What do you think?
Rate this book
Planned Chaos
An essay on the destruction of individual liberty by totalitarian ideologies.
90 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1947
142 people are currently reading
1455 people want to read
About the author
Ludwig von Mises
268 books1,244 followersLudwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (German pronunciation: [ˈluːtvɪç fɔn ˈmiːzəs]; September 29, 1881 – October 10, 1973) was an Austrian economist, historian, philosopher, author, and classical liberal who had a significant influence on the Austrian government's economic policies in the first third of the 20th century, the Austrian School of Economics, and the modern free-market libertarian movement.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
November 12, 2019
If I could start a “Socialist rehab” clinic, this is the book that would be handed out at orientation. Yes, this includes “Democratic Socialism” (here’s looking at you, Bernie Sanders supporters). Von Mises himself would say men like Bernie Sanders have a way with semantics – or changing the perceived meaning of certain terminology. I’ve heard much about Von Mises – both the man and the economist – after diving deeper into the subject of economics.
Von Mises is the leader of the Austrian school. He appears time and again to be THE original source that all the noteworthy libertarian economists draw from – in both the Austrian School of Economics (i.e. Hayek), and the Chicago School (what I would call ‘the Austrian School lite’), i.e. Sowell, and Friedman.
........
“They do not comprehend that profit and loss are the instruments by means of which the consumers keep a tight reign on all entrepreneurial activities. It is profits and loss which make the consumers SUPREME in the direction of business.”
“It is the rule of law alone which hinders the rulers from turning themselves into the worst gangsters.”
“Hitler was not the founder of Nazism, he was it’s product. He was, like most of its collaborators, a sadistic gangster. He was uneducated and ignorant. He had failed even in the lower grades of high school. He never had any honest job.”
“Those fighting socialism do not reject socialism because they envy the benefits the workers could derive from the socialist mode of production. They fight socialism precisely because they are convinced that it would harm the masses in reducing them in the status of poor serfs, entirely at the mercy of irresponsible dictators.”
Von Mises is the leader of the Austrian school. He appears time and again to be THE original source that all the noteworthy libertarian economists draw from – in both the Austrian School of Economics (i.e. Hayek), and the Chicago School (what I would call ‘the Austrian School lite’), i.e. Sowell, and Friedman.
........
“They do not comprehend that profit and loss are the instruments by means of which the consumers keep a tight reign on all entrepreneurial activities. It is profits and loss which make the consumers SUPREME in the direction of business.”
“It is the rule of law alone which hinders the rulers from turning themselves into the worst gangsters.”
“Hitler was not the founder of Nazism, he was it’s product. He was, like most of its collaborators, a sadistic gangster. He was uneducated and ignorant. He had failed even in the lower grades of high school. He never had any honest job.”
“Those fighting socialism do not reject socialism because they envy the benefits the workers could derive from the socialist mode of production. They fight socialism precisely because they are convinced that it would harm the masses in reducing them in the status of poor serfs, entirely at the mercy of irresponsible dictators.”
January 16, 2021
2021-01-16 I first read this little book as a junior or senior in college in the mid-70s. The reason was that I did not have time to read the whole of the book Socialism, for which it was designed to be an epilogue upon the 1947 Spanish translation edition publication. My friend Drew Silva who clued me in to both books said this little book was a great way to get the key ideas for the much bigger book, since I had too little time to digest the bigger book. He was right, it was a great intro... AND left me craving to read all of Socialism, which I did just a year or so later, and which has remained the best book I have ever read, period.
The scope of this little book is pretty daunting, and it certainly is not exhaustive in dealing with the subject matter. But as a great intro it is just about perfect. I highly encourage folks to read this... and if it makes any sense to you at all, afterwards move on to read all of Socialism.
Here are the chapter headings, just to give you an idea of it's scope:
1. The Failure of Interventionism
2. The Dictatorial, Anti-Democratic and Socialist Character of Interventionism
3. Socialism and Communism
4. Russia's Aggressiveness
5. Trotsky's Heresy
6. The Liberation of the Demons
7 Fascism
8 Nazism
9. The Teachings of Soviet Experience
10. The Alleged Inevitability of Socialism
As I mentioned, the book was written in 1947, so some of the topics may seem not too pressing at the moment. But if one gets understanding of the key concepts from the book, and looks at the programs and philosophy of the modern counterparts to the historical individuals, parties and regimes mentioned in the book, one will be very well armed to deal with them appropriately.
Good reading.
The scope of this little book is pretty daunting, and it certainly is not exhaustive in dealing with the subject matter. But as a great intro it is just about perfect. I highly encourage folks to read this... and if it makes any sense to you at all, afterwards move on to read all of Socialism.
Here are the chapter headings, just to give you an idea of it's scope:
1. The Failure of Interventionism
2. The Dictatorial, Anti-Democratic and Socialist Character of Interventionism
3. Socialism and Communism
4. Russia's Aggressiveness
5. Trotsky's Heresy
6. The Liberation of the Demons
7 Fascism
8 Nazism
9. The Teachings of Soviet Experience
10. The Alleged Inevitability of Socialism
As I mentioned, the book was written in 1947, so some of the topics may seem not too pressing at the moment. But if one gets understanding of the key concepts from the book, and looks at the programs and philosophy of the modern counterparts to the historical individuals, parties and regimes mentioned in the book, one will be very well armed to deal with them appropriately.
