Encounter Magazine Online

Rafe reminds us that the entire archive of Encounter magazine is online. While Encounter, like the Congress on Cultural Freedom, was a CIA project, it still managed to publish a number of important and influential essays by Hayek, Popper, Polanyi, and other classical liberal scholars. (Use the search box.) A few highlights:


  1. I am happy to see that the writers for and readers of this site are enjoying the full-run archive of Encounter magazine (posted to the web in December 2011 at Unz.org), and the ideas of some of the magazine’s signature contributors. You might also enjoy the Wikipedia entry for Encounter, which I (save for the earlier stub of its first three paragraphs) finished and posted online on August 31, 2012, and for which the judges of the first Unz Historical Research Competition awarded me, much to my grateful surprise, First Place.

  2. At this point in Hayek’s career you can seriously see his statist tendencies seeping through. He suggested that Reagan’s military expenditures were good for policing the world and preventing a nuclear war. All this did was allow the US to print more money, create a larger debt which we are paying for through inflation, just to watch the berlin wall fall and communism end. The end of communism came because of the government starving its people, and spending the money on unnecessary things like a military state. It was a battle between central banks is all, somehow the FED got away with their tactics. Perhaps Hayek was too far away in Britain to understand any of this, but Rothbard never lost his realistic touch. He really let Reagan have it, and for good reason. His policies were devastatingly statist. It’s sad to see certain economists lose their credibility at certain points in their career like this. Rothbard wrote some very extreme things at the end of his career when he was trying to win over conservatives, but thankfully they were huge missteps in theory like this one Hayek’s. I think at this point Hayek was delving into positivism. This was only a predictable outcome of a man not willing to fully embrace Austrian theory, and by this I mean praxeology. He was a good economist for most of his career, but not exceptional like Mises and Hayek. Forget the Nobel Prize he won, it was handed out by a central bank.

Leave a Reply