Chicago economists criticized Lippmann from both pro- and anti-state directions simultaneously.

Evidence

Both Frank Knight and Henry Simons extolled the book as a major event and a brilliant contribution to contemporary debates about the appropriate scope of governmental interference in the economy, but expressed concerns that it was— paradoxically—excessively optimistic in its interpretation of the prospects for reform and insuffi ciently critical in its accep tance of certain laissezfaire principles. — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, 161

Categorization

• DEFINE: Shows that even early ‘neoliberal’ figures rejected laissez-faire absolutism; useful for defining the contested boundaries of early market liberalism.
• XREF: connects to: Right-wing economists defended nineteenth-century laissez-faire against Lippmann’s attack — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free…, 158

Broader Connections

• Right-wing economists defended nineteenth-century laissez-faire against Lippmann’s attack #exemplifies (0.85) — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, 158