Well, I learned more about this presentation. I have to choose an article, with little or no economic analysis. Then, we analyze it. The analysis has to be about market failure (externalities, monopolies, and information failure), and it cannot include government failure. What should I do, as I want to tell the truth?
So you can't make the argument that government has a monopoly in the markets of politics and law? In regulation and defense?
Bummer dude.
I would expose the most heinous piece of corporatism you could find.
Stuff you can do to further libertarianism (please contribute!)
Well, I have my own think tank. .... Someday it will rule the Earth - in an anarchic way. - Roderick Long
How about a nationalised industry doing poorly? You can feign ignorance about the government's role in it : P
nameless: How about a nationalised industry doing poorly? You can feign ignorance about the government's role in it : P
If he can avoid using certain red flag labels that Statists instantly piss & moan about to arrive at his conclusion, all the better, especially if he asks rhetorically "How doesn't this make sense? If something is wrong in math, you go back & try it again, you don't force wrong math into being right.." Feigning innocence, I find, somehow makes the ignorant listen to you, if you do it correctly.
WARNING: This signature violates Rule 5. Stay classy!
Do exactly that, if it's a presentation you have to make, do it properly. Don't go up and go on some tirade about the evils of the state and the virtues of the market. Perhaps, you're correct, so what? Your class doesn't care, you teacher doesn't care and the IB doesn't care. At the end of the day you need the teacher far more than he needs you. Libertarians really need to know when to pick their battles, tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito, is wonderful, but I hardly think this situation calls for recklessness.
Organise a solid presentation, outline and go through the case for market failure. Don't rush it, take time to read articles and works on market failure and present a solid case. Do your homework. Same applies for the counter argument, study any works from this website or any others you can find, there's plenty of material available on it. Don't rush to any conclusions, don't let your Austrian bias get in the way and make it balanced. This approach has a number of advantages:
When you've done presenting both sides, pose a few questions to the audience that will incline them towards agreeing with you.
"The relationship between libertarianism and conservatism is one of praxeological compatibility, sociological complementarity, and reciprocal reinforcement"
Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe
I agree with GilesStratton. The best debaters are the ones who can make their opponents' arguments as well as the oppents themselves.
My specific suggestion is that you include a sold and complete explanation of the "perfect competition model". If you properly explain this, then showing the "market failure" as compared to perfect competition is relatively easy. It will also make it easier to show the problem with market failure analysis since perfect competition does not exist except as a theoretical construct for modern economists.
It is also important to emphasize the importance of selecting a baseline in market failure analysis. I was sitting in graduate level Economics class with a professor from China. Several students were discussing market failure and complaining about a factory that was discharging toxic fumes that were believed to be killing local children. A tragedy to be sure! The professor pointed out that since the factor began operation in this small village, fewer children were dying because more families had higher income which translated into improved pre-natal care and diet. I am not suggesting, nor was the professor, that the emission of toxic fumes go unaddressed. His point was that sometimes whether a market failure/externality exists depends on what baseline you select. Anyway, good luck on your presentation.!
GilesStratton: Do exactly that, if it's a presentation you have to make, do it properly. Don't go up and go on some tirade about the evils of the state and the virtues of the market. Perhaps, you're correct, so what? Your class doesn't care, you teacher doesn't care and the IB doesn't care. At the end of the day you need the teacher far more than he needs you. Libertarians really need to know when to pick their battles, tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito, is wonderful, but I hardly think this situation calls for recklessness. Organise a solid presentation, outline and go through the case for market failure. Don't rush it, take time to read articles and works on market failure and present a solid case. Do your homework. Same applies for the counter argument, study any works from this website or any others you can find, there's plenty of material available on it. Don't rush to any conclusions, don't let your Austrian bias get in the way and make it balanced. This approach has a number of advantages: First of all, your grade. Your teacher is far more important to you, than you are to him. Get on his good side, even if you disagree with him don't give him any reason to think of you as a fool who doesn't know anything about anything and shouldn't be taken seriously. If you can present a strong case for and against market failure he can't complain. At the end of the day, if you're worried about advancing liberty, you're going to be able to do that far better if you have a good grade in high school and a good degree. If you want to persuade people you're not going to do it without presenting an even case for both sides. Especially not in a class where everybody else is convinced that market failure is the fault of the market. If you want to convince anybody set up the strongest case for market failure you can, and present the best possible counter argument. Don't leave any stone unturned, if anybody has any questions, be fair and answer them without bias. If you present a clear argument both ways and your teacher object, he doesn't have a leg to stand on, he's either going to have to disprove your argument, which he will be unable to do or dismiss you, either way he looks like a fool. You're not going to convince anybody in your 20 minutes anyway, you'll do it outside of class. It's intellectual laziness to stand up there and make a weak strawman for market failure, or worse yet make no argument at all for it, and then to go on what will be perceived as an anti government rant. Libertarians often criticize others of doing that, so don't fall into the trap yourself. When you've done presenting both sides, pose a few questions to the audience that will incline them towards agreeing with you.
