Talk:James M. Buchanan/Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:Buchanan book.jpg
Image:Buchanan book.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with [[WP:FU|fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Buchanan only a Macroeconomist???
The "Chicago School" template box inserted at the front of the article as of 2010-03-11 labels Buchanan as merely a "macroeconomist." This seems way too narrow. A large part of Buchanan's work dealt with micro behaviors--which of course lead to macro outcomes out of the endogenous process inside any complex adaptive system (I'm using some of 2005 Nobelist Thomas Schelling's terminology here.). Buchanan's foundational work in public choice was nearly completely microeconomic analysis on real people placed into political roles, whether of legislator, executive, or mere bureau-member at some lower level of the state entity. Of course, he also explained a lot of macro outcomes from this micro political behavior, especially for example in Democracy in Deficit or The Power to Tax or Politics as Public Choice. Does anyone have a source that would support the application of the singular macroeconomist label to Buchanan? N2e (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Chicago or Austrian
Does anyone have a source for the billing of James Buchanan as being part of the Chicago School of Economics, as he said:
 * "I certainly have a great deal of affinity with Austrian economics and I have no objections to being called an Austrian. Hayek and Mises might consider me an Austrian but, surely some of the others would not."

He is also on record as not being in complete agreement with the newer members of the Chicago School, according to this source.

If there are other sources where either he identifies as part of the Chicago School, then perhaps this would be an appropriate topic to discuss within the article.

--Antony1024 (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 one external links on James M. Buchanan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110501185429/https://www.ufm.edu/cms/es/honorary-doctoral-degrees to https://www.ufm.edu/cms/es/honorary-doctoral-degrees
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060518093905/http://www.econlib.org:80/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv7Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv7Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060518103649/http://www.econlib.org:80/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv2Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv2Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060610040512/http://econlib.org:80/library/Buchanan/buchCv3Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv3Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060518103702/http://www.econlib.org:80/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv4Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv4Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060518103600/http://www.econlib.org:80/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv5Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv5Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060610040524/http://econlib.org:80/library/Buchanan/buchCv6Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv6Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060518093905/http://www.econlib.org:80/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv7Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv7Contents.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080821122414/http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv8Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv8Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060518103721/http://www.econlib.org:80/LIBRARY/Buchanan/buchCv9Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv9Contents.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060610040548/http://econlib.org:80/library/Buchanan/buchCv10Contents.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv10Contents.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:59, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

A despot in disguise: one man’s mission to rip up democracy
Interesting analysis by George Monbiot, should anyone want to include reference to or a quote from it: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/19/despot-disguise-democracy-james-mcgill-buchanan-totalitarian-capitalism -- Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:38, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on James M. Buchanan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091031224313/http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0347-0520 to http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0347-0520
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023055807/http://economics.gmu.edu/people/jbuchananemeritus to http://economics.gmu.edu/people/jbuchananemeritus

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:31, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

external link
possibly intended as footnote, " " was just sitting at the end of the line about individual utility maximization. Should be looked into at some point. Elinruby (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2020 (UTC) Ň

Not so Fair and Balanced
There appears to be a conservative/libertarian bias in this article. All of the criticisms cited about Democracy in Crisis are by right-wing ideologues. There appears to be little examination of the potential merits of the concerns raised, as analyzed by impartial experts in the field, and the only support cited is by some random novelist. Also, most of the criticism of Democracy in Crisis focuses only on the issue of segregation, which is not central to the thesis. 50.255.27.126 (talk) 04:28, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

I was noticing the same thing. The whole section is three paragraphs criticizing it, with a small, one sentence rebuttal at the end. It is showing a clear negative bias, while completely discounting any points made in the book. Gil gosseyn (talk) 12:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree with the 2 paragraphs above, citing the right-wing and libertarian dismissals of DEMOCRACY IN CHAINS in this article. I'm not an expert on the controversy but the article in its current form suggests there's no factual reason for the controversy to exist. It also suggests that Buchanan couldn't have been a racist because he invited an anti-apartheid guest speaker to GMU. That's an innocent-by-association fallacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.240.32.118 (talk) 15:11, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree with the 3 paragraphs above. I hope someone with more expertise in the subject will be able to help resolve this, because right now this almost certainly violates NPOV. cecilgol (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Buchanan was a classic liberal. You must expect that the article will have a conservative/libertarian bias, because that is the subject matter under discussion. Yes, many (not all) of the criticisms of DIC are by classic liberals because they are the ones most familiar (unlike MacLean) with Buchanan's work. Hutt was more than a guest lecturer, he was there as a visiting scholar for an extended period of time. Neither Monbiot nor MacLean are reliable sources. The list of factual errors in DIC shows that her work is a novel, a work of fantasy. Neither should be referenced in this article. RussNelson (talk) 08:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)


 * I am familiar with neither and I've come to wikipedia to get some quick overview. I must say that it's rather disappointing that in a section about the book there's not a proper statement of the main claims, only vague mentions of "conflict between 'economic freedom and political liberty'" (how?) and of "a hidden programme for suppressing democracy" (how? why?).  Then there is counter-claims against George Monbiot (who is that? How is he related to the book?)  The section should be about that book first, or be removed altogether. 2A00:6060:A000:0:9E2E:4457:1FE8:4468 (talk) 14:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Cute, given that Libertarianism to no small degree is based on actual novels and a complete fantasy that runs counter to empirical data. Incidentally, so do Buchanan's ideas on choice. They are a projection of one's own motivations onto others that don't hold water to empirical scrutiny and are long outdated. Incidentally, just because someone claims something in a google spreadsheet doesn't mean it's actually true. --2A02:810C:3C0:1D64:B4D6:6928:49B2:8CCE (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Absurdly biased section on Democracy in Chains. There are many prominent defenders of the book, though you wouldn't know it from the current article. And no, there is no reason to "expect" a bias in favor of someone's ideology in an article covering that someone. Quite the contrary, especially with someone known for certain ideas, care should be taken not to take them as given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.52.24.14 (talk) 16:03, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't see the need to preserve the disputed "Democracy in Chains" section at all. It's really about another person and its presence in this article is WP:COATRACK at best. I've removed the entire section.  If Democracy in Chains is actually notable, then it should be covered in its own article or in an article about its author with both pro and con discussion there. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:22, 21 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The book is largely about Buchanan. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The book is about Buchanan as an exemplar of a conspiracy the author perceives. If it is notable on its own, it should be on its own article.  This section is a classic COATRACK and doesn't belong here except as an excuse to find criticism of the subject.  That this is one author's opinion further demonstrates the inappositeness of its inclusion. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The application of WP:COATRACK is bizarre. The content sourced to the book and all the rebuttals of the book are exclusively about Buchanan. I cannot think of any content that is more clearly DUE and on the point than a debate between recognized experts, published in some of the best outlets (including peer-reviewed journals, about the subject of the article. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 15:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)


 * DoC is a fairly large section in NM (Nancy MacLean). Personally, I think DoC is junk, and was happy enough with the text here; but I have to admit there are prominent people who differ and the short desc here doesn't match what's at the NM page.Perhaps we could contrive a simple neutral link to that section? William M. Connolley (talk) 15:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)