The status and reputation of Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626) is one of the great puzzles in the history of social thought. What had he actually accomplished to warrant all the accolades? Essentially, he was the metaempiricist, the head coach and cheerleader of fact grubbing, exhorting <i>other</i> people to gather all the facts.
In their eagerness to eliminate from history any reference to individuals and individual events, collectivist authors resorted to a chimerical construction, the group mind or social mind.
One by one, Mises discusses and dispatches the pillars of progressive dogma: government spending can create jobs for the unemployed; the service motive is better than the profit motive; government choices are superior to individual choices.
F.A. Hayek, in a forgotten article from 1941, observes the tragedy that "men of science and engineers" may "frequently be found leading a movement which in effect merely serves to support the unholy alliance between the monopolistic organizations of capital and labor."
Pictures of the Socialistic Future tells an engrossing story about a socialist paradise that swiftly degenerates into a societal dungeon. It was originally published in an English translation in 1893—which adds immeasurably to its resonance.
If there is anything that government is actually good at doing, it is destroying things. Strangely, love for this destruction has become a popular cause, revealed in the push for "sustainability" and the banning of technologies that improve our lives.
The Wikipedia entry on the real-bills doctrine advances the controversial proposition that banks can increase the quantity of money without diminishing the purchasing power of each unit. I will refer to it as the Sproul doctrine.
Nature does not generate peace and good will. The characteristic mark of the “state of nature” is irreconcilable conflict.
Hayek noticed that the British habit of proclaiming compromise to be ingenious is an excuse for closing the eyes to unpleasant facts. If there is anyone who is not entitled to put his trust in the genius for compromise and for muddling through, it is the modern planner.
What matters for individuals is not whether they are employed as such but the purchasing power of their earnings.
