Episode
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 พ.ค. 2024
- Philosophize This! Clips: / @philosophizethisclips
Get more:
Website: www.philosophizethis.org/
Patreon: / philosophizethis
Find the podcast:
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2Shpxw7...
RSS: www.philosophizethis.libsyn.org/
Be social:
Twitter: / iamstephenwest
Instagram: / philosophizethispodcast
TikTok: / philosophizethispodcast
Facebook: / philosophizethisshow
Thank you for making the show possible. 🙂
I studied Hayek, Mises and Friedman when I majored in Econ. Now, I’m deemed a racist. Why?
it's just politically convenient, I doubt most people saying that have ever even heard of them
Unless you took a History of Economic Thought course, I don't see why you would study Hayek, Mises and Friedman.
@@raymondoftoulouse3355 majored in economics. we studied economics theory.
probably because you are? The work of hayek ultimately gives big corp the upper hand which involves heavy exploitation. Maybe try connecting it with race and how most capitalist states are set up. Political science graduate here.
@@val305346 the role of government is to provide a healthy environment for the free market to prosper and protect that environment.. thus ethics laws and a military. Adam smith outlines this role in the wealth of nations, Hayek reidratareis it. Big corporations will ultimately do what benefits them and if left unchecked can lead to exploitation , but that’s not based on racism. It’s based on profit.
The first sentence shows a worrying bias. Is he really a racist for being an economist who agrees with Hayek and freedman? And your last sentence shows why. Political science as taught by universities today is finely tuned indoctrination, and that goes without say.
Beautiful exposition. Thank you!
Great episode. Thank you.
You make this unbearable existence just a tad bit better Everytime you make one of these and I'll be forever grateful.
why so nihilistic?
Go listen to Simone De Beauvoir episodes on what she said about nihilists!
Thanks for uploading this. I'd say that i'm left leaning but reading 'The road to serfdom' and listening to this great summary and analysis of the book has definitely helped me to reflect and critique my original beliefs.
How you feeling about it now?
U can b left leaning socially and right leaning economically.. adam Smith never outlined the necessity of racism or sexism in the the wealth of nations lol
Human Action by Mises is great as well.
It’s good to be critical of your beliefs, but you should understand that the overview of leftist economic ideas outlined here is simplistic at best (if not intentionally misleading and biased), and totally disregards schools of left leaning economic thought which understand the importance of market systems.
@@yoosh9034 Yes as someone who used to be very laizze faire, after more knowledge and wisdom I realize that balance is good. Hell even taxes are necessary today in order to stave off inflation.
I really like your approach to different philosophies. Although I don't agree with Hayek I now have a deeper understanding of his ideas.
heroes' heart
what dont you agree with if you dont mind me asking? im keeping in mind this is almost a year old comment.
What exactly don't you like?
I'm totally convinced
Agree, this should be what we all heer to hear. Come your Guys! IT'W Q
Missing your podcasts podcat! Hope you are OK and well Stephen West.
Hayek was the greatest of all Times!
A visionary man
He was Liberal in that era when people were moving away from it but
He was ignored and his name became completely silent but after that....
He saw fall of keynesian economics
He won Nobel prize
He saw USSR dissolve a year before his death!
He got fruit of his patience and hardwork
He predicted the rise of Amazon? Far out! ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 he predicted the fall of socialism and collectivism
would you do Hans Hermann Hoppe's argumentation ethics that he derived from a combination of Habermas' discourse ethics and Mises' praxeology? or "Marxist and Austrian Class Analysis"? i think either would be really cool ideas to check out!
Woohoo new video
I'm watching from newest to oldest videos. I have a BA from University of Denver English literature and philosophy. Do you think this is a good strategy for understand the content.
Excellent upload. I recall Romney mentioning Hayek by name when speaking to a room of potential voters (who remained potential voters lmao)
fast eddie pulling a fast one. *all of them?* you can read peoples' minds? name drops shouldn't affect your emotions or impress at all, so maybe you're right, his voter base was easily impressed.
hayek is ok but bastiat is the one who dismantled socialism.
Strangely enough only in the US the education system is shit. In western & northern Europe nearly 100% of kids are in public schools and top all rankings.
This can be for many reasons. More specifically it might boil down to actual methods employed for teaching rather than the system of private vs public. Such was not the case even 20 years ago maybe
Exactly!!
I know it’s not philosophy per se, but could you make a video on Pierre Bourdieu or Frantz Fanon, please?
