Death to the Keynesian Insect That Preys on the Life of the People!

by Henry on December 6, 2009

I’m a bit hesitant to link to this (as I’m not an elderly right wing economist, I’m worried I might be accused of “belittling the other”), but it’s super-duper awesome! Charles Rowley, familiar to long time CT readers for his “ruminations”:https://crookedtimber.org/2003/07/20/worldly-philosophers/ on the corruption of the profession of political science (we’re all in hock to the federal government) and his “bizarre attack”:https://crookedtimber.org/2009/07/28/anger-and-greif/ on Avner Greif (see “here”:http://www.springerlink.com/content/e4477g1412453627/ for Greif’s reply), “now has his own blog”:http://charlesrowley.wordpress.com/. It’s everything that one might possibly hope for. My favorite so far is the bit telling us that:

bq. the massive fist of free market ideas once again will smash through the false consciousness of Keynesian dreams, and voters will rush to elect leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan

‘cos it’s a level of rhetorical styling that I haven’t seen since I used to pick up the newsletter of the Maoist International Movement (the title is a bit of a misnomer; the cadres all seem to hang out in Ann Arbor, Michigan) when I was a graduate student in statistics boot camp. But the Obama=Sykes, Larry Summers=Fagin “post”:http://charlesrowley.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/youve-gotta-pick-a-pocket-or-two-boys/ runs a very close second:

bq. The question that remains to be answered is whether the futures of Larry and Barack will mirror those of Fagin and Sykes. Will some fortuitous Oliver chance across the paths of these shady characters before they can fulfill their dreams while destroying the market system that created the wealth that they covet? Will both meet the dreaded drop in 2012, if not before? Or will pocket-picking accelerate to the point at which Atlas Shrugs and the wealth-creators remove themselves from the economy, leaving those who cannot create wealth to share in the economic collapse of a negative-sum game as the United States begins a long decline into economic mediocrity?

This is a man who was surely born to blog. Update your bookmarks.

Update: “The Fun Continues”:http://charlesrowley.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/a-great-deal-of-ruin-in-a-nation/

bq. As private investment is increasingly crowded out by government expenditures, and as entrepreneurship is dashed by national socialist policies – as indeed was the case in the US throughout the the first two administrations of FDR – the once-powerful engine of the US economy will sputter and then die. Unlike in 1945, in 2019 the United States will not bestride a shattered world economy like some hegemonic Colossus. Rather its _state capitalist,_ [HF: emphasis in original] social market economy will struggle just to maintain existing living standards, while newly-emergent, vibrant market economies demonstrate to a former master the awesome power of laissez-faire capitalism.

If Tyler Cowen hadn’t confirmed that this blog was the genuine article, I’d suspect it of being a clever fraud perpetrated by an old-school lefty – the ‘Staatsmonopolistischer Kapitalismus=Nationalsozialismus’ identity has fallen out of fashion since the collapse of the GDR, and it is rather odd to see it being revived as a defense of free markets.

{ 65 comments }

1

P O'Neill 12.06.09 at 6:54 pm

Sadly, and I am sure unwittingly, Ben Bernanke is becoming a liberal fascist in the sense defined by Johan Goldberg in his recent book.

Yes, this is gold.

2

Smaug 12.06.09 at 7:22 pm

Wow. I’m kinda impressed; sort of a literate tea bagger. I guess delusion isn’t simple a function of ignoring one’s education. Are we sure this isn’t a Poe?

3

Tiny Hermaphrodite 12.06.09 at 7:39 pm

I think I’ve dislocated my jaw.

4

Aulus Gellius 12.06.09 at 8:31 pm

Is that really not a parody? Really?

Actually, my favorite is the one with the fable of the fox who lost its tail; I got a bit confused about which country was which fox, but one thing is clear: the US is the “alpha-male fox.” I don’t think Aesop really got into vulpine gender dynamics and herd behavior, but in international relations, that’s what’s important.

5

David 12.06.09 at 8:56 pm

How did a kook like that ever get a job at George mason? Do’t they worry about being seen as a school full of goofball randite hacks?

6

kid bitzer 12.06.09 at 9:03 pm

george mason *is* a school full of goofball randite hacks.

that’s not a bug, to their minds; that’s their niche and their pitch.

7

cockburn 12.06.09 at 9:22 pm

“The lower organs of the party in Britain must make still greater efforts to penetrate the backward parts of the proletariat.”

