Doug Mackenzie wrote:  
> Schumpeter (1942) argued that socialism could work and  
> that capitalism would be undone by its own critical  
> rationalism. Hayek (1945, 1960) accepted antitrust  
> laws and government correction of externalities, among  
> other types of intervention. Weiser was a socialist.  
> Mises accepted the draft during wartime. Of course,  
> Mises and Hayek accepted less intervention than did  
> most mid 20th century economists, but to suggest that  
> they were not interventionist at all is wrong. Hayek  
> came to a more hardline anti-interventionist position  
> in the 70s and 80s, but in the middle part of his  
> career he accepted quite a bit of intervention.  
>   
  
  
Interesting documentation but Schumpeter was giving his view of the prospects   
for capitalism. I don't think you can fairly interpret this as an advocacy of   
intervention, let along socialism.  
  
But, if he or the others changed their view, did they also stop advocating MI?   
That is, did they still advocate MI when advocating some degree of intervention?   
Or worse, did they advocate MI because they advocated some degree of   
intervention as Pat suggests?  
  
Lawrence A. Boland