Good reading.
June 18, 2020
Excerpted from the 1951 book, "Socialism: an Economic and Sociological Analysis," I highly recommend this 83-page book for understanding issues and events in the present. Several topics developed in the book are of special interest to me:
1. Von Mises explains the inevitable totalitarianism and economic failure of all socialized economies, where the market is managed by bureaucrats who become the ruling class. He coined the term "STATOLATRY" for the public reliance on government.
2. Social Democracy/Socialism/Fascism vs International Communism. Communism IS Socialism; it was the USSR/United Soviet SOCIALIST Republics. Only political strategies separated them. Lenin and the Revolutionaries expected the Capitalist West to erupt in Revolution, as predicted by the Marxist "scientific" theory of historical materialism. In Lenin's view, what stood in the way of Revolution in the West was "Progressive" policies of Social Democrats/Fascists, such as Social Security and minimum wage. That is why radicals taking their orders from Moscow formed the ANTIFA opposition groups in Europe.
3. As Fascism and later Nazism arose in Europe, Lenin's revolutionaries opposed them in the streets of Germany and Italy. They were the Anti-Fascists, or ANTIFA. Writing just after World War II, Von Mises clearly shows that Antifa radicals were Communist revolutionaries who opposed Nazis as competitors for leadership in undermining and replacing Western Capitalist democracies.
In a later period (the 1970's and 80's), Antifa was exported to the West and influenced the SDS/Students for a Democrat Society and Black Panther movements. They are associated with opposition to Red Neck White Nationalists or "Nazis." But just like the original Antifa radicals, their real target is Western Capitalist democracies. As revolutionaries, their objectives are total takeover of government, and their tactics are anarchy and terrorism.
1. Von Mises explains the inevitable totalitarianism and economic failure of all socialized economies, where the market is managed by bureaucrats who become the ruling class. He coined the term "STATOLATRY" for the public reliance on government.
2. Social Democracy/Socialism/Fascism vs International Communism. Communism IS Socialism; it was the USSR/United Soviet SOCIALIST Republics. Only political strategies separated them. Lenin and the Revolutionaries expected the Capitalist West to erupt in Revolution, as predicted by the Marxist "scientific" theory of historical materialism. In Lenin's view, what stood in the way of Revolution in the West was "Progressive" policies of Social Democrats/Fascists, such as Social Security and minimum wage. That is why radicals taking their orders from Moscow formed the ANTIFA opposition groups in Europe.
3. As Fascism and later Nazism arose in Europe, Lenin's revolutionaries opposed them in the streets of Germany and Italy. They were the Anti-Fascists, or ANTIFA. Writing just after World War II, Von Mises clearly shows that Antifa radicals were Communist revolutionaries who opposed Nazis as competitors for leadership in undermining and replacing Western Capitalist democracies.
In a later period (the 1970's and 80's), Antifa was exported to the West and influenced the SDS/Students for a Democrat Society and Black Panther movements. They are associated with opposition to Red Neck White Nationalists or "Nazis." But just like the original Antifa radicals, their real target is Western Capitalist democracies. As revolutionaries, their objectives are total takeover of government, and their tactics are anarchy and terrorism.
July 20, 2013
This book is fantastic. Everyone needs to read von Mises work to better understand what is happening all around them today.
June 24, 2013
Great book. It was interesting to learn all the tidbits in history of the communists, socialists, fascists, and Nazis. I'll have to read this one again to get more out of it.
September 16, 2014
An excellent book where Mises presciently diagnoses (again) all things that are wrong with socialism, and masterfully unveils the deluded and misled thought of those who, in spite of evident failure, still spouse socialism in any of its variations.
it's even better to read it today, as after the failure of communism everywhere it's been tried (be it the extinct and ruined industrial version USSR and its satellite countries, be it the agrarian versions from China or Cambodia, or be it the pathetic examples of Cuba and Venezuela) to great loss of life and generations that live in misery today, many so-called intellectuals not only still support it, but with increasing boldness dare to actually say it is the only way forward. After one century, it seems nothing has been learned from the impossibility of economic calculation in such systems.
This book complements very well Mises' other book "economic calculation in the socialist commonwealth" where the failure of soviet economy is carefully exposed.
In both books the lucid arguments put forward by Mises are impossible to refute.
This is a great read, not only for socialists, who with their religious zeal are quite impossible to convince even with facts, but also for those who think intervention is a way out of the current crisis.
As Mises already says, decades before this current crisis, this is not the crisis of capitalism, but the crisis of the interventionist socialist state.
it's even better to read it today, as after the failure of communism everywhere it's been tried (be it the extinct and ruined industrial version USSR and its satellite countries, be it the agrarian versions from China or Cambodia, or be it the pathetic examples of Cuba and Venezuela) to great loss of life and generations that live in misery today, many so-called intellectuals not only still support it, but with increasing boldness dare to actually say it is the only way forward. After one century, it seems nothing has been learned from the impossibility of economic calculation in such systems.
This book complements very well Mises' other book "economic calculation in the socialist commonwealth" where the failure of soviet economy is carefully exposed.