8

Alex 12.06.09 at 10:00 pm

So Atlas could shrug and the US “begins a long decline” economically? I don’t think this guy has been paying attention for the past 2 years. There was this thing called the worst recession since the Great Depression. And another thing called 10% unemployment. And a final thing called not out of the woods yet. So any right-wing morons who want harp on that Obama may cause the US to decline: the decline was already happening before Obama. Obama’s the one people elected to fix the decline.

9

Brett 12.06.09 at 10:04 pm

I thought Going Galt-mentum was in full swing already. Good to know I was wrong! That means I still have time to sell Going Galt insurance for pets (see also). Most useful for large animals that won’t fit in the Gulch, or older pets that probably won’t survive the trip.

10

Substance McGravitas 12.06.09 at 10:23 pm

voters will rush to elect leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan

Ew, gross.

11

yabonn 12.06.09 at 10:30 pm

I discovered at nearly the same time Mr Rowley’s blog and the suprised kitty.

And this simultaneity make sense, in a mysterious way.

12

Maurice Meilleur 12.06.09 at 10:46 pm

Substance: Yes; what makes it weird is that it’s an actual wish and not a grammatical error.

13

Maurice Meilleur 12.06.09 at 10:57 pm

So wait: did the Euro-foxes lose their tails by choice or necessity? And what exactly is the tail: a strong manufacturing sector? Healthy infrastructure? Innovation and tech sectors? Because the Euro-foxes seem still to have those tails. Who’s the tail-less fox, here, anyway? God, this much stupid makes my head hurt.

14

will u. 12.07.09 at 12:41 am

Hmm. I think “tail” might be a euphemism, in the same way “Schwanz” is in German.

15

Neil B 12.07.09 at 1:46 am

But you can’t really even have a “free market” with a modern monetary system, since the money supply is regulated by the government in a way that involves decisions, winners and losers, making of more money and how to allocate it etc. Raising and lowering interest rates puts people in and out of work, distorts borrowing decisions, etc. Indeed, the government has to “interfere” to fairly make up for the interference of the money policy. It is no more fair to ignore the hardships caused by interest rates than to ignore the hardships caused e.g. by a government damn project etc. Also, new money has to be allocated and therefore one’s earnings can’t just be a consequence out of “market decisions” as if it were people trading goods for metal coins.

Then there’s the government institution of legal personhood for corporations, a favor (not really a right as SCOTUS falsely implied) that deserves to be paid for. I could go on; don’t need to around here I guess.

Some libertarians act as if we could do without even that basic governmental framing, and therefore the excuse to counter-meddle. But things would hardly work. In practice, the fake-libertarian conservative faction promotes the withholding of the regulation but hides the initial grand meddling (which includes not only money but the assignment of private estate claims, no more inherently worthy than the government they dismiss away.) So if “taxation is theft” then so is rent. For big fun, get the royal libertarians into arguing with Georgists.

16

Justin_Anderson 12.07.09 at 1:57 am

Rowley is the geriatric version of Alex Tabarrok. Or he is David Henderson.

17

Fr. 12.07.09 at 2:07 am

Just wait until someone launches a #FakeCharlesRowley channel on Twitter.

18

Martin Bento 12.07.09 at 3:05 am

Fr. would the fake one sound sensible?

Neil, sure, but are you going to take up those arguments with this guy? It would be like debating wildlife conservation with Yosemite Sam. I don’t think this is the thread for serious discussion.

19

marcel 12.07.09 at 3:05 am

Neil B:

a “government damn project”? Don’t you mean a “goddam government project?

20

Michael Harris 12.07.09 at 6:34 am

@ #17/#118

I cannot imagine a #FakeCharlesRowley Twitter account that would sound more beserk than the real one.

21

dsquared 12.07.09 at 7:22 am

How did a kook like that ever get a job at George mason?

this is sort of like asking “How did a chef like that ever get a job at the Cafe de Paris?”

22

ejh 12.07.09 at 8:23 am

Re: #7 – fantastic, but I ‘d want to see documentary evidence that such a directive actually existed and neither Claud nor Alex were making that one up. (Ditto the “brothers and sisters, join the Communist Party” story.)

23

Alex 12.07.09 at 9:25 am

The prose is remarkably like an economics version of Pastor Swank.