The Economancer has a video of Bourdiue
*The service economy is part of the road
To serfdom as we are to “sell ourselves” instead of a product.*
Good piece, as usual - thank you.
Hayek was very influential in Margaret Thatcher's policymaking.
Hence why she was such a disaster.
@@Oners82 but without her Britain would be current Venezuela.
@@Oners82 throwing off 3 million people from their government jobs is a disaster in the short term but is of much greater benefit in the long term (10 years and on)
@@Warum.2439
We are still suffering from her neoliberal policies 50 years later you fool.
@@Oners82 can you directly attribute that? If so how?
thx
Do one on Emil Cioran please!
Just finished "The Temptation to Exist" and I am still not sure what I just read. It was like hyper self aware trolling essay. The last chapter was worth it though.
Considering the responses on this video so far... Am I the only one who listens to this and thinks... "Hayek, buddy... You're taking all of the worst flaws of capitalism and are projecting them onto planned economy."?
Amazing as always! Without saying anything about Hayek’s actual work, I guess Hayek was then the first person to basically say “socialism is when the government does stuff” lol
he never said that. HE says socialism is when gob owns the means of production. He even says that goverment can help people get to a minimum life standard so they can get on there foot
@@cidagus1518 it was just a joke but yeah you are right, though I guess at least from that perspective, it does leave out a whole second half of socialist thought - of libertarian socialists, mutualists, Luxembourgists, anarcho-communists/collectivists, egoists and syndicalists. tbf
Socialism ultimately leads to government doing stuffs in practical life
So he isn't wrong if he said it though
I’ve lived in a neoliberal capitalist society my whole life. I don’t know what else to call it but a “road to serfdom “
So pathetic
Which country is that?
while on my ipad sipping starbuck. It's terrible.
@@Boihkp12 uh im sure china probably has Starbuck's, and people there have smart tech, I suppose oppression doesn't have to be that obvious as well ofc, but the luxury of even being able to afford a starbucks isn't incompatible with suppression of individuals - if anything it may help to keep people pleasured enough not to change anything about the system, if ya see what I mean? :/ :)
@@tomio8072 damned, those bougeoisie developing a hegemonic culture that propagates its own values and norms so that they become 'common sense' values of all and thus maintain the status quo. We need revolution I am telling yah!
This is great, sent it to all my socialist friends. 😂
Mr. West, another great work. Could i ask you a favor? I am an academic of social and political studies in Brasil, and i consider your vídeos as influential in my work. Could you add the source of your research in the vídeo description from now on? It will be of great value for me and for others! Thank you so much
I do love your work, but selfishly wish you would find an illustrator/collaborator to help visualize your points. I especially wish this was so because your way of driving home a point is so accessable to laypersons.
Though I can sympathize with the extra work in approving illustrations, say, if someone doesn't understand the term *layperson* and what an animation of that might become.
Love your work, you are much appreciated.
J H That would be Great!!!
Donate money through patreon and maybe he'll have the cash to pay for an illustrator.
You'll have to dig deep though, because those illustrators are not cheap.
Besides, if you manage to build pictures in your mind from the words he says, you might not even need an illustrator.
Besides besides, his content is so mega concentrated and distilled, that you have to listen actively. Unlike with Harry Potter audiobooks, this content is rich as F, so there is absolutely no shame in listening to the content even thrice.
JA= basic economic argument for freedom of business model is potentially very important legal theme.
10:00m We don't need a centralized planning for the economy. It is a self-organizing system.
And on the subject of language:
The Tyranny of Words by Stuart Chase
I'd like to buy one of your titanium licence plates!
🤩
8:30 *facebook, google, and 10+ others are typing...*
Sorry I'm not very knowledgeable in this field, but haven't these ideas inspired neoliberalism as we know it? "Competition leads to innovation", "we don't want government to interrupt" etc?
Yes. Hayek lived in a very different world.
@@slartibartfast2977 do you think he shouldn't be seen as a villain in history?
Neoliberalism is different from classical liberalism because one require discipline and the other runs off of impulsion.
@@DjPjX how he's villain? Lol he talked about people's freedom. People's Liberty. How is that wrong?
U need to explain this actually.
The concerns of Hayek are very relavent to todays situation.
If marxists tend to examine history through the lense of class struggles and improvements in the means of productions, etc. libertarians tend to examine history through the lense of inflation. Their philosophy of history can basically be summed up like this : « All wars are inflationnary, therefore no empire can last. The life cycle of an empire is the same as the life cycle of its money. » Furthermore libertarians are not boot-lickers, quite the opposite. Quoting from an article I’ve read recently.
