It's strange that you find Austrianism interesting.
The whole reason it is ignored (having initially been carefully studied) by all academic economics departments globally is that economists looked at it and found it deeply
uninteresting.
Their lack of interest was based on the 2 principal problems with Austrianism
One, most or Austrianism's assertions are equally applicable to totally opposite and incomparable economic outcomes and processes. The assertion tells you nothing.
All things being equal, the result could be a massive increase in wealth, or a crushing depression, and Austrianism's assertions are wholly applicable to both scenarios. Von Hayek himself wrote that economic theories "can never be verified or falsified by reference to facts". Useless!!!
Two, Austrianism's few actual predictions fail to materialise in real-life, testable situations. Please look up "Money illusion", the process whereby printing money creates an irrational "wealth effect" in the behaviour in the vast majority of consumers involved. This effect has been observed in both controlled
lab experiments AND in real-world economic behaviour. A prime example is the consumer-spending splurge that arose in Ireland in line with the house-price boom, and has just evaporated in line with the collapse in house prices. Austrianists deny this "wealth effect" angrily, but you have seen it with your own peepers for the last 10 years every time you have looked at Irish price tags.
Economists look at these staggering departures from intelligent thought processes and deduce, correctly, that Austrianism is simply a cult with nothing of interest to say about any human economy. They toss the Rothbard book aside and get on with the real study of what happens when money changes hands in the modern world: economics.