This is a really fantastic post, I think I will use this. Thanks.
Write the paper as instructed, then have a paragrah at the end saying, "Of course, this would never have happened if..."
GilesStratton:Do exactly that, if it's a presentation you have to make, do it properly. Don't go up and go on some tirade about the evils of the state and the virtues of the market. Perhaps, you're correct, so what? Your class doesn't care, you teacher doesn't care and the IB doesn't care. At the end of the day you need the teacher far more than he needs you.
No, he doesn't. He doesn't need the faux-approval of state-employed lackeys.
Knight_of_BAAWA: GilesStratton:Do exactly that, if it's a presentation you have to make, do it properly. Don't go up and go on some tirade about the evils of the state and the virtues of the market. Perhaps, you're correct, so what? Your class doesn't care, you teacher doesn't care and the IB doesn't care. At the end of the day you need the teacher far more than he needs you. No, he doesn't. He doesn't need the faux-approval of state-employed lackeys.
Unfortunately he does.
No, he really doesn't.
I hear high school drop outs are renound for getting ahead in life.
I hear there's no such thing as "need". There are only variously-ranked desires. Further, I hear that the state-run indoctrination centers aren't necessary in the first place.
So please: don't confuse your desires with reality. Thanks.
Knight_of_BAAWA:I hear there's no such thing as "need".
Oh I see, you're being pedantic.
Knight_of_BAAWA:. Further, I hear that the state-run indoctrination centers aren't necessary in the first place.
They are if you want to succeed.
GilesStratton:They are if you want to succeed.
No, they're not at that. They're merely meatpuppet factories.
Knight_of_BAAWA:They're merely meatpuppet factories.
Be that as it may one can't do much without a high school diploma. That's the whole point of these indoctrination centres. Perhaps he could drop out and get a job at McDonald's without schooling, but perhaps the most he'd be able to do for the cause of liberty then is to scribble a few anti-state slogans on the burger wrappers. As it stands now, schooling is a must.
I don't get what you're trying to prove, that you're a better anarchist than me because I live in the real world?
KoB doesn't walk on state owned streets. He glides over them.
It appears you have enough advice to make your presentation. I would encourage Economics students who are familiar with or follow Austrian Economics to share, but pick your battles carefully. I have a BS in Agriculture Economics and a JD; I have taught Economics off and on for ten years at a local community college. When I started teaching, I had already rejected Keynesian Economics. I did identify some with Milton Friedman and Richard Posner; in particular the idea that the "law" should strive to achieve "efficiency" in the marketplace. I was still uncomfortable with government intervention as a whole. I identified myself as a "conservative", but rejected the "war" on drugs (without being a recreational drug user) and the "conservative" disregard for the rights of the accussed (without having been accused of a crime). (No drugs, no crime? Yes, its true, but my life is still exciting). I was looking for a more comprehensive school of thought.
After I had been teaching for two or three years, we were having a typical discussion on inflation. An older student who was taking the class as continuing education (so he really did not need me) stood and gave a good explanation about the cause of inflation from an Austrian perspective. Unfortunately he did it in a somewhat condescending manner. It did not turn me off because I was searching for more answers, but I could see in the eyes of my students that he had definitely turned them off. This bagan my study of Austrian Economics and a more determined study of Libertarianism. As I have gained understanding, I have included these concepts in my lectures. I still teach "modern economics" so that my students can play in the game, but I give them a healthy dose of Austrianism as well.
So, speak up, if you are in an Economics class and want to raise counter-arguments on the basis of Austrian principles. Just do it with respect. You never know who may be listening and searching for a better answer.
liberty student: KoB doesn't walk on state owned streets. He glides over them.
Powered by nothing more than a severe hatred for the state,
Do that which brings you the greatest joy. It's only a presentation.
We are the Ewoks. Fighting oppression against the Empire with sticks, stones and furry optimism. Yub Yub!
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap