Morgenstern’s essay is a methodological defense of economics against both political overclaiming and anti-theoretical “practical” disdain. Its main thesis is double: economic theory cannot prescribe ultimate ends, because those belong to value and politics; yet no rational economic policy is possible without theory, because only theory can clarify causal relations, side effects, and contradictions among measures.
Das Grundproblem der Wirtschaftspolitik besteht in der Anwendung der ökonomischen Theorie.
English translation: The fundamental problem of economic policy consists in the application of economic theory.
This “application problem” structures the book. Morgenstern begins by defining economic policy as action aimed beyond the actor’s private interest toward effects on a wider economic group. He then brackets final goals and asks what science can say once goals are given. Unlike physics, economics lacks stable constants; it works through relations, probabilities, and historically shifting data. Hence policy must translate abstract propositions into concrete situations full of “Leerstellen,” changing facts, and imperfect observation.
Das Wort, das an ihre Stelle tritt und alle Schwierigkeiten heraufbeschwört, heißt: „Verhältnismäßig“.
English translation: The word that takes its place and conjures up all the difficulties is: "relatively."
From this follows his critique of rigid policy systems. Liberalism and socialism, when presented as scientific necessities, confuse theory with political valuation. Economics is “invariant” toward possible uses: it may explain tariffs or free trade, intervention or abstention, but cannot by itself declare a final social optimum. Morgenstern nevertheless argues that interventionism is practically more dangerous because its effects accumulate, interlock, and often obscure one another. The absence of scientific certainty is not a license for arbitrariness.
Eine flackernde Fackel ist völliger Finsternis vorzuziehen.
English translation: A flickering torch is preferable to complete darkness.
The middle chapters develop his most original conceptual moves. First, every policy has a spatial and temporal “Streuung” of effects: losses are often concentrated, visible, and immediate, while benefits are dispersed, delayed, and hard to organize politically. This asymmetry gives producers, protected industries, and organized interests an advantage over consumers and diffuse beneficiaries. Second, all measures are mutually dependent; policy cannot be judged measure by measure because each intervention modifies the data to which later interventions respond. The only strictly scientific rule available is therefore not a substantive program but consistency.
Das „Prinzip der Widerspruchsfreiheit der Wirtschaftspolitik“ ist das einzige wissenschaftlich-wirtschaftspolitische Prinzip, das sich ohne Fällung von Werturteilen aufstellen läßt.
English translation: The "principle of the internal consistency of economic policy" is the only scientific principle of economic policy that can be established without rendering value judgments.
Morgenstern’s treatment of power is similarly anti-romantic. Power does not abolish economic law; it changes the range within which outcomes are determined. Monopolies, unions, privileges, and state coercion widen indeterminacy and complicate prediction, but they do not free policy from economic constraints.
Die ökonomische Macht kann an der Größe der Unbestimmtheit, die durch sie in das wirtschaftliche Geschehen getragen wird, gemessen werden.
English translation: Economic power can be measured by the magnitude of the indeterminacy that it introduces into economic events.
The chapters on conjuncture policy sharpen the argument. Business-cycle policy is especially difficult because cycles are international, no strict rhythm has been proven, and statistical symptoms never capture the whole economic process, especially expectations and time-lags. Morgenstern rejects confident forecasting and “stabilization” recipes, but he does extract cautious rules: preserve elasticity, use depressions for structural adjustment, and avoid public burdens that rigidify costs.
The final critique is against “Vulgärökonomie”: slogans, patent remedies, interest-serving pseudo-theory, and the belief that intuition can replace disciplined analysis. The danger of economics lies not mainly in theory’s incompleteness, but in its misuse by advisers, journalists, politicians, and practical men who want answers without method. His strongest claim is epistemic: economics has limits, but there is no superior substitute outside it.
Was die Wissenschaft nicht wissen kann, das kann auch niemand anderer wissen.
English translation: What science cannot know, no one else can know either.
In conclusion, Morgenstern returns policy to the state. Economic policy is ultimately politics, because every economic intervention also alters the social and power order. The state supplies the frame, advisers matter, and independent control of promises against outcomes is essential. The work’s relevance lies in this austere combination of value-freedom, policy realism, and institutional skepticism: it neither idolizes laissez-faire nor trusts interventionist expertise, but demands that public action recognize the limits set by knowledge, time, interests, and economic law.
Der Staat gibt für die Wirtschaftspolitik den Rahmen ab, nicht nur soweit er selbst ihr Träger ist.
English translation: The state provides the framework for economic policy, and not only insofar as it is itself the agent of that policy.
This work was divided into 15 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 15 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian