2. - What's most interesting about Robin's argument is not just providing the broader philosophical context for the emergence of subjectivism - it's making the connection between that and the relentless anti-socialism of the Austrians. That's the real value-added. That's the point of the specific associations with Nietzsche that Austrians have that some others don't. This was the purpose of the Weiser quote where he said that the whole point of marginalism was to prove socialism false.
3. - Nietzsche obviously has other ideals wrapped up in his anti-socialism and subjectivism that sit uneasily with many Austrians and subjectivists generally. This is where the portion of the essay starting with the problem of "squaring Nietzsche's circle" comes in. Schumpeter does this through what Robin calls the "relocation of politics in the economic sphere" through his discussion of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs are the restless creative force behind real change - the sanitized Austrian ubermensch. This was a particularly good example from Schumpeter:
"There is the dream and the will to found a private kingdom, usually, though not necessarily, also a dynasty. The modern world really does not know any such positions, but what may be attained by industrial and commercial success is still the nearest approach to medieval lordship possible to modern man."The version of this in Hayek is similarly entrepreneurial - dedicated to generating new frameworks rather than fitting into existing frameworks. This, for example, was fairly Nietzschean: "To do the bidding of others is for the employed the condition of achieving his purpose."
4. - Hayek's note to Salazar was... illuminating.
5. - The essay makes me want to know Corey Robin's view of "Why I Am Not a Conservative"
-
Posts
Let's face it, associating anyone with Nietzche is an effort to smear them. This is just another effort to smear Austrian economics. It's only made to look superficially like an actual examination of people's thoughts. It doesn't stand up to any careful analysis.
ReplyDeleteLet's face it, people preface comments with "less face it" when they want to make people who come across those comments feel silly for being skeptical of the comment itself.
DeleteDaniel, I could criticise it in detail, and you know I could. Kevin Vallier already has over on Bleeding Heart Libertarians. But, it would be a waste of time. It's just a hatchet job written by a mediocre Marxist with too much time on his hands. There are better things to do.
DeleteCurrent,
DeleteJust let Kuehn go down this particular rabbit hole. The results should be fun. :)
I've said pretty much what I have to say. Were you expecting some kind of massive implosion? What should be fun?
DeleteHi, Daniel. Thanks for the kind words; glad you enjoyed the piece. I had a question I wanted to ask you about something you wrote, but can't find your email address. Could you email me at corey.robin@gmail.com. Thanks, Corey
ReplyDeleteThe Corey Rubin essay is very disappointing, specially because there are several similarities betweeen Hayek and Nietzsche: both had an evolutionary approach regarding culture and mind, for example. The whole thing about value seems to be an unecessary digression when there are some explicits connections that could be made.
ReplyDeleteThe political commentaries of Nietzsche is also very problematic to wrote about: his writing have a more critical instance of political activity itself, (at least the Politics understood as an autonomous activity) than a vigorous problem with socialism in particular.
I'm neither an Austrian nor a libertarian, but it is obvious (this is one of those times where it is in fact obvious what's obvious) that Robin is trolling Austrians.
ReplyDeleteProbably a little.
DeleteIt's not made to troll us, or it wouldn't need to be so long. It's made for people on his side to agree with.
DeleteI don't see that the two things are really mutually exclusive.
DeleteSo Current, have at it. Anxiously awaiting your in depth, expert, critique.
DeleteSo Current, have at it. Anxiously awaiting your in depth, expert, critique.
DeleteFor what it's worth, Matt Zwolinski left the following comment in the Vallier thread. Make of it what you will:
ReplyDelete"Corey sent me an early draft of his essay over email, and we had a brief conversation about Nietzsche and libertarianism. He said that he thought that a number of libertarians came to their philosophy through Nietzsche. I said that I didn't personally know about any who did. And I know a fair number of libertarians. However, I knew that Liberty Magazine did a decennial poll of its readers, and that one of the questions they asked was about intellectual influences. I didn't remember what, if anything, those results said about Nietzsche. But I suggested that he look there for more info.
So, in his announcement of his Nation essay at his blog, Corey writes the following:
"How many teenage boys, after all, have found their way into the free market via Nietzsche? None, one insider tells me; a lot, says another. My impression is that the latter is right, but good data is hard to come by. Every ten years, Liberty Magazine polls its readers about their intellectual influences. The magazine draws up a list of candidates to vote on. Nietzsche is never on it. Even so, he gets written in each time by the readers. So much so that the editors have been forced to acknowledge on more than one occasion that should they put his name on the pre-approved list of possible influences he might draw more votes than some if not many of the others."
Curious, I followed the links to look at the original polling results. Two of the three survey don't give any specific numbers. But in the 1999 results, Nietzsche is described as having been written in by a bit under 2% of respondents (that is, about 12 people out of 600). Less than Jacob Hornberger, of whom I'm pretty confident Robin has never heard. Yet this is certainly not the impression with which one would have been left had they relied exclusively on Robins' writeup.
It's a small point. But it's indicative, I think, of the way Robin approaches these issues. He began his inquiry with the answer already in mind - Nietzsche was an important source of influence for a lot of libertarians. He looked at the data to find support for this belief and, when he didn't, reported it in a way that makes him sound as though he was right after all."
That's pretty damning.
DeleteI wonder who the second one was that said Nietzsche was a big influence.
DeleteMy understanding is the magazine added Nietzsche because he was so popular - perhaps the other two don't reflect 1999? Seems odd that they'd add him for 2% don't you think?
Anyway, Zwolinski may be exactly right about this but I think LSB is wrong to say it's "damning". Clearly the essay itself didn't make the claim that Nietzsche was a direct influence on a lot of modern libertarians. So what's the big deal (at least in the context of the essay - which is, after all, what I'm writing about)?
The magazine didn't add Nietzsche, they simply noted the write-ins.
DeleteIt is damning; thanks to Hume for posting it. :)
It's not damning at all. Nietzsche was in fact written in all three polls, the magazine noted that he would ranked higher than several names on the list in the second poll, and "highly ranked" in the third poll.
DeleteThis leaves out that in all three polls Nietzche is the second-most written in name. The first is different in all three polls. So, fine, Nietzsche is kind of popular but not uniquely popular among write-ins, and there aren't really all that many write-ins (the ranking is based on both the number and the rating, and people writing in a name rank it highly.) It wasn't really a particularly scientific or thorough survey so it would be foolish for Robin to base his article on it.
Fortunately, he didn't.
"My impression is that the latter is right"
ReplyDeleteBased on what initially? Nothing, it seems.
And congratulations to Robin on trolling--it's been a massive success in wasting everyone's time.
"Deirdre McCloskey makes connections between what advocates like to term "free market economics", subjectivism, and postmodernism all the time and she gets widely (and rightly) praised for making the tie. But when Corey Robin comes along and makes the same argument for a critical cornerstone of later postmodernism people lose it. I don't buy it, guys."
ReplyDeleteYes, but McCloskey is a economist with decades of experience and training. She knows the economics side cold. Does Robin? Not that I know of.