/lit/ - Literature

>>18156778
Not literature

>>18156778
Hayek

>>18156778
Mises is more intelligent, but he's also dishonest and much of his work is anti socialist subversive propaganda.

>>18156778
Keynes. He's the only one still taken seriously by actual economists. The "debate" is mostly just between internet schizos and funded by oil interests

>>18156805
this.

>>18156816
There's nothing wrong with being anti-socialist or making propaganda against socialism. Socialism is retarded. I think we have enough failures to rule it out as a legitmate worldview. Only trannies and druggies take Marxism seriously.

>>18156825
It is his fault anarchism and libertarianism are terms now associated with liberalism instead of socialism. Also his fault people use the term capitalism to refer to the current economic system, before him it was a term that had very limited use(like Weber used it) or it was used by socialists to mock industrialism/laissez-faire.
He's also responsible for the most annoying, stupid think tank readers in existence.
If an idea is stupid you just need to be honest and you will destroy it anyway.
Human Action is an absolute classic that will be underrated because of his bad conduct.

I know this is a troll question, but maybe you should ask whether you are idealist or realist?

>>18156780
>Human Action
>The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money

>>18156886
What is the difference between those two?.

And what does it have to do with Mises and Keynes?.

>>18156819
>actual economist
Stiglitz think companies exploit consumers

>>18156864
>It is his fault anarchism and libertarianism are terms now associated with liberalism instead of socialism.
Oh no...
Why is that a problem exactly? Most "An"coms or "libertarian" socialists aren't actual anarchists or libertarians because they dropped the anti-coercion and voluntary association definition of anarchism for the false "anti-hierarchy" one.

>>18157028
Because he subverted terms on purpose to make them more inacessible.

>>18157040
I guess not in this case because he would be correct in associating anarchism and libertarianism with liberalism instead of socialism. Or at least more correct.

>>18157050
Yes

>>18156778
Keynes is popular mostly on the left but you won't find them being to honest e.g. military spending has been probably the most reliable source for employing excess resources and (indirectly) keeping investment up but you'll find a lot of people thinking you can just defund that and get benefits (a lot on the left will even use old anti-Keynesian "crowding out" arguments in certain contexts).

Mises is really big with libertarians obviously but if you want to be a clever troll there's a lot of incoherency there. Is that sort of society based on private contracts they want also compatible with the sort of price flexibility they claim makes a market society work? What does the recent "success" of cryptocurrencies mean for imposing a gold standard?

>>18156978
Not that guy but idealism would be holding to an ideal perspective on how things should be and realism taking things as they are and exploiting things from there. Mises type of liberalism was based on the international gold standard and free trade. He was pretty straight forward on the impossibility of a world of floating currencies and saw nationalism as a barbaric relic which should disappear as the world civilizes... but gold has only become more demonetized since he died and nationalism still ebbs and flows. Keynes would be more of a "pragmatist" than a classical liberal since he completely changed opinions whenever it suited the situation e.g. he defended free trade when he thought it was good and denounced it when he thought it was bad.

>>18156778
Any Discord server about keynesianism?

>>18158985
https://disboard.org/servers/tag/scatman-john