Pete Boettke notes on The Austrian Economists blog that the IHS recently prepared, for a conference, a postcard showing the IHS version of Mount Rushmore, showing Rothbard, Isabel Paterson, Rand, and Hayek. Boettke says, “I guess if I had my Mount Rushmore I would put Mises, Hayek, Nozick, and Friedman. Who would be on your Mount Rushmore?”
Interesting question! Mises and Rothbard are the obvious choices among the deceased. Candidates for the other two slots abound… Calling Misesian Photoshoppers!
{ 37 comments }
Just throwing out some ideas here, but what about Karl Hess and Ayn Rand?
Is this imaginary Mount Rushmore a private property?
Mises represents the economic case for freedom. Rothbard represents the philosophical and historical cases for freedom. Rand represents the artistic case for freedom (i.e. her novels, which were well received by both Mises and Rothbard). The final slot must go to the man who represents the political case for freedom – the 19th century’s Ron Paul and the most inspiring writer I’ve ever read (he must have given great speeches too) – none other than Frederic Bastiat.
Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, and Ron Paul. Seriously why do they all have to be deceased. Rand might make an artistic case for freedom, but some of her works aren’t real critically acclaimed (and it’s not simply because of her philosophy). Also, she didn’t write a whole lot on economics, was a little inconsistent in some respects (worshipping the statist space-shuttle launch over the more anarchistic and spontaneous Woodstock comes to mind) and was also a bit of a warmonger too. Isabel Paterson is a noble choice, but I can’t think of any major works of hers besides “God of the Machine”. Simply put Hayek, Mises and Rothbard (in order of least radical to most radical) constitute the “holy trinity” almost of Austrian Economics and praxeology while Ron Paul belongs up there trying to bring these ideas to the forefront, especially through the Internet and also proving to many that libertarianism isn’t simply a bunch of kooks who only want to smoke pot.
Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, and Ron Paul. Seriously why do they all have to be deceased. Rand might make an artistic case for freedom, but some of her works aren’t real critically acclaimed (and it’s not simply because of her philosophy). Also, she didn’t write a whole lot on economics, was a little inconsistent in some respects (worshipping the statist space-shuttle launch over the more anarchistic and spontaneous Woodstock comes to mind) and was also a bit of a warmonger too. Isabel Paterson is a noble choice, but I can’t think of any major works of hers besides “God of the Machine”. Simply put Hayek, Mises and Rothbard (in order of least radical to most radical) constitute the “holy trinity” almost of Austrian Economics and praxeology while Ron Paul belongs up there trying to bring these ideas to the forefront, especially through the Internet and also proving to many that libertarianism isn’t simply a bunch of kooks who only want to smoke pot.
Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, and Ron Paul. Seriously why do they all have to be deceased. Rand might make an artistic case for freedom, but some of her works aren’t real critically acclaimed (and it’s not simply because of her philosophy). Also, she didn’t write a whole lot on economics, was a little inconsistent in some respects (worshipping the statist space-shuttle launch over the more anarchistic and spontaneous Woodstock comes to mind) and was also a bit of a warmonger too. Isabel Paterson is a noble choice, but I can’t think of any major works of hers besides “God of the Machine”. Simply put Hayek, Mises and Rothbard (in order of least radical to most radical) constitute the “holy trinity” almost of Austrian Economics and praxeology while Ron Paul belongs up there trying to bring these ideas to the forefront, especially through the Internet and also proving to many that libertarianism isn’t simply a bunch of kooks who only want to smoke pot.
Mises, Rand, Rothbard and Menger.
I’d settle for a closeup of Stefan Molyneux’s forehead. No blasting necessary, just find a nice broad hill and call it the Big Chatty Monument.
Rand? Are you freaking kidding me? That butch hag? Srsly?
Hayek? What?
If it’s the libertarian Mt. Rushmore, perhaps you should pick actual libertarians. Not an… Ayn Rand – for lack of a better term – and an Austrian conservative.
Hayek was not a conservative. From the horses mouth:
http://www.fahayek.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46
For what? They are not gods nor should they be worshiped as such. I don’t believe they would want their faces carved in some mountain. Promoting liberty through their works is enough of a tribute.
Walter Block, Hans Herman Hoppe, Murray Newton Rothbard and Gustave De Molinari.
Mises would nominate Menger and Bohm-Bahwerk. I suggest Menger, Bohm-Bahwerk, Mises and Hayek
I suggest Caligula, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao — as reminders to the populace of what the naked and unbridled result of statism is.
