B*llsh*t on Hayek

The leftist tracts on “neoliberialism” are full of it.

Hayek is perhaps the most outstanding critic of the “homo economicus” idea among all mainstream economists — criticisms which had virtually no influence within the Chicago school of economics.  But from Aihwa Ong, professor of Anthropology at UC-Berkeley, we get this:

“At the center of Hayek’s neoliberalism is homo economicus, an instrumentalist figure forged in the effervescent conditions of market competition.  Hayek’s ideas influenced Milton Friedman and Gary Becker .. “

That is from page 10 of Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty.  The book is published by a university press, presumably on the recommendation of peer review. And it is BS, not competent scholarship — something all too common in the academic literature when the topic is Friedrich Hayek and his ideas.

This entry was posted in B*llsh*t. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to B*llsh*t on Hayek

  1. Eric Auld says:

    It’s just such lazy writing. It represents willful ignorance of economics. It sounds like something taken second-hand from an article in People magazine.

  2. Jim Rose says:

    Neo-liberalism is an example of the sustained sneer.

    The Left never enjoyed those old smears as reds and fellow travellers to communists.
    I am surprised that the Left lowers itself so if it really has the superior arguments. No one in the middle – the swinging voter – is persuaded by crude and obtuse insults designed to cheer up those who will vote for you no matter what.

    The old left, the new left and the left over left all welcome crises and recessions because it gives them a chance to denounce capitalism as a failure and on the way out.

    When the economy is strong, the Left brings out their old talking points about capitalist greed, materialism, inequality and, of course, the affluent society tempting men and women to sell their souls for an obscene affluence. Whatever happened to that old prediction of food riots in the industrialised countries by the end of the 1970s!

    Schumpeter was right. They are hanging judges who carry the sentence in their pockets determined to deliver it no matter the indictment.

Comments are closed.