In both books the lucid arguments put forward by Mises are impossible to refute.
This is a great read, not only for socialists, who with their religious zeal are quite impossible to convince even with facts, but also for those who think intervention is a way out of the current crisis.
As Mises already says, decades before this current crisis, this is not the crisis of capitalism, but the crisis of the interventionist socialist state.
May 12, 2019
The writing style is quite terse, but the contents is fantastic. I have read the 1960s edition, but to describe so clearly the evolution post 1990s while just talking about the post-WWII Western World, it's amazing. What makes things even better for the book is the sad observation that most talks about the subject happening after the year 2010 are just rehashes of the same text.
May 17, 2024
This book is split into a series of essays, all with the unifying theme of showing that contrary to popular belief, the capitalist mode of production has been shown to be more efficient than all other modes of production, and the failures of other systems are made evident by their inability to raise living standards as quickly as businesses selling to consumers in hopes of making profits.
The Failure of Interventionism - In a world where capitalism is under attack and socialism is seen by some as too radical, a third way, called interventionism, has been sought out. The interventionists insist that their system is able to avoid the excesses of too much capitalism or too much socialism, allowing the market to help incentivize hard work while smoothing out the rough edges of a purely capitalistic system. But interventionism is stuck with a searing problem, in that it can never go far enough to guarantee its success; attempting to control one aspect of the market, or one set of market prices, is impossible without controlling all the factors of production that go into that market price. Unfortunately for the planner, this means one of two things; either a) accepting that one will not be able to control that particular aspect of outcomes on the market (i.e. embracing capitalism fully) or b) attempting to control all market prices (i.e. full-blown socialism). The middle way is itself an unstable contradiction.
The Dictatorial Nature of Socialism - Despite many socialists insisting that they are for the democratic method, their economic planning is manifestly undemocratic. In the market, everyone can choose with his own money what he will buy and where his labor will go, but in the constrained market of interventionism or the non-market of socialism, his decisions are abrogated in favor of what someone else thinks his money should go to and where his labor should go. Thus, while in the market all men are free to choose for themselves what they wish to have (i.e. they are allowed to plan for themselves), men under socialism must adhere to the plans of the select few (the politicians and bureaucrats in charge of marking the plans).
Socialism and Communism - In the theoretical works of Karl Marx and the early years of the Soviet Union, no difference between socialism and communism was ever admitted. However, given the manifest failure of the dictatorship of the proletariat to turn into higher standards of living for the working class, Stalin helped to create a difference in socialism, which he defined as an intermediate state requiring industrialization and the temporary sacrifice of workers for a better tomorrow, and communism, which was the final realized state of socialism.
Trotsky's Heresy - In the fierce debates between Trotsky and Stalin over the direction of Russia, few have noticed that these debates are immaterial from a policy perspective; both Trotsky and Stalin preferred a ruthless dictatorship dedicated to collectivization, industrialization, and the suppression of political rivals. However, the one difference that they did have was on who was to rule whom. In the planned economy, everyone believes that it is their plan that will win out in the end, failing to realize (or failing to sufficiently take into account) that other people will have their own plans that may be contrary either in substance or in who is to participate. Thus, Trotskyist and Stalinist both believe that they are defending true socialism and that the heretics opposed to them must be oppressed, ensuring the political liquidations that have resulted in the Soviet Union.
The Failure of Interventionism - In a world where capitalism is under attack and socialism is seen by some as too radical, a third way, called interventionism, has been sought out. The interventionists insist that their system is able to avoid the excesses of too much capitalism or too much socialism, allowing the market to help incentivize hard work while smoothing out the rough edges of a purely capitalistic system. But interventionism is stuck with a searing problem, in that it can never go far enough to guarantee its success; attempting to control one aspect of the market, or one set of market prices, is impossible without controlling all the factors of production that go into that market price. Unfortunately for the planner, this means one of two things; either a) accepting that one will not be able to control that particular aspect of outcomes on the market (i.e. embracing capitalism fully) or b) attempting to control all market prices (i.e. full-blown socialism). The middle way is itself an unstable contradiction.
The Dictatorial Nature of Socialism - Despite many socialists insisting that they are for the democratic method, their economic planning is manifestly undemocratic. In the market, everyone can choose with his own money what he will buy and where his labor will go, but in the constrained market of interventionism or the non-market of socialism, his decisions are abrogated in favor of what someone else thinks his money should go to and where his labor should go. Thus, while in the market all men are free to choose for themselves what they wish to have (i.e. they are allowed to plan for themselves), men under socialism must adhere to the plans of the select few (the politicians and bureaucrats in charge of marking the plans).
Socialism and Communism - In the theoretical works of Karl Marx and the early years of the Soviet Union, no difference between socialism and communism was ever admitted. However, given the manifest failure of the dictatorship of the proletariat to turn into higher standards of living for the working class, Stalin helped to create a difference in socialism, which he defined as an intermediate state requiring industrialization and the temporary sacrifice of workers for a better tomorrow, and communism, which was the final realized state of socialism.
