Mises Review

Like most readers of The Mises Review, Professor Tushnet is fed up with the Supreme Court. I doubt, though, that his complaint against the Court will have much resonance with most of my readers.

As usual Murray Rothbard was right. In his Classical Economics, he contrasts John Stuart Mill with his father James Mill: "Instead of possessing a hard-nosed cadre intellect, John Stuart was the quintessence of soft rather than hard core,

Frank Michelman is famous among law professors for his acute critical intellect, and his powers of demolition are much in evidence in Brennan and Democracy. 

In 1958, John Kenneth Galbraith assailed American spending patterns. Consumers, he told us in The Affluent Society, spend too much on such fripperies as large tailfins on cars.

I opened Mr. Buchanan's book with trepidation. According to press accounts, Pat Buchanan had shed his cloak as a noted conservative commentator to reveal himself as a sympathizer with the Third Reich and its Führer. 

Thomas Sowell is an excellent economist, but unfortunately this is not enough for him. He imagines himself a philosopher and an expert on foreign policy as well. 

Garry Wills is a man with a mission. He wishes to expose for the falsehood that it is a myth that has bedeviled American history. 

In the course of a largely appreciative review of Murray Rothbard's An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought, David Prychitko, who has long positioned himself as an anti-Rothbardian, makes a few mistakes worthy of attention. 

This is not a bad book, but almost every major thesis in it is wrong or unproved. According to our author, human society depends to a large extent on "social capital." 

There is nothing like a good target to get a writer going, and the contributors to this excellent symposium have found a very worthy target indeed. 

I approached this book with considerable sympathy. Murray Rothbard rested much of his Ethics of Liberty on the foundation of Thomist natural law. 

As soon as you glance at this book's dedication, you know that you are in for it: "To the sacred memory of Abraham Lincoln." Mr. Black long held court at the Yale Law School: according to Philip Bobbitt's fawning introduction,

There are two ways to read Mises's great treatise. Most readers will, I fear, find the book too much to attempt to grasp systematically. Not everyone feels like reading a nine-hundred-page book straight through.

Roberta Modugno has analyzed the work of Murray Rothbard from the standpoint of her professional specialty, the history of political thought.

Professor Mahl's excellent monograph helps clear up a historical mystery. As everyone knows, Americans before Pearl Harbor opposed, in overwhelming numbers, entry into World War II. 

Sanford Lakoff admires Max Lerner greatly. As a student of Lerner's at Brandeis University in 1949, his "adulation soon became obvious and made me the butt of jokes." 

 Austrians have sometimes been very hard on Lord Robbins. He at one time embraced the views of Mises and Hayek; and in The Great Depression, he presented a resolutely Austrian theory of the business-cycle.

Edmund S. Phelps is no right-wing extremist. Quite the contrary, he stands at the center of Keynesian orthodoxy in economics. 

Usually I review a book by getting into the swing of things at once. What is the book's central thesis? and (if possible) How is that thesis mistaken? are the questions that occupy me. 

The key to Paul Gottfried's brilliant book may be found in note 44 of Chapter 4. Here he remarks: "This original Weberian notion [of a tyranny of values] is most fully developed in Carl Schmitt's controversial essay Die Tyrannei der Werte.