The Division of Intellectual Labor in Austrian School Economics
On March 24, I will be speaking to the Austrian Scholars Conference, which is sponsored annually by the Mises Institute. I will be speaking on the "godfather" of central planning in American history, Lester Frank Ward.
This annual event brings the scholars from around the world to listen to presentations by other scholars. Yet these are not meetings that will in any way advance somebody's march down a tenure-track professorship. They are only for scholars who are interested in ideas. You would be surprised how few college professors are deeply interested in ideas. They go to meetings of their professional peers, but those without tenure are trying to get better job offers, and those with tenure do more schmoozing than taking notes at the lectures of other professors.
The Mises Institute recognizes that the future belongs to those who present their ideas to scholars, intellectuals, college students, and even high school students. But the Mises Institute concentrates on presenting high-level videos, books, and articles for intelligent laymen to read. The tremendous advantage that Austrian School economics has is that Austrian School economists write for people outside of academia as well as inside. Their materials can be understood by somebody who has not received a bachelor's degree in economics or higher. There are not a lot of graphs. There are virtually no mathematical formulas. In this respect, it has a competitive advantage against all schools of economics that are advanced primarily by professors. It does not have any advantage among university faculties, but it has a distinct advantage among businessmen who read, which is a limited group, undergraduates, and people who are interested in ideas.
Lew Rockwell started the Mises Institute in 1982. The timing was perfect. The Foundation for Economic Education was in disarray. Leonard E. Read founded it in 1946. It was Austrian School-related. His health had been declining for years. FEE was on life-support. Then Read died in 1983. His replacements were not able to get full cooperation from the Board of Trustees, which was divided. There was no clear vision of what FEE should do. FEE was in disarray for the next 25 years.
During that time, the Mises Institute displaced FEE as the major source of Austrian School ideas for the general public. With the development of the Internet in 1996, the Mises Institute gained a tremendous advantage over FEE, which took a decade to get its website functional. Today, FEE has a good website, and its articles reflect the traditional target audience of FEE, which is not professors. But FEE had to play catch-up from its decades in the wilderness.
Read did not want FEE to have any presence on a college campus, which created an opportunity for the Mises Institute. It was initially located on the campus at Auburn University. It was loosely connected with the economics department. This is no longer the case, which is good for the Mises Institute. It is in the physical shadow of Auburn University, which is located right across the street, but it is not in its institutional shadow. This was vital for the development of the Institute.
This is the division of labor at work. FEE still does not target professors. The Mises Institute does. But it also does a good job assisting advanced graduate students and undergraduates. It looks to the future in terms of the development of Austrian School ideas, not just popularizing an existing body of material.
Today, there are nonprofit foundations on the Right that do target academics and also the general public, but these organizations are not exclusively Austrian in outlook. If we are talking about Austrian School economics, the Mises Institute is the primary institution for developing Austrian School economics and also popularizing these ideas among literate adults. It does have occasional programs for high school students, but this has never been primary.
THE ONE AND THE MANY
No single organization can do well in all markets. The only organization that may attempt to do this is a small organization that has little influence. It seeks converts anywhere it can get them. As movements mature, if they grow larger, innovators must specialize. They must pursue a narrow segment of the market. It is safe to say that any movement that does not reflect this kind of institutional specialization is either barely getting started or on its way out.
With the development of the Internet, it is now possible for any innovator who professes any worldview to begin to position himself in a particular market. If he tries to be successful in every market, he is going to fail. But he can begin to present his case to a small group of disciples.
Almost all of these attempts will fail. In Western Europe in the late 19th century, there were probably 3,000 active revolutionaries, but Lenin was the only one who ever pulled off a successful revolution and institutionalized it.
Any movement that expects to extend its worldview into the general population has to appeal to everybody in the population. If you expect people to adhere to your ideas, you had better be a part of a broad movement that has a long-term goal for persuading the masses, but has no overall strategy. Any group with a strategy for converting the world is delusional. This can only be done by specialization. There must be an overall unity of vision, but with decentralized institutions to work on implementing this vision. There has to be specialization. This is basic to extending the division of labor. There should be a prevailing philosophy of causation, and this theory should apply to every area of life. It should appeal to everybody in the society. But no single organization has the resources available to accomplish this.
CONCLUSION
If you intend to serve in the trenches of a movement, you should decide now which part of the battlefield can best put your skills to work.
Every outfit wants your money: the most marketable commodity. But not every outfit wants your opinions. My advice: start low on the rung. Show up at the meetings. Set up the chairs. Stay late. Take down the chairs.
If you are there every time, the local branch will become dependent on you. That is your ladder of advancement. Voice your opinions only after the outfit recognizes you as a person who shows up when it rains.
Boring? You bet. But it works.