I have revised my choices. Locke, Mises, Rand, Rothbard and Aristotle. I do not really care if Mt Rushmore has 4 heads or if some people hate Rand (get over it – she converted tons of people to it, and despite personal issues, was consistent and insightful as an integrator of Aristotelian thought and classical liberal tenets.) The above capture Austrian economics, natural rights, classical liberalism/libertarianism, a causal-realist epistemology and virtue ethics. Perhaps Rothbard should be ommitted for Menger, ’tis possible…
I agree with Mathlas. Moreover, I always find it amusing when people who promote individualism and liberty end up inadvertently promoting subtle characteristics of collectivism and hero-warship.
It’s been done, in a way, in _Roswell, TX_ by Smith and Bieser:
http://www.bigheadpress.com/roswell?page=64
Why no Jefferson mentioned? Just because he’s on the present Rushmore doesn’t make his eloquent statement that the government is _elective_ any less important.
Without the concept that the state is elective, what good is the rest?
Maybe because he was a slave owner until the day he died.
An Austrian School Rushmore must have
Menger, Wieser, B-B, and Mises. All others, except perhaps Hayek, are too recent.
A Libertarian Rushmore should have
Herbert Spencer, Auberon Herbert, Lysander Spooner, and Gustave de Molinari.
And throw in Bastiat to this group if you can fit him on the rock.
Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, Harry Browne, and Ron Paul.
Menger, Mises, Rand and Reisman.
“I agree with Mathlas. Moreover, I always find it amusing when people who promote individualism and liberty end up inadvertently promoting subtle characteristics of collectivism and hero-warship.”
Warships are used for collectivist purposes.
Frank Chodorov, Murray Rothbard, Ron Paul, and one left for a future contributor, perhaps one hundred years from now, when property rights are universally understood to be human rights and a classical liberalism society blossoms.
anyone but friedman.
he should be desecrated!!.
that guy , his bad economics, are pretty much responsible for the mess we are in.
olmedo
It is very popular to hate Friedman, but growing up in a very liberal Democratic household, Friedman was my first introduction to the freedom philosophy with his program Free to Choose. He also played a huge part in ending the draft. And in the 1980s he recanted his views on the gold standard. At least when he realized he was wrong, he admitted it, even if he still didn’t understand the real reason.
John Delano,
You are evading a discussion of substance by picking up on a typo. I’ll make sure to return the favor sometime.
Aristotle, Rothbard and Molyneux’s pinky finger.
In my eyes Molyneux is the best anarchist thinker/popularizer/philosopher. If you haven’t devoured his free books at freedomainradio.com you are missing out.
Check out Everyday Anarchy, Practical Anarchy, and Universally Preferred Behavior: A Rational Proof of Secular Ethics.
Aristotle, Rothbard and Molyneux’s pinky finger.
In my eyes Molyneux is the best anarchist thinker/popularizer/philosopher. If you haven’t devoured his free books at freedomainradio.com you are missing out.
Check out Everyday Anarchy, Practical Anarchy, and Universally Preferred Behavior: A Rational Proof of Secular Ethics.
I say, libertarians should destroy the faces on Mount Rushmore, not replace them. That monument was built on a mountain that’s sacred to the Native Americans. It’s basically the Washington Empire giving a giant middle finger to them.
DMajor, sometimes it is fun to make a joke about a typo when it forms another word.
Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Ron Paul.
Tricky: first of all, as a personal statement, I disagree with Mathias on the subject of putting any conservative on a new Rushmore; I don’t care how Austrian economically. I consider myself to be, with a few reservations, a moral libertine. As long as one doesn’t murder; steal; rape; trespass; or lie, then just about anything goes. Personally, I don’t consider abortion to be murder; if one is really committed to eliminating abortion, then addressing its’ root causes is a more productive route. Sorry for the derail.
Let me see: I’d keep Jefferson on there, so that leaves me three heads. How about this: Hayek, Robert Anton Wilson (A better choice than Ayn Rand, if one wants an author up there), and Robert Nozick?
I dont think this subject should even be considered. Young people like you guys get crazy ideas and don’t know what youre talking about. It is not right to place heads on mount rushmore that don’t belong. The people that are up there right now deserve to be up there. They wouldn’t appreciate if people like you were trying to replace historical figures like them with all of this rubish. They earned it up there because they changed America. The carvers would be espically sad because you don’t appreciate all of their hard work.
I dont think this subject should even be considered. Young people like you guys get crazy ideas and don’t know what youre talking about. It is not right to place heads on mount rushmore that don’t belong. The people that are up there right now deserve to be up there. They wouldn’t appreciate if people like you were trying to replace historical figures like them with all of this rubish. They earned it up there because they changed America. The carvers would be espically sad because you don’t appreciate all of their hard work.
Frederic Bastiat, Gustave de Molinari, Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
Bastiat, Mises, Rothbard, and Hoppe
Comments on this entry are closed.