Thursday, June 21, 2012

Oh, so it's not just now?

Richard Ely in 1887 on what happens to economists that stray fom the straight and narrow:

"Any deviation from the straight and narrow path laid down by them ["orthodox" economists] was deeply damned. Was there not, indeed, that never-failing refuge of incompetence and malignity, the epithet "socialism," ready to hurl at all offenders?"


  1. It's amusing because generally I find socialists well informed of both their side's arguments and also of the common arguments of libertarians and leftist supporter of capitalism. On the other hand, most supporters of capitalism have a very narrow view of what socialism is, its history, and the history of capitalism.

    1. I go back and forth between preferring the narrow definition and calling everyone else something else, and recognizing that in the nineteenth century especially there were a lot of very different socialists.

      The latter is probably more responsible, but it risks opening the door for irresponsible accusations and assumptions.

    2. Socialists are well informed of the arguments for capitalism??? Really?


All anonymous comments will be deleted. Consistent pseudonyms are fine.