The world is drowning in contradictions. Politicians speak of peace while maintaining arsenals. Economists discuss growth while ignoring the underlying mechanisms that produce it. Yet, buried beneath the noise, lies a simple truth that our predecessors understood better than we do: economics is not about money, GDP, or quarterly earnings reports. Economics is the study of how human beings cooperate peacefully to improve their conditions.

Politicians will be heartily applauded for saluting American’s soldiers today. But if citizens had better memories, elected officials would instead be fleeing tar and feathers. Politicians have a long record of betraying the veterans they valorize.

Zohran Mamdani won the November 2025 election, becoming the first Democrat Socialist Shia Muslim mayor of New York City.

November 11 (Veteran’s Day) in the US was once known as Armistice Day, the day set aside to celebrate the end of the modern era’s bloodiest war (up to that time). In his essay “World War I as Fulfillment: Power and the Intellectuals,” Murray Rothbard discusses the war as the triumph of several Progressive intellectual strains from the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The following is Chapter 44 of The Irrepressible Rothbard. The article was originally published September of 1993. 

This year the Nobel prize in economics was awarded to Joel Mokyr, Philippe Aghion, and Peter Howitt for having explained how innovation drives economic growth. According to the laureates, Mokyr in particular, the period of Enlightenment set the foundation for the Industrial Revolution and sustained economic growth. Note that the period of Enlightenment gave birth to industrial capitalism—a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, especially property rights, in which all property is privately owned.

Professor Hülsmann’s rejoinder to my earlier reply is, as always, elegantly written and guided by the spirit of collegial debate. Yet, despite its rhetorical polish, I must disagree on several points, particularly where his argument rests on empirical conjecture rather than on praxeological necessity.

The age of social media has made it easier than ever to spread misconceptions and misdirection. Bad arguments seemingly go through seasons like the flu. One idea currently in-season is that artificial intelligence is uniquely damaging to the environment. Accusations abound against AI’s impact on our environment, emanating both from popular consciousness and academic institutions.