He has an interesting link on Owen here.
I have always found it disappointing that some people lump "socialists" all together and then treat the whole lot of them like they were Marxists. This is a good step in the other direction. It's always seemed a shame to me that worker democracy in the United States especially has been lumped in with Marxist socialism. And this sort of thing is still around today of course. That's worker ownership of the means of production. I have my doubts about a post-scarcity future because I think the moment we get close we'll keep pushing new frontiers, but if we do ever see such a thing we're likely to see much more American style socialism. Big capitalists bankrolling industrial efforts is more necessary in a world of scarcity than of post-scarcity.
The other key point that Bryan makes is experimentation.
This is another thing that bothers me to no end about (some) Hayekians. Experimentation and cautious growth and the gradual evolution of new social institutions is all well and good unless it's (1.) workers' cooperatives/socialism, (2.) Keynesian and other counter-cyclical experimentation in the 30s, (3.) Constitutional evolution, etc.
Oh, but simply ending the Fed is fine.
After a while, you start to get a sense of how much substance is really there for some people. I'm not accusing Bryan of this, and I have emphasized "some" people twice now, so don't get in a tizzy in the comment section.
How Bad Is Pop History of Science?
1 hour ago