Trotsky's Heresy - In the fierce debates between Trotsky and Stalin over the direction of Russia, few have noticed that these debates are immaterial from a policy perspective; both Trotsky and Stalin preferred a ruthless dictatorship dedicated to collectivization, industrialization, and the suppression of political rivals. However, the one difference that they did have was on who was to rule whom. In the planned economy, everyone believes that it is their plan that will win out in the end, failing to realize (or failing to sufficiently take into account) that other people will have their own plans that may be contrary either in substance or in who is to participate. Thus, Trotskyist and Stalinist both believe that they are defending true socialism and that the heretics opposed to them must be oppressed, ensuring the political liquidations that have resulted in the Soviet Union.
January 19, 2021
An excellent primer on the history and ideological development of socialism (both national and international). This book serves as a broad attack on state control of the economy and a summary of the Austrian case for lassez faire. To explore these issues in more depth, I have Economic Calculation and Socialism by Mises on my tbr list for 2021.
June 9, 2021
In chapter 1, von Mises shows how every type of government intervention into a free market economy results in worse conditions than existed when the intervention began.
Chapter 2 continues with a further discussion of the consequences of market intervention. He takes pains to point out that this intervention must always be dictatorial in nature whether it is German Socialism or Marxian Socialism.
Chapter 3
Von Mises points out that Marx did not believe that any political action could hasten or prevent the ultimate socialist transformation of a capitalist society. This event was inexorable and could not be manipulated by the people.
In chapter 4 he talks about Russian aggressiveness. He explains that Stalin needs to conquer as much of the world as he can in order to placate his own intellectuals. You can’t run a country very well when you’ve killed off all the smart people and only blockheads are left behind.
In chapter 5 he talks about Trotsky. Trotsky was a pure Marxist and did not like the fact that Stalin was ignoring as had Lenin before him the structures of Marxism. But more likely Trotsky disliked Stalin because Stalin had taken over. In fact, all socialists simply want to be in charge or at least for their clique to be in charge. Socialist groups fight against each other because each group is a different clique.
In chapter 7, he focuses on Benito Mussolini and how he had long been a fascist before Hitler came on the scene.
In chapter 8 he talks about how the ideas of Nazism came from a variety of different sources. Eugenics came from America. And with eugenics the Nazis would not just be engaged in economic planning they would also be engaged in racial planning for the entire country.
In chapter 9, he makes the point “the social sciences are never in a position to control the conditions of change and to isolate them from one another in the way in which the [scientific] experimenter proceeds in arranging his experiments.“ Nevertheless, the Marxist always says that “however beneficial and social system may have been in the past they say it cannot be so in the future; a new age requires a new mode of social organization.“ Marketing consultants and business consultants say this to small business owners as a pitch to get themselves hired.
“In spite of the fact that mankind has had no experience with the socialist mode of production, the socialist writers have constructed various schemes of socialist systems based on a prioristic reasoning. “ “But as soon as anybody dares to analyze these projects into scrutinize them with regard to their feasibility and their ability to further human welfare, the socialist vehemently object. These analyses, they say, are merely idle a priority stick speculations. They cannot disapprove the correctness of our statements in the expediency of our plans. They are not experimental. One must try Socialism and then the results will speak for themselves.“
In chapter 10 he concludes his book by talking about how so very many people believe that the coming of totalitarianism is inevitable. “The truth is that most people lack the intellectual ability and courage to resist a popular movement, however pernicious and ill considered. “ “One does not fight socialism by criticizing only some accidental features of its schemes.“ It is also absurd or rather stupid to praise totalitarian regimes for various alleged achievements for instance the railroad train schedule in fascist Italy. The socialist propaganda never encountered any decided opposition. “The devastating critique by which the economist exploded the futility and impracticality of the social schemes and doctrines did not reach the molders of public opinion”. “The policy of appeasement, so much criticized when applied in the case of the Nazis and fascists, was practiced University for many decades with regard to all other brands of socialism. It was that defeat then that made the rising generation believe that the victory of socialism is inevitable.“
This was a very interesting read as it was written 70 years ago. He goes after many of the common thoughts about Socialism people have as a result of the unending onslaught of pro communist propaganda we have all lived with for the last many decades.
Chapter 2 continues with a further discussion of the consequences of market intervention. He takes pains to point out that this intervention must always be dictatorial in nature whether it is German Socialism or Marxian Socialism.
Chapter 3
Von Mises points out that Marx did not believe that any political action could hasten or prevent the ultimate socialist transformation of a capitalist society. This event was inexorable and could not be manipulated by the people.
In chapter 4 he talks about Russian aggressiveness. He explains that Stalin needs to conquer as much of the world as he can in order to placate his own intellectuals. You can’t run a country very well when you’ve killed off all the smart people and only blockheads are left behind.
In chapter 5 he talks about Trotsky. Trotsky was a pure Marxist and did not like the fact that Stalin was ignoring as had Lenin before him the structures of Marxism. But more likely Trotsky disliked Stalin because Stalin had taken over. In fact, all socialists simply want to be in charge or at least for their clique to be in charge. Socialist groups fight against each other because each group is a different clique.
In chapter 7, he focuses on Benito Mussolini and how he had long been a fascist before Hitler came on the scene.
In chapter 8 he talks about how the ideas of Nazism came from a variety of different sources. Eugenics came from America. And with eugenics the Nazis would not just be engaged in economic planning they would also be engaged in racial planning for the entire country.
