Re: Talking past another and refusing to talk to another at all

["Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John, the issue was not even substantive arguments.  The issue was equal
time to response to a public asccusation of being "wrong".

Below is an exchange oo Hayeck list  censorship between Randall Wray and
me.

Liu:
Yes Randy, as I wrote in my blocked post: Freedom is not a divisible
commodity.  Either everyone is equally
free or no one is free.

Heyekian free marketeers never understood that.

Henry C.K Liu

"Wray, Randall" wrote:

> henry
> very ironic that the hayekians keep their own list closed, but they
dominate the pk list with their anti-keynes
posts and insist on freedom of speech anytime anyone suggests that posts
to pk ought to be filtered.
> randy
>

John Gelles wrote:

>     Henry Liu, adviser to nations, and Peter Boettke, teacher
>     of youngsters in college, are caught in an argumentative trap
>     --set for them by a moderator at the Hayek list.
>
>     For the audience I don't know if any damage has been
>     done. Liu made an argument that appears fairly solid, that
>     the derivatives trade and actions of Alan Greenspan have
>     altered past patterns of predatory enterprise in search of
>     labor, raw materails, component parts and customers to
>     make way for new patterns of financial speculation and
>     fraud.
>
>     Of course Liu may not have said this at all. It is only the
>     current reflection of Liu-thought in a Gelles-head. It would
>     be nice if Liu's thoughts-- that challenge Hayek price
>     mechanism worship-- were expressed often enough for the
>     audience to fully grasp them. And the put-down he received
>     from a mandarin (priest) from the academy has done nothing
>     to help us understand Liu. The mandarin has failed his
>     audience.
>
>     As for trying to understand the mandarin or (any Hayek
>     defender)-- this would be for me as total a waste of time
>     as the mandarin thinks it would be for him to try to
>     understand Liu.
>
>     All is not lost however. The stuff Liu has on his mind,
>     which smacks of important deep thought, could be
>     presented to Legge and Hummel on this list, and to
>     Davidson if he is interested, and we here on pkt could
>     do with it more than Hayekians could in a million years.
>
>     I know how Liu feels. He is a rejected prophet in a
>     forum for metaphysicians to which he was invited.
>     I was rejected by the gang of 8--folks I felt no
>     sympathy for. But the rejection was unwelcome.
>
>     Now I know Liu's is not the last word of wisdom
>     on full employment at fair wages and green economic
>     growth. Nor is it the answer to peace inside China
>     or between China, Russia and the USA. Nor does
>     it reconcile the future of India and China. But Liu
>     does try hard. And these problems will be solved
>     --or there will be no human race to know that they
>     weren't.
>
>     We all have our fixations. Me with the implications
>     of Lerner which I call taxless, debtless, indexed fiat
>     money.  Liu's used to be dollar hegemony--I'm
>     interested to understand if this is still his pet. Legge
>     with business management information systems--
>     maybe, (I'm not really sure John L. is even ficated).
>
>     Hummel is quite wonderfull, like Fonseca, he would
>     teach us all the facts, even the facts about theory,
>     and avoid being sucked into utopianism. What
>     good is an education if it does find utopia? It's
>     not provable that it ain't there. At least as as a
>     state of civilization vastly better than we've had
>     in the past.
>
>     Anyway, Henry Liu:  Do me a favor and try to
>     teach us very slowly why hegemony is the devil,
>     if it is, and about the potential for price calculation
>     using models the way we do for silent propellers.
>
>     I am in full agreement, if you are, that fiat money
>     management systems can give financial strategic
>     planning a long and useful life on the way to
>     an open democratic economy, where production
>     is open to anyone and consumption is constrained
>     by law not unlike the way we constrain sex.
>
>     Free rein for the worst impluses stemming from
>     greed has been tried and found fatal in socialist
>     and capitalist nations.
>
>         John Gelles