24

Tim Wilkinson 12.07.09 at 11:22 am

will pocket-picking accelerate to the point at which Atlas Shrugs

Or is there still time for the Robin Hood of Coercive Tax-Accounting to ask instead “what has it got in its offshore accountses?” and pull the carpet of capital flight from beneath the bookless Sybils of idle threat? And having transfer-paymented the Cash of the Titans from the Flightless Pickets of Dubai-less tantrum to the Swollen Coffers of Demand-Pump-Priming, will the Unsuperhumans of Capital, Labour and Land still cry out to the Heavens of Milton (F.) and, keening, rend the garments of supply-side withdrawal-syndrome? Or could they instead use the Form Book of Non-Price Signalling to pick dead certs in a loserless race of welfare-based allocation, leaving the price-setting prestidigidators of greenfingered speculative random walking to respond in masterly ubermensch style to the Incentive of Sudden Destitution by redoubling their entrepreneurial efforts, luxuriating in the Ritzian freedom to shrug into existence new and wonderful civilisations – perhaps on the Douglo-Adamsian planet of fuck-off-and-don’t-come-back?

25

matthias 12.07.09 at 12:25 pm

In live oratory, speech is ennobled by the mere enthusiasm with which it is delivered. I used to think this didn’t apply to prose, but Rowley is giving me doubts. It’s a pathos-bathos double whammy, like the best parts of I Am Charlotte Simmons.

26

alex 12.07.09 at 12:25 pm

L. Sprague de Camp, thou should’st be living at this hour…

27

ajay 12.07.09 at 1:31 pm

24: with a few more ampersands, that would read like William Blake Does Free-Market Economics…

28

kid bitzer 12.07.09 at 2:08 pm

24 is good. very good.

i read something like that in a dutch book one time, but i could never really see the payoff.

29

bianca steele 12.07.09 at 3:37 pm

Will some fortuitous Oliver

Um, yeah. Dickens said he would, didn’t he?

30

rea 12.07.09 at 4:18 pm

Will both meet the dreaded drop in 2012, if not before?

It’s amazing how many of our friends on the right seem to think that the first black president ought to be hanged. I am certain this in an unfortunate coincidence, and that no racism is intended–oh, of course not.

31

JoB 12.07.09 at 4:37 pm

At least he’s upbeat on “Continental Europe” in his latest blog entry!

32

Malaclypse 12.07.09 at 5:05 pm

This is truly a sublime and funky new blog.

33

Colin Danby 12.07.09 at 6:30 pm

24 is lovely.

If God hadn’t meant us to snark, why did He give us Randians?

34

Brautigan 12.07.09 at 6:49 pm

the massive fist of free market ideas once again will smash through the false consciousness of Keynesian dreams

I have seen absolutely no evidence that Lawrence Summers is a Keynesian.

Seriously, the “stimulus” plan has almost exclusively focused on increasing the money supply, which is pure Chicago-school monetarist policy, rather than stimulating demand through government hiring/purchasing, which would be the Keynesian response.

No matter. The failed monetarist response will be called “keynesian”, and thus will poison the well for real demand stimulus for the foreseeable future.

35

mds 12.07.09 at 7:12 pm

the massive fist of free market ideas once again will smash through the false consciousness of Keynesian dreams

Ooh, another Bulwer-Lytton contest? So soon?

“The massive fist of free market ideas, having been dipped into the inkwell of truth, smashed its way through the Keynesian false consciousness like rock through paper in that game that children play.”

The failed monetarist response will be called “keynesian”, and thus will poison the well for real demand stimulus for the foreseeable future.

Indeed, I’d almost suspect it was deliberate. See also how the near-collapse of the global “free market,” thanks to right-wing deregulatory policies has empowered right-wing free market parties in Europe and the US.

36

BJN 12.07.09 at 7:23 pm

You guys are wrong. THIS is the best article on his blog

37

Anderson 12.07.09 at 7:23 pm

But you can’t really even have a “free market” with a modern monetary system, since the money supply is regulated by the government in a way that involves decisions, winners and losers, making of more money and how to allocate it etc.

Ah, but that’s because we haven’t heeded Dr. Ron Paul and gone back to the gold standard, which seems like a shoo-in for a future Rowley post.

38

Barry 12.07.09 at 8:25 pm

Henry, how the f*ck does George Mason hire such a dweeb? Was he once actually competant, and deteriorated, or do they really not care?

39

Anderson 12.07.09 at 8:31 pm

Barry, George Mason also employs David Bernstein, Ilya Somin, and Todd Zywicki (all of Volokh notoreity). Their standards are not stratospheric.

40

roac 12.07.09 at 9:31 pm

like rock through paper in that game that children play

Rock covers paper. Or is that part of the joke?