In chapter 9, he makes the point “the social sciences are never in a position to control the conditions of change and to isolate them from one another in the way in which the [scientific] experimenter proceeds in arranging his experiments.“ Nevertheless, the Marxist always says that “however beneficial and social system may have been in the past they say it cannot be so in the future; a new age requires a new mode of social organization.“ Marketing consultants and business consultants say this to small business owners as a pitch to get themselves hired.
“In spite of the fact that mankind has had no experience with the socialist mode of production, the socialist writers have constructed various schemes of socialist systems based on a prioristic reasoning. “ “But as soon as anybody dares to analyze these projects into scrutinize them with regard to their feasibility and their ability to further human welfare, the socialist vehemently object. These analyses, they say, are merely idle a priority stick speculations. They cannot disapprove the correctness of our statements in the expediency of our plans. They are not experimental. One must try Socialism and then the results will speak for themselves.“
In chapter 10 he concludes his book by talking about how so very many people believe that the coming of totalitarianism is inevitable. “The truth is that most people lack the intellectual ability and courage to resist a popular movement, however pernicious and ill considered. “ “One does not fight socialism by criticizing only some accidental features of its schemes.“ It is also absurd or rather stupid to praise totalitarian regimes for various alleged achievements for instance the railroad train schedule in fascist Italy. The socialist propaganda never encountered any decided opposition. “The devastating critique by which the economist exploded the futility and impracticality of the social schemes and doctrines did not reach the molders of public opinion”. “The policy of appeasement, so much criticized when applied in the case of the Nazis and fascists, was practiced University for many decades with regard to all other brands of socialism. It was that defeat then that made the rising generation believe that the victory of socialism is inevitable.“
This was a very interesting read as it was written 70 years ago. He goes after many of the common thoughts about Socialism people have as a result of the unending onslaught of pro communist propaganda we have all lived with for the last many decades.
August 24, 2017
Very good yet short book. It's a pithy, well-articulated, and well-reasoned critique of socialism (and is actually excerpts, I believe, from his lengthier book, "Socialism"). Ludwig von Mises was sharp as a tack, and nothing was lost on him: The canards and shibboleths of the Marxists and socialists; the relationship between socialism and fascism; the zero-sum game that is government and liberty (the more government we have, the less liberty we have); the mutual-exclusivity of socialism and capitalism (i.e. a "mixed economy" is still socialism, and a path that leads to eventual totalitarianism); the reason there will always be shortages due to problems of economic calculation, under socialism. Etc. etc.
Probably not for the absolute newcomer to economics, but who knows? For those, I'd suggest "Economic Policy: Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow" by von Mises....or else Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson."
Probably not for the absolute newcomer to economics, but who knows? For those, I'd suggest "Economic Policy: Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow" by von Mises....or else Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson."
August 4, 2020
My first Mises
This is my first von Mises book and it proved really useful. It provided a god historical background about worldwide initiatives to spread socialist economies. A key point that struck me as relevant to today is that communism, socialism and fascism rely on physical violence and end up under totalitarian control. I know that today’s so called democratic socialists don’t believe that, but history proves the point. I’m now inspired to delve into more of von Mises writings.
This is my first von Mises book and it proved really useful. It provided a god historical background about worldwide initiatives to spread socialist economies. A key point that struck me as relevant to today is that communism, socialism and fascism rely on physical violence and end up under totalitarian control. I know that today’s so called democratic socialists don’t believe that, but history proves the point. I’m now inspired to delve into more of von Mises writings.
September 14, 2020
The world needs more of Ludwig Von Mises. This is a must read.
This book develops a very well argument against Marxist theories and their ramifications (Leninism, fascism, Nazism, socialism, communism and interventionism).
It was written in the 1960's but is more relevant than ever... a never ending battle of ideas. Hopefully liberty, freedom and personal choice will emerge victorious against tyrannical dictatorships, collectivism and fake utopias.
This book develops a very well argument against Marxist theories and their ramifications (Leninism, fascism, Nazism, socialism, communism and interventionism).
It was written in the 1960's but is more relevant than ever... a never ending battle of ideas. Hopefully liberty, freedom and personal choice will emerge victorious against tyrannical dictatorships, collectivism and fake utopias.
July 16, 2012
Amazing
August 4, 2016
Decent little history of the ideas that led to the rise of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and the totalitarian state.
June 8, 2025
Planned Chaos serves as a sort-of precursor to Mises behemoth Socialism. In Planned Chaos, Mises describes the inaccuracies of socialism, the distinctions of interventionism, and the intentions of the communist, fascist, and Nazi parties in Europe during the 20th century.
While parts of the book are not necessarily relevant to the discourse of contemporary economics, they remain significant to the broader vein of economic thought and political philosophy.
Mises starts by alluding to Hayek's ideas of price signaling and dispersed knowledge by explaining that the market economy is one which sums the desires and information outputted by the consumers to effectively manage the production of goods and services. In nature, the market is democratic in which one penny equals one vote; and while it is true that a richer individual has more votes, they are rich only because of a prior election. In a market that is untouched by interventionism, one must serve the costumer in the best and cheapest way possible.
It is simple to understand why socialism is at a constant risk of decaying to mass poverty. Socialism aims at stripping capitalism of all its qualities, and if this is the case, the accuracy of price signaling and dispersed knowledge are gone. An attempt at a centrally-planned economy would crumble immediately as it would require the central planners to know and understand all of the consumers desires. In short, they would be guessing.
