Periods of crisis reveal something unsettling about human behavior. Faced with uncertainty, individuals and institutions alike tend to accept measures that would otherwise be unthinkable. Restrictions on movement, suspension of rights, and centralized decision-making often emerge not gradually, but almost effortlessly, as if they were the natural response to danger.
Accurate words and definitions always matter, however, it is often underappreciated how important this is in the study of history, especially regarding context-dependent words and meanings. A common historical error is anachronism—a chronological inconsistency in which an object, person, or concept is inappropriately retrojected back into a time when it did not exist.
“The number of Federal Reserve policymakers willing to consider an interest rate hike this year rose ... as higher gas prices stemming from the Iran war threatened to worsen inflation in the coming months.”
“This new regulatory framework ... has been officially communicated to regional parties. There will be no return to the pre-war status quo.”
The Wall Street Journal recently ran a commentary by Justin Lahart, according to which the debate among economists regarding minimum wages is still unsettled- after 30 years.
Among the 10 points in Iran’s peace proposal that President Trump has now agreed to use as a basis for peace negotiations between the United States and Iran is a plank that prohibits any more attacks on Iran. That point reminds me of what John Kennedy agreed to in his peace agreement with the Soviet Union to resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis, an agreement that ultimately led to his assassination at the hands of the U.S. national-security establishment.
People readily line up on one side or another of great economic debates. How do they choose which side to take?
This is clearly a question worth asking. I have asked it of myself, and it has led me to being an Austrian and especially a Misesian.
To try to answer the question of why people decide about economics, let’s begin at the beginning, by asking how people decide anything. As a general rule, they rely on emotion, factual observation, logic, or intuition.
