rothbard, Murray N.. 1995. An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought I, Economic Thought before Adam Smith, pp. xvi, 556; $99.95, ISBN 1-85278-961-1; II, Classical Economics, pp. xvi, 528; $99.95, ISBN 1-85278-962-X; Edward Elgar, Brookfield, Vermont.Google Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1817. Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, E. P. Dutton, New York, 1943.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Modern Library, New York, 1937.Google Scholar
Sockwell, W. D. 1994. Popularizing Classical Economics: Henry Brougham and William Ellis, St. Martin's Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Say, Jean-Baptiste. 1827. A Treatise on Political Economy; translated by Prinsep, C. R., edited by Clement, Biddle, 3d American ed., John Grigg, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Stanfield, James Ronald. 1995. Economics, Power and Culture, St. Martin's Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viner, Jacob. 1963. “The Economist in History” American Economic Review, 53, no. 2, 05, 1–22.Google Scholar
Wild, John. 1953. Plato's Modern Enemies and the Theory of Natural Law, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar