of ethics, insisting instead on divine revelationrnas the only path to truth. “If reasonrncannot be used to frame an ethic,” writesrnRothbard, “this means that Luther andrnCalvin had to, in essence, throw out naturalrnlaw, and in doing so, they jettisonedrnthe basic criteria developed over the centuriesrnby which to criticize the despoticrnactions of the state.” Anyone else wouldrnhave left it at that: a simple statement ofrnhis argument, with no further evidencernoffered. But in a typical flourish, Rothbardrnilluminates his subject with a lightningrnflash of insight: “One of the expressionsrnof this conflict came over religiousrnholidays, which Catholic countries enjoyedrnin abundance. To the Puritans,rnthis was idolatry; even Christmas was notrnsupposed to be an occasion for sensaternenjoyment.”rnHere is the clincher that makes therncase, a vivid example that brings homernthe centrality of culture and religionrnto the evolution of economic thought.rnUnder the accumulated weight of considerablernevidence, Rothbard shows thatrnmilitant asceticism—from Plato’s dictatorshiprnof the philosopher-kings to thernpostmillennial pietism that energizedrnthe Progressive era—is inevitably a rationalernfor tyranny and invariably an occasionrnfor blood-letting on a massive scale.rnThis is a major theme of these volumes,rnone which runs through all of Rothbard’srnwritings: the importance of human enjoyment,rnoi pleasure in life, and, therefore,rnin economics.rnAcomplete and thorough survey ofrnthe material covered in these thousandrnpages would take up an entire issuernof Chronicles. Reviewers of Rothbard’srnmagnum opus are therefore forced tornfocus on a few specifics. A high point isrnRothbard’s definitive treatment of Marxismrnas “an atheized variant of a venerablernChristian heresy,” which weaves togetherrnthe various thematic strands that runrnthrough both volumes. The Kuhnianrntheory of the paradigm shift, in Rothbard’srncreative hands, maps the regressionrnfrom Smith to Marx through Ricardo.rnThe Kauder thesis is expanded tornexplain the rise of communism as arnconsequence of the Reformation, a theologicalrnphenomenon secularized byrnGerman Romantics and their Britishrnimitators.rnCentral to the Rothbardian view ofrnMarxism is his incisive analysis of Marxrnthe man. According to the “scientific”rnview of “objectivity,” only Marx’s ideasrnare grist for the historical mill, any pryingrninto the individual psychology of therneconomist himself being somehow unfairrnand “ad hominem.” But as Rothbardrnpointed out many times, and not only inrnthis context, social “forces” and otherrnaggregates are nonexistent entities; onlyrnindividuals act, in the market and in life.rnTherefore, the vagaries and personal idiosyncrasiesrnof individuals are a factor inrnthe development of religious, political,rnand economic ideas, and a valid field ofrninvestigation for those who seek to understandrnthe real sources of Marxism —rnindeed, of any “ism.”rnAs Rothbard points out, there hasrnbeen an attempt in recent years to distinguishrna benign “young Marx” from thernelder Stalinist Marx. In a startling andrnunusual manner, Rothbard shows thatrn”there is only one Marx, whether early orrnlate.” In a perceptive and original analysisrnof Marx’s early poetry, often dismissedrnas adolescent musings of no consequence,rnRothbard pinpoints the pure hatredrnof life, of humanity, and of the naturalrnlaw that produced, in the man ofrnmature years, a monstrous system of almostrnsatanic evil. (“See this sword? /Thernprince of darkness / Sold it to me.” Andrnwhat could be more explicit than: “WithrnSatan I have struck my deal / He chalksrnthe signs, beats time for me./ I play therndeath march fast and free”?)rnThis death march has been the Leitmotifrnot the 20th century, an era whichrnRothbard denounced in his famous inauguralrnspeech as president of the JohnrnRandolph Club as the century of massrnmurder, totalitarianism, socialism, andrndevastation on a scale unmatched in allrnof human history. “Repeal the 20th century!”rnwas the slogan he offered to his fellowrnRandolphians: Roll back not onlyrnthe Great Society, but the Fair Deal, thernNew Deal, the statist “reforms” of thernProgressive Era—go back, he urged us,rnretrace your steps to that fateful crossroadsrnwhere a wrong turn was taken, and,rnas he puts it in these volumes, regainrn”paradigms lost.”rnRothbard’s enemies on the right, notablyrnWilliam F. Buckley, Jr., tried tornsmear him as a leftist for opposing thernCold War, but this profoundly conservativerntheme should put that old canard tornrest. Against the idea of progress as anrnautomatic series of ascending steps towardrnthe truth and the light, Rothbardrnheld up the vision of knowledge lost andrnthen rediscovered, and of history as anrnuncertain and heroic strueele to maintainrnand improve the human condition.rnHe was a man of the right, not only ideologicallyrnbut temperamentally as well.rnUpholding the natural law tradition ofrnAristotle, Aquinas, the scholastics, andrnCatholicism as the fountainhead of humanrnfreedom ought to score him somernpoints with National Review. But Rothbardrnwas a man of the Old Right, onernof the hated “isolationists,” permanentlyrnostracized therefore by the right-wingrnsocial democrats who have commandeeredrnthe conservative movement.rnAt the conclusion of these volumes,rnRothbard breaks off a discussion of CarlrnMenger and the rise of marginalism, explaining,rn”But that is the stuff of anotherrnvolume.” Tragically, there was to be nornthird volume. Rothbard died on Januaryrn7, 1995, before he could put to paper arnbook that was already written “in myrnhead,” as he explained to a colleaguernshortly before that tragic day. The storyrnof the history of economic thought in thern20th century, the rise of the Austrians,rnthe triumph of Keynes, the crisis of thernKeynesian paradigm, and the summationrnof what was to be, in an importantrnsense, the capstone of the Rothbardianrnsystem —all this was lost when a greatrnmind flickered out.rnYet the magnitude of Rothbard’srnachievement was such that his legacy isrnassured; his contribution to the cause ofrnliberty in America will not only endurernbut continue to grow in stature. As anrneconomist, he succeeded in firmly establishingrnthe Austrian school of economicsrnin America, expanding and refining thernlegacy of his own mentor, the great Ludwigrnvon Mises. As a system-builder, herncompleted the intellectual edifice thatrnwas the work of a lifetime in its generalrnouflines and established it upon a solidrnbase. Keeping in mind the limited valuernof scientific analogies in this context, wernmay conclude that the totality of his writingsrn—culminating in these volumes—rnpresents the equivalent of a unified fieldrntheory for the social sciences.