41

roac 12.07.09 at 9:32 pm

Arrgh! Paper covers rock. Excuse me while I slink away.

42

Donald A. Coffin 12.07.09 at 9:40 pm

Neil B (#15)–One fairly strong and persistent strand of attack on the Federal Reserve is that we should simply go to a system of privately-issued currency. In fact, googling “privately-issued currency” returns more than 3 million hits. Some of these are, in fact, publications in peer-refereed journals (and, to be fair, a lot of that is in economic history), but there’s also a lot of comtemporary proposals to eliminate the Fed and allow private issue of bank notes. (There’s a strand of this that also calls for 100% reserve banking, but, since that involves some form of regulation, it’s sort of a left-wing aspect of a right-wing fringe.)

And (as Anderson@#37) notes, this doesn’t even take occount of the gold bugs, like Ron Paul. Or, somewhat more interestingly (because he’s at least somewhat more knowledgeable about the history of banking and things monetary), Jim Grant (who just last week wrote a long article for the WSJ advocating a return to gold.)

43

Aulus Gellius 12.07.09 at 9:45 pm

Anderson: no, I’m sorry, say what you will about David Bernstein (much less Ilya Somin), at his most insane he is not insane enough to write a blog like that. This is something truly exceptional, and George Mason needs to be given special credit, far beyond what they have received in the past.

BJN: that is pretty great. I had thought there was something really inspiring about the subheading “just another WordPress.com blog.”

44

Salient 12.07.09 at 11:31 pm

the massive fist of free market ideas…

Let not your right hand know what your left hand is doing.

…once again will smash through the false consciousness of Keynesian dreams…

We won’t been able to witness this, because the fist is invisible.

“like rock through paper in that game that children play.”

Applause.

“If you had not lost your own tail, my friend,” that fox said, “you would not be giving us this advice.”

Yes, McCain is such a fox.

“it’s super-duper awesome!”

I don’t know… he takes himself much too seriously for that. And there are insufficiently many exclamation points in the text, which lack is not quite compensated for by the funniest part: the klunky third-person self-citations, e.g. This bad outcome was entirely predicted in the book co-authored by Charles K. Rowley and Nathanael Smith and published in September 2009 by The Locke Institute in association with the Institute of Economic Affairs.

But I did like the passage

Let us hope that the Founding Fathers structured the Constitution sufficiently well as to block the political manipulations of this dangerously narcissistic Manchurian candidate who actually succeeded in misleading the electorate of this once-great nation as to his true intentions.

A little flat, but almost hilarious. I think my favorite word in that sentence is “actually.” Had it said, for example,

Let us hope that the Founding Fathers, those wise titanic Atlases on whose uplifted Constitution our government and greatness have been built, structured that Firmament of their toil sufficiently well as to block, as a riot shield does block both the bullet in flight and the splatter of vomit, those political machinations, those abominable manipulations, those schematic calculations, of that dangerous Narcisuss of Manchuria who now threatens to wrest each golden apple from the mighty soil of American prosperity and thieve away that very seed of wealth that has been misplaced into the ground before his feet by an open-eared electorate misled into the whirlpool cesspit of socialism by the Hopeful song of mermaid voices’ lying lyrics, a song sufficiently smooth and couth to mislead this once-great nation down the drain of its demise!

…that would qualify for awesome.

45

Substance McGravitas 12.08.09 at 1:04 am

Via Boing Boing:

Steven Landsburg was chosen by the economics department at Oberlin College to be an outside examiner to “determine who among its top graduating seniors should receive an honors degree.” He posted the written exam, which consists of 10 questions, to his blog.

http://www.thebigquestions.com/2009/11/20/the-honors-class-part-i/
http://www.thebigquestions.com/2009/12/04/the-honors-class-part-ii/

46

Joshua Holmes 12.08.09 at 3:46 am

See also how the near-collapse of the global “free market,” thanks to right-wing deregulatory policies has empowered right-wing free market parties in Europe and the US.

The Democrats are a lot of things, but a “right-wing free market party” is not among them.

47

Zamfir 12.08.09 at 8:16 am

Substance, those links leave the weird feeling that behind the jokey tone, the guy actually believes that the world works like that and that other people do well to think about it in such a way.

48

Adam Roberts 12.08.09 at 1:58 pm

Fagin and Sikes. It’s ‘Bill Sikes’, not Sykes. Or perhaps he’s thinking of Eric.

49

ajay 12.08.09 at 3:17 pm

48: I find that sort of careless error can really detract from someone’s authority.

