Mises Daily

Michael Prowse of the Financial Times was a Misesian. Then he read Durkheim and saw new light. Martin Masse explains why this now-famous conversion was wholly unnecessary.

The editor of the Wall Street Journal is thinking about the right issues--the ill-effects of the Federal Reserve policy--but he doesn't understand the underlying causes of the business cycle, says Christopher Westley.

Harry Jaffa's new book on Lincoln overlooks the implications of a crucial fact: Some of the the most passionate opponents of forced political union were the radical abolitionists. Myles Kantor explains.

Interventionism is often justified on grounds of "efficiency," as defined by judges and economists who have no stake in the outcome of disputes over property rights. Gene Callahan explains the Austrian view.

The writings of the great French economist explain why the recent conflict with China has ended through diplomacy and peace rather than belligerence and war, writes Llewellyn Rockwell.

Professor Shand was an outstanding economist in the Austrian tradition and a friend to the Mises Institute. His intellectual legacy is built on his two books on the science and morality of market economics. His son offers a tribute. 

In choosing whether tax cuts should be big or small, will the U.S. follow the path of Germany's Ludwig Erhard or of the socialists in Britain? Gregory Bresiger explains what's at issue.

A new book on liberty is an inspiring contribution to the resurgence of the pro-private property intellectual movement. Its replies to Gray, Rawls, and Sen should exert a decisive effect in future debates on political economy.

Think about it: a major motion-picture, "Enemy at the Gates," that dares to lump nazis and communists into one reprehensible leftist dung-heap. Lawrence Reed wonders if he is dreaming. 

He has fallen from grace for failing to inflate. But Greenspan is still wrongly assumed, by everyone but the Austrians, to have god-like powers over the economy. Hans Sennholz explains.