« The Fed has always been a scam to cheat the middle classes, but the lesson of income redistribution is less well known than the connections between the Fed and price inflation and the business cycle (which themselves are not widely understood). Even though mainstream economists will sometimes admit of the negative impact of inflation on real wages, few if any are willing to admit that there are beneficiaries as well as losers. Indeed the Fed's low-interest policy not only encourages spending and borrowing, it discourages the one thing that best helps people raise themselves into higher economic classes - saving. Therefore it should be clear that the Fed is systematically working against the interests of the common American.
Of course the major beneficiary of the Federal Reserve's inflation is government itself, but, in addition, its policies have driven a wedge into the income scale that greatly favors those at the very top to the disadvantage of all of us below. Its policies of inflating the money supply, keeping interest rates low, and bailing out those who lose in subsequent financial crises have been a big boon for all of those in the upper echelons of banking and finance. Not only has the Fed made their primary input (i.e., credit) cheaper, it has greatly reduced their primary business concern (i.e., risk of loss). This explains the extraordinary profits generated in financial markets. »
I think there’s a huge misunderstanding between the two camps (marxists and libertarians). - If you had to read one, just one libertarian article, just to give a try, I’d recommend « War and Inflation » by Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr. It completely blew my mind. Of course it’s filled with cringey references to socialism = statism and so on, but the meat of it is gold.
"Propaganda" the title of a book by Edward Bernays?
Yes, absolutely, but then there must be a common investment in psychiatry that is not nosological. That. Most individuals are, in fact, using astronomy, as Adorno said, spell bound by economists unlike Hayek, who is an Astrologer.
#Canada and Trudeau
Philosophize This do a video on the Dark Enlightenment.
"Socialism is any system where the government exercises significant control over the economy" lmao, it's literally 'Socialism Is When the Government Does Stuff, and the More Stuff It Does, the More Socialister It Is' but unironic
The government does a lot that is not in the aim of controlling the economy. That’s a very unimpressive breakdown of what he meant by that. That’s what you call a straw-man.
In socialism eventually and practically it's the government control only 🤣
Idk which Socialist nation doesn't have a government control
How can u avoid government control in socialist system?
As with the Market we need to include in a theoretical equation of the Macro-Economy the influence that the Media has on Government Policy. The Media influences the Free Market by Advertising. However, the Mass Media via Mainstream News demands that the Government, or rather the Politicians, do something. The Government needs to solve, and only the Government can solve, climate catastrophe, white supremacy, third-world poverty, the covid pandemic, refugee movement, gender and cultural diversity, etc. etc. The Mass Media need something for their 24-hour news cycle. You can't interview the hundreds of business leaders but you can get a 30-second sound bite interview from the President/Prime Minister/Chancellor/etc. for the 6 o'clock news. The symbiotic nature of the Politicians and the Media drives the Economy. In a totalitarian government, the Government/Politicians and the Media are conjointly joined. In a Mixed Market Economy (ie a mix of free-market micro-markets and government welfare socialism) the Politicians and Media are "in bed together" in an adulterous affair. For our society to properly work and stop the road to serfdom, the Media needs to be monogamous and independent. To report the facts as facts, opinion as opinion, commentary as commentary, and stop daily polls. We need a full, free, and independent Press Media. It is a branch of our Economy and our Freedom. Who controls the Media controls the Political Narrative; controlling the Political Narrative ultimately decides who wins Government and consequently the Economy and our Freedom. Milton Freidman mentioned briefly this in his Introduction to the 1994 Edition of The Road to Serfdom, when he said, "Why is it that intellectual classes everywhere almost automatically range themselves on the side of collectivism - even chanting individualist slogans - and denigrate and revile capitalism? Why is it that the mass media are almost everywhere dominated by this view?" The Communists and the Nazis and all totalitarians understand the need for them to control the Media. The founders of the US Constitution thus understood the value of a free press to democracy and viewed it as an important watchdog (or arm) of a free society and the economy, protecting free enterprise, private property, and limited government.
I'm eating VEGAN chicken tenders right now
I definitely appreciate hayeks position, but I can't help but think the great accumulation of wealth, in turn creating immensely powerful individuals who can manipulate markets and propagandize themselves, is not materially so different than the concentration of power he fears a government would have over a centrally planned economy.
