"The real disagreement between Keynes and Hayek was identified by Keynes... (as being about) the question of knowing where to draw the line between intervention and non-intervention. Keynes's criticism of Hayek was that he accepted that the logical extreme of no intervention at all was not possible, but gave no guidance in The Road to Serfdom as to where the line should be drawn. This was the same criticism made later by the libertarians. But unlike them, Keynes thought that it was a matter of practical judgement, not principle. He acknowledged that Hayek would draw the line differently than he would, but criticized him for underestimating the practicability for a middle course. He also argued that since Hayek accepted that a line had to be drawn, it was disingenuous of him to imply that 'as soon as one moves an inch in the planned direction you are necessarily launched on the slippery path which will lead you in due course over the precipice... Keynes proposed his middle way as a means of harmonizing individualism and socialism'". - Andrew Gamble, Hayek: The Iron Cage of Liberty. Boulder: Westview Press, 1996, p. 159-160.
"Mises main target was Marx and the Marxists. In that sense, his original article was a further episode in the long-running Methodenstreit. Marx's refusal to speculate about the form a socialist society would take, struck Mises as a supreme evasion, and typical of historicism. Marx always refused to lay down blueprints in the manner of 'utopian socialists' like Owen and Fourier, on the grounds that principles of organisationwere intimately related to particular modes of historical organisation, which were always worked out practically and could only be understood theoretically in retrospect. This impeccable Hegelianism did not impress Mises, because it refused to consider the question of how the universal problems of any human society would be addressed, One consequence of this methodological gulf between the Austrian school and Marxism was that there was no Marxist response to Mises. His criticisms were regarded as irrelevant. Bukharin had already analysed the Austrian school and marginalism as a retreat from scientific analysis into ideology. Marginalism was dismissed as the ideology of the rentier class, because it regarded all incomes, including 'unearned incomes', as equally productive, and therefore legitimate, so long as they were generated through the market" Andrew Gamble, Hayek: The Iron Cage of Liberty. Boulder: Westview Press, 1996, p. 63.