Further along in the essay, Mises begins to introduce praxeology: "in the field of purposive human action and social relations no experiments can be made and no experiments have ever been made. The experimental method to which the natural sciences owe all their achievements is inapplicable in the social sciences."
Mises is showcasing the mannerisms necessary in discussing economics. If economics is so integrated with human action, it would be impossible to make a positive claim. Unlike the natural sciences, social sciences are incapable of isolating a variable. For example, historical reference is only a supplement to the discussion of economics. All of history can be viewed in a multitude of perspectives and one case-study is not enough to predict a future event.
Alongside introducing praxeology, Mises introduces the magnum opus of socialist refutation: the economic calculation problem (ECP). The ECP is the incapability of socialism to plan future action and determine the result of past action. Since there are no market prices for the factors of production, a socialist management of production is unable to execute the most efficient means necessary. The ECP is such a compelling argument that even Trotsky admitted that economics is nothing without market relations.
In Planned Chaos, Mises offers a compelling case against socialism by introducing his most famous developments in plain language. It is a necessary read for anyone that is serious about economics and politics.
As Trotsky says, "In a country where the sole employer is the state, this means death by slow starvation. The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced with a new one: who does not obey shall not eat."
While parts of the book are not necessarily relevant to the discourse of contemporary economics, they remain significant to the broader vein of economic thought and political philosophy.
Mises starts by alluding to Hayek's ideas of price signaling and dispersed knowledge by explaining that the market economy is one which sums the desires and information outputted by the consumers to effectively manage the production of goods and services. In nature, the market is democratic in which one penny equals one vote; and while it is true that a richer individual has more votes, they are rich only because of a prior election. In a market that is untouched by interventionism, one must serve the costumer in the best and cheapest way possible.
"No 'automatic' and 'anonymous' forces actuate the 'mechanism' of the market. The only factors directing the market and determining prices are purposive acts of men. There is no automatism; there are men consciously aiming at ends chosen and deliberately resorting to definite means for the attainment of these ends. There are no mysterious mechanical forces; there is only the will of every individual to satisfy his demand for various goods. There is no anonymity; there are you and I and Bill and Joe and all the rest. And each of us is engaged both in production and consumption. Each contributes his share to the determination of prices."
It is simple to understand why socialism is at a constant risk of decaying to mass poverty. Socialism aims at stripping capitalism of all its qualities, and if this is the case, the accuracy of price signaling and dispersed knowledge are gone. An attempt at a centrally-planned economy would crumble immediately as it would require the central planners to know and understand all of the consumers desires. In short, they would be guessing.
Further along in the essay, Mises begins to introduce praxeology: "in the field of purposive human action and social relations no experiments can be made and no experiments have ever been made. The experimental method to which the natural sciences owe all their achievements is inapplicable in the social sciences."
Mises is showcasing the mannerisms necessary in discussing economics. If economics is so integrated with human action, it would be impossible to make a positive claim. Unlike the natural sciences, social sciences are incapable of isolating a variable. For example, historical reference is only a supplement to the discussion of economics. All of history can be viewed in a multitude of perspectives and one case-study is not enough to predict a future event.
Alongside introducing praxeology, Mises introduces the magnum opus of socialist refutation: the economic calculation problem (ECP). The ECP is the incapability of socialism to plan future action and determine the result of past action. Since there are no market prices for the factors of production, a socialist management of production is unable to execute the most efficient means necessary. The ECP is such a compelling argument that even Trotsky admitted that economics is nothing without market relations.
In Planned Chaos, Mises offers a compelling case against socialism by introducing his most famous developments in plain language. It is a necessary read for anyone that is serious about economics and politics.
As Trotsky says, "In a country where the sole employer is the state, this means death by slow starvation. The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced with a new one: who does not obey shall not eat."
March 9, 2023
A concise treatise on how socialism started, its tenets and tragedy for all its acolytes.This book was first published in 1947 shortly after WW2 where the author witnessed first hand the demise of two socialist sects Nazism, and Fascism whilst observing the devastating effect of communism the nirvana goal of socialism in the USSR.
Ludwig Von Mises rose to be the world’s leading historian and critic of socialism. If you want to learn about socialism in a quick way, read this book. If you are looking for a deeper analysis on all political and economical aspects of socialism read his tome “Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis”.
This analysis is timeless, some of the terminology may seem different to the contemporary reader, however that alone is a feature of socialism continuous changing language to conceal their agenda.
Today’s Social Democrats, New Democratic or Liberals are in fact yesterday's Marxists under a different banner. Their policies remain nihilistic, economically unsound & disastrous the polar opposite of human nature. Ludwig Von vehemently condemns the intellectuals (university professors) whom pro port the virtues of socialism starting in the early 1950’s until his death. His prophecies have turned to reality throughout the 20th century and now two decades into the 21st century where once again civilization is endangered by radical left socialists with new names and promises of Diversity, Inclusivity, and Equity (DIE ideology) a socialist nirvana. Follow this cult at your peril.
Highly recommended reading for those looking to understand the foundations of leftwing politics in these times.