Balance and accountability seems to be the true way
What you are probably describing are monopolies, which Hayek is against and stands for the idea of legislation. The existence of market competion is a basic pilar on Hayek point of view cause promotes creativity, inovation, progression,..
Hayek, also in his book states the appearence of a "competitive socialism"(which exists in modern societies) and its flaws due to the impossibility of recieving a lot of production resourses without deciding who to give to, so the competion would just be a scam
Nobody can manipulate the market if he doesn't have the support of government! The cronies are getting fatter it's time to be Hayekian!
A great book. A work everyone in education should read.
I am looking at you, my dear colleague professors! 🤨
Hayek never thought of Google, Amazon, Facebook, or Twitter huh?
no he didn't. Why do you ask that?
If you mean that these companies might have enough data to make economic decisions, than that was a issue Hayek already addressed in "Use of Konwledge" (1945), where he describes that it isn't about the amount of information or access to information, but about the fact that the information does not exists: There is no truth about what prices should be.
@@alexd7466 Hayek said that u don't know what u r doing next
Like in a day u make many decisions but u don't decide them a day before
"The mind can't foresee its own advance" this is epistemology. Data collection is different shit actually. I don't get logic behind correlation of two
Computers can't tell about what will the people do next
Like before going market u don't decide everything, u go u see prices, u interract with seller etc etc etc that's where u have a freedom.
Also planning can't tell value of a product. Price tells and price system can't exist in planning system. How can computer say which product should be used or which is more efficient?
Planning can tell u need to built a hospital in one location, but how many workers u need for it? How many inputs is needed? Etc etc
Planning history has been of wrong allocation. Inefficiency is a big feature of it and therefore Hayek was very much right actually.
Not even the smartest people in the world could effectively plan an economic market, all together. The free market is the ultimate democracy
Without governments, with moral humans, the free market (laissez faire) would take care of itself. The gap between rich and poor would narrow, and many more people everywhere would prosper. Though it would not be a Utopia, it is the only moral system in the world.
He’s gone now I’m sure he’s saying I told you so !!!! We’re not exempt from the destruction of socialism. We were on the road to serfdom . In 2023 it’s right in front of us now , Hayek was right !!!
Hayek predicted Amazon? Far out! :-)
@@schmetterling4477 what Obama now Biden are doing is just what Hayek was talking about he said 20 years it’s more like 40 or so but the rest he got right . Their trying to make this country socialist or totalitarianism, the way Biden uses the DOJ to go after his political enemies . Sad
Why the worst get on top, mmm sounds like Trump, and Wall Street in general. Finance and corporations have led to corporate serfdom... so yeah. So at this point it's a pick your path to serfdom.
You don't have to. According to libertarians slave markets are fair, as long as the pricing is determined by market forces only. ;-)
This is nothing short of mental gymnastics. market economies did not even start till mid to late 1800s. Business cycles didn't even exist till after centeral banks started messing with interest rates. France in 1848. First recorded business cycle 1860. You don't even have free trade till after the corn laws end in the UK mid 1800s.
Nothing he says is factual or make any sense if you look at history.
He actually made the most sense
No doubt things that make sense to people like u like Keynesian economics or Socialism lead to failure always.
Hayek main aim was Liberty and he believed people are very much capable to decide their life.
Was he wrong about boom and bust cycle?
Was he wrong about knowledge problem?
Was he wrong about abolition of central Bank monopoly?
Or was he wrong about Competition?
Was he wrong about cronyism?
Hayek was right about majority of things actually and that's what makes him the best.
I love this podcast, however this episode was so un-critical of Hayek's incredibly critique-able ideas that I feel like I have to re-listen to all the episodes I like to ensure I actually like them.
I thought the purpose of this was to understand not critique. Either way, how does one properly critique without first empathizing and understanding the opposing perception?
It was the government that produced the internet. Also the foundation of the science that produced all of those other things.
discodespot what the hell are you talking about
And government used it for war and spying.
The free market made it what it is.
@@whatdupdoh true. thank god google and facebook and apple and all these other products of the free market don't do any spying.
@@ToaNyroc I picked up on the sarcasm. But agreeing to terms and conditions for a company to spy for advertisement and aligrithims Is different than spying without consent to put you in jail or overthrow govt so they can put in a puppet.
@Jay Blake huh?
What did Hayek ever say about planned obsolescence? When have economists ever advocated for mandatory accounting/finance in the schools?
