(no subject)

[unnamed525.livejournal.com]

Comments

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Mill was one of the authors George savages, and with good reason. Yes, there are moments of seeming simple elegance; these are, according to George, followed by breaches in the logic so subtle that it takes a very close reading to even discern.

Don't get me wrong; George makes mistakes himself. But I do think he is dead on in his criticism of Mill and the other classical economists, especially when it comes to the Malthusian argument forgotten today, but all too prevalent in his time (http://peristaltor.livejournal.com/243652.html).

He also points out time and time again the similarity they all share, these classical thinkers; they bow to power, to the accumulated wealth that funds their schools. When one sees the breaks in logic, this is fine. But when there is no perceived break in logic, does that mean that the thinker has not realized on which side of the argument his bread is buttered and made concessions?