Display:
I still have to work out if this is a fair comment on Friedman or whether it mainly applies to his disciples.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu May 22nd, 2008 at 12:11:25 PM EST
It applies more to the disciples than Friedman himself, but it applies to both, really.

Where's your motherf*%&ing flag pin?
by Drew J Jones (blahblahblah@blahblahblah.com) on Thu May 22nd, 2008 at 01:29:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It applies most of all to the US and Soviet governments. Flawed theories are a dime a dozen. What matters is the endorsement/enforcement by government officials (and, in the US case, corporate elites).
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Thu May 22nd, 2008 at 02:07:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I will be with you here... the disciples did not distort Friedman as much as Darwin disciples distorted Darwin....

Friedman did embrace a propaganda structure besides his books on monetary policy.

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Thu May 22nd, 2008 at 02:24:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Friedman is not Adam Smith, he was alive for most of the period when his disciples were disseminating "his gospel."

As such, his failure to go on the record correcting them amounts to a powerful endorsement of their views.

We allow economists to get away with that kind of behaviour far too often: "They didn't say that really, it was just others interpreting."

That's fine with Smith, Ricardo etc. they weren't around to correct people. But Friedman was and many others are now and they just don't.

If you behave that way in other disciplines, you lose credibility. Why should economics get a free pass?

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Thu May 22nd, 2008 at 07:08:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series
Agriculture
by afew - Aug 7

Anglo Disease
by Migeru - Aug 3