The von Mises institute is wonderful, especially when they stick to economics (Lew Rockwell has been known to say some really crazy shit when he gets off the topic of economics and into social issues...).
I think the point of the article is that if people are weak and value nonproductive or counterproductive activities, this is not the fault of the free market (which merely gives people what they value) but of our culture and educational system (which influence what people value). By criticizing the free market, leftist intellectuals are not actually helping to change the culture in the way they want it moved -- they're merely denying people what they want without offering them anything better. People will not want to read Aristotle merely because you take their Danielle Steel books away from them (to use the article's example; having never read a Danielle Steel book I can make no informed commentary on their content).
Murdering one's opposition is not part of the free market; that's a different issue entirely, and probably one related to the same sociocultural issues that cause people to like vapid media content.
As for solar energy, it gets more efficient every year. 20-30 years from now everyone having solar panels on their house (especially in sunny climes -- solar air conditioning in Tuscon will become practical long before solar heating in Seattle, where there is constant cloud cover and only 8 hours of daylight per day in the winter, does) will probably be commonplace. Right now it's not cheap enough to be in the "clearly superior choice" category.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-11-21 11:19 am (UTC)I think the point of the article is that if people are weak and value nonproductive or counterproductive activities, this is not the fault of the free market (which merely gives people what they value) but of our culture and educational system (which influence what people value). By criticizing the free market, leftist intellectuals are not actually helping to change the culture in the way they want it moved -- they're merely denying people what they want without offering them anything better. People will not want to read Aristotle merely because you take their Danielle Steel books away from them (to use the article's example; having never read a Danielle Steel book I can make no informed commentary on their content).
Murdering one's opposition is not part of the free market; that's a different issue entirely, and probably one related to the same sociocultural issues that cause people to like vapid media content.
As for solar energy, it gets more efficient every year. 20-30 years from now everyone having solar panels on their house (especially in sunny climes -- solar air conditioning in Tuscon will become practical long before solar heating in Seattle, where there is constant cloud cover and only 8 hours of daylight per day in the winter, does) will probably be commonplace. Right now it's not cheap enough to be in the "clearly superior choice" category.