I couldn’t agree more! I am in NY attending a FEE seminar on Austo-econ. listening to a number of “libertarians and classical liberals” inveighing against the incentive structure of the social welfare state, although glossing over the perverse incentive structure of corporate welfare.

Btw, I listened to an excellent lecture by Lewin on the application of Austro-econ to management studies, wherein he adduced your work, Foss, and Langlois. Why no paper presented by you?

Coincidentally, I saw an academic anthology of readings on capitalism on the bargain table at the used bookstore yesterday, and it included “The Great Society: A Libertarian Critique.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard40.html
Money quote:

Another conservative blind spot is their failure to identify which groups have been responsible for the burgeoning of statism in the United States. In the conservative demonology, the responsibility belongs only to liberal intellectuals, aided and abetted by trade unions and farmers. Big businessmen, on the other hand, are curiously exempt from blame (farmers are small enough businessmen, apparently, to be fair game for censure.) How, then, do conservatives deal with the glaringly evident onrush of big businessmen to embrace Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society? Either by mass stupidity (failure to read the works of free-market economists), subversion by liberal intellectuals (e.g., the education of the Rockefeller brothers at Lincoln School), or craven cowardice (the failure to stand foursquare for free-market principles in the face of governmental power). 6 Almost never is interest pinpointed as an overriding reason for statism among businessmen. This failure is all the more curious in the light of the fact that the laissez-faire liberals of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (e.g., the Philosophical Radicals in England, the Jacksonians in the United States) were never bashful about identifying and attacking the web of special privileges granted to businessmen in the mercantilism of their day.