50

Marc 12.08.09 at 5:59 pm

Another example of the genre: Stanley Fish has also written a glowing review (here ) of Sarah Palin’s ghostwritten autobiography It’s hard to choose a favorite line, but my favorite is in his intro – where he goes to a used book store (the Strand) and takes the lack of Palin books there as evidence of elitist liberal bias. His assertions that it doesn’t matter whether things in the book are true, and whether Palin actually wrote them, are close runners-up.

51

alex 12.08.09 at 6:28 pm

Fish’s review is only ‘glowing’ in the sense that he points out that this book is a very successful performance of the image Palin wishes to project to the people she wishes to project it to:

“Do I believe any of this? It doesn’t matter. What matters is that she does, and that her readers feel they are hearing an authentic voice.”

It seems to me, apart from the occasional infelicity of his style, that he has pretty much nailed it there.

52

alex 12.08.09 at 6:30 pm

[BTW, Fish’s nailing it here is worthy of note, of course, because it is so rare these days. He isn’t who he was when he was Morris Zapp.]

53

Substance McGravitas 12.08.09 at 6:33 pm

54

Marc 12.08.09 at 6:51 pm

Thanks SM.

Fish:

“When I walked into the Strand Bookstore in Manhattan last week, I headed straight for the bright young thing who wore an “Ask Me” button, and asked her to point me to the section of the store where I might find Sarah Palin’s memoir, “Going Rogue: An American Life.” She looked at me as if I had requested a copy of “Mein Kampf” signed in blood by the author, and directed me to the nearest Barnes and Noble, where, presumably, readers of dubious taste and sensibility could find what they wanted.”

Yup, he’s not tweaking the pointy-heads at all there. The Strand is mostly a vendor of used books and specializes in rare books, and it’s in Manhattan. The tenor is right up there with his summary:

“It is the voice of small-town America, with its folk wisdom, regional pride, common sense, distrust of rhetoric (itself a rhetorical trope), love of country and instinctive (not doctrinal) piety.”

The bit where he claims that autobiographers can’t lie about themselves (even when they don’t actually write the book) nails something for sure; I think the target is Fish. The review to me is like reading a deadly serious textual analysis of a Hardy Boys book. I found it hilarous, by accident. Your mileage may vary, but reading this as anything but an enthusiastic endorsement of Palin is tough to justify.

55

alex 12.08.09 at 7:09 pm

How do you read the part where he says “Do I believe any of this? It doesn’t matter.” He’s right: whether you, or I, or anyone else in the pointy-head community gives a flying shit about the contents of this awful book is irrelevant, because it’s designed for a different kind of person to find awesome, and they are, in large numbers. And in that sense – the sense of it being a text with a purpose, and clearly succeeding in that purpose – it isn’t an awful book at all, alas.

56

Tim Wilkinson 12.08.09 at 7:38 pm

It hasn’t nailed what you say it’s nailed, at all. Maybe it doesn’t matter what the pointy heads think, but if it did, Fish would be doing a great service to the Palin cause.

He may pay about a bulldog’s worth of lip service to the fact that the book is a (lucrative) positioning exercise, but the obvious fallacy in autobiographers cannot lie because anything they say will truthfully serve their project, which, again, is not to portray the facts, but to portray themselves (viz., redefining the subject matter doesn’t remove the possibility of lying – in this case by misportraying oneself) causes or enables him nonetheless to endorse the book’s message uncritically:

Do I believe any of this? It doesn’t matter. OK so far so disingenuous. But then: What matters is that she does.. Oh she does, does she? And if : …and that her readers feel they are hearing an authentic voice sounds archly knowing, it’s again followed by I find the voice undeniably authentic, and even the really insulting (yes, I know the book was written “with the help” of Lynn Vincent, but many books, including my most recent one, are put together by an editor).

As he continues, the blurry remnants of ambiguity resolve into unequivocal endorsement: there is still a hint of dispassionate reporting in it is the voice [as] of small-town America, with its folk wisdom, regional pride, common sense, distrust of rhetoric, but when he slips in (itself a rhetorical trope), it already sounds jarring amidst such enthusiasm for the message.

And that’s the last real sign of scepticism. By the time he gets to it is the voice of a politician, of the little girl who thought she could fly, tried it, scraped her knees, dusted herself off and “kept walking.” we’re being told it really is the voice of an actual (if metaphorically so-called) little girl, just as it is of an actual politician.

