it seems to me that before 1945 laissez-faire ideology was not an especially prominent proponent of "liberalism," whose adherents (following Halévy) often described themselves as "not socialists." It was only the Cold War, when "not socialism" had to be given content, ...
-
Show this thread
-
... that laissez-faire was embraced (outside of certain British liberal intellectuals).
2 replies 0 retweets 14 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @dbessner
Yes and no. Roots of modern attempts to make laissez-faire again salient date to the 1930s, although of course Cold War enormously coalesced and strengthened. Lippmann's Good Society (1937) is important in this.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
Yeah this means defining Hayek and Mises as "liberals" which is a bit ahistorical imo
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Lippmann was always a strange figure
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dbessner
Yeah, I actually don't understand how The Good Society fits in with his other work before and after. But its interesting as a precursor of a lot of post-WWII thinking. And he's clearly a liberal
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Kevin Murphy Retweeted Kevin Murphy
Lippmann was ahead of his time. He was basically the model for today's vox shitposter. (Thread below).https://twitter.com/kcm74/status/719931533960855552?t=pyXKtDhrAPHQHg-6JTWmmg&s=19 …
Kevin Murphy added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yeah, I think that's right, the first of the contrarian liberals. Doesn't reflect well on him.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.