He wrote in the Introduction to this 1995 book, "this work is an overall history of economic thought from a frankly 'Austrian' standpoint... This is the only such work by a modern Austrian... Not only that: this perspective is grounded in what is currently the least fashionable though not the least numerous variant of the Austrian School: the 'Misesian' or 'praxeological.'" (Pg. vii) He adds, "leaving out religious outlook, as well as social and political philosophy, would disastrously skew any picture of the history of economic thought... The entire work is longer than most since it insists on bringing in all the 'lesser' figures... I hope that, for the reader, the unwonted length will be offset by the inclusion of far more human drama than is usually offered in histories of economic thought." (Pg. xiii)
He states, "The usury prohibition was the tragic flaw in the economic views of medieval jurists and theologians.Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you?
While much of Rothbard's 'analysis' is somewhat correct none of it is original. Far more of it is a matter of snarky assertion having little to do with facts or analysis and his writing is so wildly biased towards his own political world view as to be rendered useless for any scholarly purpose other than a review of this particular economist and his writing. His dissection of Marx is about half correct though blindingly obvious, and half based on deliberate misstatement of Marx's works or of attributing the works of others to Marx. Don't get me wrong, I'm no Marxist, but it would seem to me to be a simple matter to critique Marx on a far more honest and intelligent basis than this 'economist' has done. The parts of this book which are not tortuously boring are rife with willful misinterpretation of viewpoints that are anything other than far right libertarianism. By and large, this book has been a giant waste of time.