The rest has lost any sense (if the idiotic argument suprissima left any room for such sense) that the intended message and the good old actualité might diverge at all. From the ability to absorb defeat without falling into defeatism, is the key to Palin’s character. It’s what makes her run in both senses of the word, all the way through to as she runs, she achieves equilibrium and hope: “We’ve been through amazing days… [enthuse enthuse, madly]…nothing is hopeless.”, not only is the message clear, but it’s God’s honest truth:

America can’t be stopped. I can’t be stopped. I’ve stumbled and fallen, but I always get up and run again. Her political opponents…should take note. And not just through an interest in expressionistic autobiography, but because ‘America’ Palin really is so sympathetic and so wonderful, and just so…unstoppable.

I don’t know anything about his previous persona, but from what I’ve come across, he sure talks a load of crap these days.

57

Anderson 12.08.09 at 7:53 pm

I don’t know anything about his previous persona, but from what I’ve come across, he sure talks a load of crap these days.

He hasn’t changed.

while *newly-emergent, vibrant market economies* demonstrate to a former master the awesome power of laissez-faire capitalism

Like, oh … China? “Socialist” Europe? Antarctica?

58

Jon H 12.08.09 at 9:25 pm

Smaug wrote: “Are we sure this isn’t a Poe?”

I find ‘Poe’ to be vastly overused. I rather rue the day it was introduced. You can’t have a decent comment thread about a net.kook without a dozen people calling ‘Poe’, no matter how clearly genuine the kook is. I find it tiresome.

Just Say No To Kneejerk Poe-calling.

59

Tim Wilkinson 12.08.09 at 10:01 pm

BTW (at the risk of giving Fish more than his due allotment of attention) the above @56 shouldn’t be taken to concede that autobiographers cannot lie because anything they say will truthfully serve their project might be viable if the project were described as, say, ‘self-revelation’ rather than ‘self-portrayal’. I mean, call me an anal-autistic philosopher, or whatever you like, but I’m pretty sure that autobiographers can lie, and it would take some pretty fancy footwork to convince me otherwise.

Thus Fish: the truth the genre promises is the truth about themselves — the kind of persons they are — and even when they are being mendacious or self-serving (and I don’t mean to imply that Palin is either), they are, necessarily, fleshing out that truth.

Apart from the fact that ‘being mendacious’ sounds very much like ‘lying’ to my fusty old ear, the idea that in autobiography you can’t lie because in attempting to do so you are always revealing something about yourself is, shall we say, defective.

First, it assumes that the reader takes a forensic rather than a communicative attitude to the text (something Fish evidently doesn’t do); second, it entails that the fact-checkers poring over every sentence are an essential part of gathering the evidence required to identify lies and thus to understand the text properly – and are therefore very much “to the point”, contrary to the conclusion of Fish’s argument; and in any case, third, it very obviously confuses intention (communication of some falsehood) with effect (revelation of some different truth), AFAICS relying on sheer chutzpah to get away with it.

60

Salient 12.08.09 at 11:08 pm

Regarding Fish’s review, I got as far as “I headed straight for the bright young thing who wore…” and gagged and winced and gave up. But kudos to those of you who soldiered on and read it through.

You can’t have a decent comment thread about a net.kook without a dozen people calling ‘Poe’, no matter how clearly genuine the kook is.

Besides, I already conclusively verified the indubitable veracity with rigorous investigative research.

“I am the real Charles Rowley.”

61

Salient 12.08.09 at 11:20 pm

If Tyler Cowen hadn’t confirmed that this blog was the genuine article…

Hrm. Missed that update.

For the record, I am not intentionally systematically obscuring the contribution of Tyler Cowen in establishing that Charles Rawley does indeed blog at that wordpress account, in order to enhance my own reputation or damage his intellectual property, and my failure to mention Cowen in the post above should not lead you to overlook his work. But if Rawley wants to excoriate me in Public Choice over it, I resignedly accept my fate.

62

Anderson 12.09.09 at 2:27 am

You are excellent, Salient.

63

Zamfir 12.09.09 at 8:32 am

Cause I am Charles Rowdy, yes I am the real Rowdy
The other Charles Rowdys are just imitating
So won’t the real Rowdy now please stand up?
Please stand up, please stand up?

64

Eli Rabett 12.09.09 at 2:37 pm

Denial Depot for the soft sciences, but at least we now have our candidates for best blogs of the year in two categories

65

David 12.10.09 at 1:42 am

Jacob Weisberg is putting in an offer on Stanley Fish right now, I bet.

Comments on this entry are closed.