Ludwig Von Mises rose to be the world’s leading historian and critic of socialism. If you want to learn about socialism in a quick way, read this book. If you are looking for a deeper analysis on all political and economical aspects of socialism read his tome “Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis”.
This analysis is timeless, some of the terminology may seem different to the contemporary reader, however that alone is a feature of socialism continuous changing language to conceal their agenda.
Today’s Social Democrats, New Democratic or Liberals are in fact yesterday's Marxists under a different banner. Their policies remain nihilistic, economically unsound & disastrous the polar opposite of human nature. Ludwig Von vehemently condemns the intellectuals (university professors) whom pro port the virtues of socialism starting in the early 1950’s until his death. His prophecies have turned to reality throughout the 20th century and now two decades into the 21st century where once again civilization is endangered by radical left socialists with new names and promises of Diversity, Inclusivity, and Equity (DIE ideology) a socialist nirvana. Follow this cult at your peril.
Highly recommended reading for those looking to understand the foundations of leftwing politics in these times.
June 14, 2018
A clear and concise linking of economics, human proclivities (of which socialism working because "It just hasn't been done right yet!", wars, death , trageties of the 20th century and humankinds very short memory...
Sums about the last 10,000 years of human history...and explains why even in the face of previously unknown freedoms, social evolution and technological and economic stratospheric booms, that the there always remains that thought in the back of our minds that we fallible, often selfish creatures can create utopia.... when we end up losing the wonderfullness that we had....spiraling into CHAOS.
And it's a planned, slowly circling the drain chaos...not stopped until catastrophe...Hiroshima, Third Reich...Venezuela....Cuba.....Pol Pot and Cambodia, North Korea, Jim Jones and "Jonestown"....
Just the name....Jonestown should tell you of the selfishness....
Why can't millionaire geniuses in Hollywood create local utupia with their own money... We could call in Weinsteintown...or DiCaprioville...
Sums about the last 10,000 years of human history...and explains why even in the face of previously unknown freedoms, social evolution and technological and economic stratospheric booms, that the there always remains that thought in the back of our minds that we fallible, often selfish creatures can create utopia.... when we end up losing the wonderfullness that we had....spiraling into CHAOS.
And it's a planned, slowly circling the drain chaos...not stopped until catastrophe...Hiroshima, Third Reich...Venezuela....Cuba.....Pol Pot and Cambodia, North Korea, Jim Jones and "Jonestown"....
Just the name....Jonestown should tell you of the selfishness....
Why can't millionaire geniuses in Hollywood create local utupia with their own money... We could call in Weinsteintown...or DiCaprioville...
December 8, 2020
It's one of my personal favorites from Mises. When I published the hungarian translation of this book I changed its title to "Epilogue to the 20th Century", partly because Planned Chaos just didn't translate well and partly because this little book - which was added as an epilogue to his book Socialism, the first paragraph of which rightfully exclaims that our century is the epoch of socialism - is a short summary of the grand political and ideological tides of the twentieth century from a classical liberal perspective. Reading it feels as if Mises, who lived through the worst of it in Europe until he fled to the US from Hitler as a highly wanted target of the nazis, would look back to what happened to explain it for those who werent there to witness that apocalypse.
The chapter on the praxeological impossibility of socialism also serves as a great introduction to his economic thought, although I'm not sure his short summary of the epistemological position of economics and of the calculation problem is enough to convince a layman reader.
The chapter on the praxeological impossibility of socialism also serves as a great introduction to his economic thought, although I'm not sure his short summary of the epistemological position of economics and of the calculation problem is enough to convince a layman reader.
April 25, 2020
Out dated in its analysis as the time this book was written has ideological rivalry and many conclusion were too early to make without falling under ideological temptation. It has harsh critic of welfare states, describing them as dictatorial regimes with patriarchal state and such conclusion is not so accurate if one wants to apply it to 21st century. So far one can see that Scandinavian countries that falls under such categorization has much higher democratic rating and happiness than the United States that follows the model of the tradition of libertarianism, or at least the most libertarian than any other country on the world. Also, a great deal of the wealth that Western countries obtained historically is derived from colonialism, slavery, discoveries of new lands and industrialization rather than individual entrepreneurship.
March 28, 2024
This book was a big 'preaching to the choir' type book for me. I loved his phrasing many times and plan to steal a bunch, but there wasn't much drastically new information for me. It's hard for me not to love this writing style -- though.
P.S. I find the arguments about what the Nazis actually were, whether they were socialists, rather interesting, especially prior to their canonization as far-right.
P.S. I find the arguments about what the Nazis actually were, whether they were socialists, rather interesting, especially prior to their canonization as far-right.
November 6, 2024
It was great that this author spoke out against all forms of socialism from the Soviet socialism the Italian Fascism and German Nazism to their basis in Communism. This was likely an important affirmative statement at the time of writing. But this work did little to enlighten me to the author's thinking on totalitarianism in general.
November 5, 2025
Read in the epilogue of his behemoth on Socialism, one cannot help but see in Mises a true champion of freedom. A man of extraordinary courage, unyielding in defending his convictions and refusing to bow to the fashionable doctrines of his time. He stood firm when others cowed and never compromised his ideals to gain acceptance or popularity.
March 11, 2019
Lucid & concise.
