Brunner is a monetarist. I wasn't aware of an association between him and either public choice or the "Virginia school" as far as ideas go. I would welcome correction here.
Buchanan and Tullock are anti-state, hence pinning upon them the growth of an authoritarian state is problematic. Corporatism horrifies them. I can't imagine them building an enormous body of literature without meaning it.
In Hayek the road to serfdom is central planning, not the state per se. I believe he favored social insurance, for instance.
Now for all I know, these guys used political prisoners for target practice. The fact that they visited Chile or some center is not very meaningful. An academic center would have an interest in publishing big names merely to enhance its prestige.
The ideas of all these characters are repellent in assorted, creative ways, but it won't do to mix them up.
mbs
> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 19:02:43 -0500
> To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY <ipe at csf.colorado.edu>
> From: "Jeffrey L. Beatty" <Beatty.4 at osu.edu>
>