Language evolved in prescientific times. Does the Sun actually rise?
The issue is most people don't or won't charge. If a superior language is designed most people won't use it. How many people have even heard of Esperanto? The English won't even rationalize spellings.
Double entry accounting is 700 years old. What country makes it mandatory? Economists are technologically illiterate. I asked a PhD economist to explain how an automobile engine worked. Total blank, but he drove a white SUV. Ask any economist the annual depreciation of automobiles in their country.
We are turning natural resources into garbage that economists cannot evaluate because they think prices measure everything. Yeah, they measure how stupid consumers are.
What have you been smoking, Dude? ;-)
@@schmetterling4477
If you point out something erroneous about what I said I consider stop smoking long enough to explain the error of your ways.
Milton Friedman had such bad takes, government did fund most of these inventions through military spending. Military innovations are then funneled through the private sector to be mass produced for public consumption.
beautiful hagiography ... too bad , it doen't work and puts us in our current predicaments . We've put someone who can't understand Hegel in charge of the ideological decay of an entire genereation ... Jeff Bezos says thank you by the way ^^
Austrian economics seem like myopic abstraction. Markets are great tool in theory buy in reality they fall short when over leveraged. A industry can be efficient in its goals but cannot be concerned about its impact on the ecosystem or say an individual who's job it destroyed. Capitalism can't defend itself from greed and power actually makes it worse. A hybrid society seems better.
It all depends on who’s teaching the Econ class. It’s theory. My opinion is a free market is better than central planning.
Plus, USA is meant to be a free country. My opinion
How does a capitalist market get destroyed by greed? Every consumer votes with their money. No one is forced to work or buy from any business. Freedom to choose seems like the most moral system to me.
@@allysagilbreath By rent seeking and monopolistic behavior that doesn't allow composition. It's dark money funding the political class. It special interest writing our laws and policy. It the current k shapes recovery the make the upper 10% very wealthy and the rest nothing. A hybrid system where market can operate freely but with oversight and not monetizing life support resources (water, air, energy, health care).
@@brentroberts5323 how does rent seeking not allow for competition in a laissez faire capitalist market?
I agree that the state (government) is absolutely influenced by special interest and the bankers, and highest bidder writes the legislation. That is why mixed economies always end up growing government so large, they turn in to socialist economies essentially.
Health care is not a human right. If it was, you would have been born with a policy. Governments do not create wealth and they cannot provide for anyone, not even themselves, without stealing from others.
They made up that Nobel prize for economics to give to right wing economists like Hayek
Btw, really liked your channel for all your amazing work on so many other philosophers. But to hear you present Hayek in such a non critical manner really makes me question your intentions. You need to provide adequate counter argument if you are going to present present such politically charged ideology if you don’t want to be dismissed as an alt-right pundit.
An alt-right pundit lol
He does the same for left-wing philosophers, what's the problem?
discodespot I agree that he's not being sufficiently critical here, but I wouldn't dare call him alt-right or anything similar to that. Have you heard his episodes on Marx, The Frankfurt school or the French existentialists? He exhibits a great understanding of many left-wing thinkers in those episodes and throughout the show. I think he's also done a good job remaining neutral and not letting his personal beliefs effect the introductions he's given to these philosophers' ideas. Oftentimes this includes giving the most generous possible interpretation to some idea that might be contradictory with ideas previously discussed on the show.
Although I agree that by not sufficiently criticizing Hayek's ideas he fails to give us the strongest most steel-manned version of Hayek's point of view. But I see no reasonable doubt that his intentions are anything other than educating people on philosophy, and who knows, maybe we get a hard criticism of Hayek's positions next episode.
@@akikoivunoksa635 I agree with you I had to do a step back and think about what was being said I feel as tho a he should have scrutinized hayak but I have heard his Carl schmidt vids and more to know that he is most likely just trying to come from hayaks POV even if its flawed. I love the work keep it up
@@akikoivunoksa635 I think this isa great channel and admire it but if you actually go back and listen to the Frankfurt School coverage e.g. the Eros episode, about 20% of it does cover a pro-capitalist counter to their critique. I think for balance it might have been right to the same thing here - especially the extent to which Hayek was contradictory and much less libertarian and more managerial and bureaucratic than generally presented, even just within RTS itself
Is this a serious philosophy channel or just a right wing fan boy? Has to be the most shallow review I've ever heard and it's sometimes hard to tel where the quotes start and end as the narrator seems so sold...