A very interesting discussion of the socialist surges of the 20th century.
In light of history and basic understanding of human proclivities, it's breathtaking that socialists still have political prominence, are still either actively wrecking countries, or are trying to.
A very interesting discussion of the socialist surges of the 20th century.
In light of history and basic understanding of human proclivities, it's breathtaking that socialists still have political prominence, are still either actively wrecking countries, or are trying to.
December 22, 2019
Me encantó. Mises suele tener un estilo muy formal y académico que hace que la lectura sea densa y difícil. Como de costumbre, nos encontramos con un texto lleno de información, pero esta vez: corto, provocativo y entretenido.
July 31, 2020
Recomendado
November 7, 2024
توضيح جيد للفشل الاشتراكي
October 21, 2021
Still relevant in the 21st century, very clear and concise.
August 4, 2020
Me gusto mucho este libro. El autor explica de manera muy sencilla y con argumentos muy sólidos, porque los sistemas socialistas-comunistas generan un completo caos económico y social. Explica también las grandes similitudes de los sistemas totalitarios surgidos a principios del siglo 20: Fascismo, Nazismo y Comunismo Soviético. Una de las frases que más me gustaron: "Si la historia pudiera probar y enseñarnos algo, sería que la propiedad privada de los medios de producción es un requisito necesario de la civilización y el bienestar material".
August 3, 2024
A SEPARATE PUBLICATION OF A 1947 EPILOGUE TO MISES' "SOCIALISM" BOOK
Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (1881-1973) was one of the major figures in the Austrian School of economics; Friedrich Hayek was a pupil of his. His major works were 'Human Action: A Treatise on Economics,' and 'Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis.' Leonard Read (of FEE) explains in his Foreword that this essay was written and first published as an Epilogue to the 1947 Spanish translation of 'Socialism,' and was later added to the 1951 Yale University Press edition.
Mises begins by stating, "The characteristic mark of this age of dictators, wars and revolutions is its anticapitalistic bias. Most governments are eager to restrict the sphere of private initiative and free enterprise." Yet "The increase in per capita consumption in America ... is not an achievement of laws and executive orders. It is an accomplishment of businessmen who enlarged the size of their factories or built new ones." (Pg. 15) In fact, he asserts, "The inherent tendency of capitalist evolution is to raise real wage rates steadily." (Pg. 21)
He argues, "No economist ever dared to assert that interventionism could result in anything else than in disaster and chaos." (Pg. 21) Later, he adds, "It is an illusion to believe that a system of planned socialism could be operated according to democratic methods of government. Democracy is inextricably linked with capitalism. It cannot exist where there is planning." (Pg. 30) He charges that the revolution of Lenin "was the negation of all the political ideals that had for three thousand years guided the evolution of Western civilization." (Pg. 63)
He provides a succinct version of his famous argument against Socialism: "The fundamental objection advanced against the impractibability of socialism refers to the impossibility of economic calculation. It has been demonstrated in an irrefutable way that a socialist commonwealth would not be in a position to apply economic calculation. Where there are no market prices for the factors of production ... it is impossible to resort to calculation in planning future action and in determining the result of past action. A socialist management... will operate in the dark, as it were. It will squander the scarce factors of production both material and human (labor). Chaos and poverty for all will inevitably result." (Pg. 83)
Not really suited as an "Introduction" to Mises' work, this short work does make a helpful supplement to it.
Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (1881-1973) was one of the major figures in the Austrian School of economics; Friedrich Hayek was a pupil of his. His major works were 'Human Action: A Treatise on Economics,' and 'Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis.' Leonard Read (of FEE) explains in his Foreword that this essay was written and first published as an Epilogue to the 1947 Spanish translation of 'Socialism,' and was later added to the 1951 Yale University Press edition.
Mises begins by stating, "The characteristic mark of this age of dictators, wars and revolutions is its anticapitalistic bias. Most governments are eager to restrict the sphere of private initiative and free enterprise." Yet "The increase in per capita consumption in America ... is not an achievement of laws and executive orders. It is an accomplishment of businessmen who enlarged the size of their factories or built new ones." (Pg. 15) In fact, he asserts, "The inherent tendency of capitalist evolution is to raise real wage rates steadily." (Pg. 21)
He argues, "No economist ever dared to assert that interventionism could result in anything else than in disaster and chaos." (Pg. 21) Later, he adds, "It is an illusion to believe that a system of planned socialism could be operated according to democratic methods of government. Democracy is inextricably linked with capitalism. It cannot exist where there is planning." (Pg. 30) He charges that the revolution of Lenin "was the negation of all the political ideals that had for three thousand years guided the evolution of Western civilization." (Pg. 63)
He provides a succinct version of his famous argument against Socialism: "The fundamental objection advanced against the impractibability of socialism refers to the impossibility of economic calculation. It has been demonstrated in an irrefutable way that a socialist commonwealth would not be in a position to apply economic calculation. Where there are no market prices for the factors of production ... it is impossible to resort to calculation in planning future action and in determining the result of past action. A socialist management... will operate in the dark, as it were. It will squander the scarce factors of production both material and human (labor). Chaos and poverty for all will inevitably result." (Pg. 83)
Not really suited as an "Introduction" to Mises' work, this short work does make a helpful supplement to it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews