Is the Mises Institute being infiltrated by Marxist operatives?

[ClaytonB]

Before I jump into this, I want to clarify a couple things:

- The core academics that make up the Mises Institute clearly have not shifted their messaging. So, this post is not about trying to suggest that the core academics who make up the Mises Institute have "changed". At least, I'm not aware of any evidence of that.

- The Mises Institute still provides an expansive library of Austrian economics texts in electronic form on their website, completely free of charge for anyone to download and read (as well as in HTML form, audiobook, etc.) And their prints are very reasonably priced, clearly with the goal to make Austrian economics as widely available as possible.

That said, I have noticed that whenever I read articles written any time certainly in the last 5 years or so, by anyone who isn't one of the core academics that were involved in the Mises Institute 10+ years ago, there is absolutely a "shift" in the tone of the writing. Much of the writing has what I would describe as a devil's-advocate tone... "as Austrians, we all tend to fall into this echo-chamber... but what if 'the other side' has a point?" This is a red-flag for Marxist infiltration, but I've been keeping my mouth shut for the last few years because I have no concrete evidence.

However, I just now chanced upon the following "Radio Rothbard" podcast:



I only got two minutes into it before I was saying out loud to myself "What the hell is this trash?!" Now, disagreeing with Hoppe over democracy is hardly controversial among Austrians -- Mises himself was not opposed to democracy and would not have agreed with Hoppe's conclusion that monarchy is superior to democracy (and both are inferior to a propertarian society). But tone is everything, and this podcast opens with blatant strawmanning:

"We're encountering ... the other side of things, the diehard libertarian, Hoppean side of things. Democracy - voting of any kind - is terrible and we need some sort of authoritarian system where nobody's allowed to vote."

This quote in no way, shape or form represents even one iota of Hoppe's views. I'm no academic, I've read some Hoppe and listened to a selection of his online lectures. But I know enough to see instantly that this podcast host has never read a single world of anything Hoppe has written. One of the YT comments: "This guy is talking about a book he clearly didn't read." And that exactly sums it up. And what is outrageous about this is that this "Radio Rothbard" podcast is hosted right there on mises.org. This content is so abysmally bad I can't even power through it to survey all of the nonsense being peddled. I stopped at 3:05 with "retreatist mindset". The number of contradictions within each sentence is simply too headache-inducing to sit through.

Which leads me back to the OP title -- is the Mises Institute being infiltrated by Marxist operatives? We know the Marxists are really good at pretending to be something they're not. And once they're inside, they find places to hide while they promote the exact opposite of the organization they have infiltrated. I am astounded that this sort of content is able to go out there under the Mises Institute's official banner...

 

[Occam's Banana]

"Everyone's crazy except you and me ..."

Is the Mises Institute being infiltrated by Marxist operatives?

Of course it is.

I am the only libertarian who isn't actually a Marxist of some kind.

And if you disagree, that only shows how much of a Marxist you really are ...

 

[TheTexan]

I am the only libertarian who isn't actually a Marxist of some kind.

^ is exactly what a Marxist infiltrator would say

 

[Okie RP fan]

Keep documenting it and then when it's clear as day, contact Lew or Tom or the admins at Mises and tell them to knock it off.

Of course, come to us first so we can all do the same thing and show them some numbers.

 

[ClaytonB]

Keep documenting it and then when it's clear as day, contact Lew or Tom or the admins at Mises and tell them to knock it off.

Of course, come to us first so we can all do the same thing and show them some numbers.

Well, it's good to hear what other people think. This podcast left me astounded. I'll do some more digging as I have free time to see if there is a clear pattern here.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I only got two minutes into it before I was saying out loud to myself "What the hell is this trash?!"

Apparently it is meant to bore the crap out of you. Did they ever make a point?

 

[ClaytonB]

Apparently it is meant to bore the crap out of you. Did they ever make a point?

I can't tell, I don't think so. As far as I could tell, nothing was even being discussed. More like "filling airtime" while making wildly inaccurate mischaracterizations of Dr. Hoppe who, by the way, Rothbard was colleagues with, and frequently quoted with esteem. Some kind of "Rothbard Radio"...

 

[TheTexan]

Voting is an extremely complex and nuanced topic. It took myself years of study before I understood all of its intricacies.

Deep analyses on voting I usually find compelling and insightful, however I as well found their suggestion to remove voting altogether, to be rather quite offensive.

I dare say- They should really educate themselves on the theories of voting philosophy, as a requisite for further fabrication of podcasts, lest they further embarrass themselves with nonsensical talk of "getting rid of voting".

 

[ClaytonB]

Voting is an extremely complex and nuanced topic. It took myself years of study before I understood all of its intricacies.

Deep analyses on voting I usually find compelling and insightful, however I as well found their suggestion to remove voting altogether, to be rather quite offensive.

I dare say- They should really educate themselves on the theories of voting philosophy, as a requisite for further fabrication of podcasts, lest they further embarrass themselves with nonsensical talk of "getting rid of voting".

There are scholars who have argued that mass democratic voting is a waste of time, a view which I also hold. Hoppe has argued that democracy is not merely ineffective, but that it actually leads to predictably bad outcomes because it creates a "competition in the production of bads". In addition, democratic leaders have no interest in preserving the capital value of the country because they are just temporary directors who will be reassigned after serving some term. For this reason, he has argued that monarchy is a superior form of government -- it is more peaceful (less aggressive) and more conducive to general prosperity. However, Hoppe is not a monarchist (even though it is easy to assume this when you first hear his arguments), rather, he is an anarchist and holds that both monarchies and democracies are destructive and opposed to human rights. He simply points out that democracy is inferior to monarchy in order to point out that we have not improved our situation from 200 years ago, we have only made it worse by substituting a bad (monarchy) with a worse (democracy).

 

[Anti Federalist]

Of course it is.

Mises is an educational institute.

That is the Marxists number one objective.

Control all forms of education.

And in typical philosotarian fashion, they are too busy navel gazing to organize and mount a credible defense, failing to even recognize the attack for what it is.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Of course it is.

Mises is an educational institute.

That is the Marxists number one objective.

Control all forms of education.

And in typical philosotarian fashion, they are too busy navel gazing to organize and mount a credible defense, failing to even recognize the attack for what it is.

This is a classic case demonstrating the need for exactly what I advised this site needs: https://atavisionary.com/the-neoreactionary-inquisition/

But the leftarians, philosotarians and leftist infiltrators all hate any form of discipline or exclusion and declare it to be "authoritarian".

 

[acptulsa]

This is a classic case demonstrating the need for exactly what I advised this site needs: https://atavisionary.com/the-neoreactionary-inquisition/

But the leftarians, philosotarians and leftist infiltrators all hate any form of discipline or exclusion and declare it to be "authoritarian".

One, the Mises Institute is not a forum. It provides a product, and I haven't heard any of these mythical people you keep inventing labels for in order to divide freedom loving people against one another argue that MI shouldn't take steps to keep their product pure.

Two, it is authoritarian. There's nothing wrong with authoritarian, provided it remains shackled in its proper place. And no, that is decidedly not an invitation for you to start issuing orders and alienating people.

 

[ClaytonB]

This is a classic case demonstrating the need for exactly what I advised this site needs: https://atavisionary.com/the-neoreactionary-inquisition/

But the leftarians, philosotarians and leftist infiltrators all hate any form of discipline or exclusion and declare it to be "authoritarian".

History has amply proved the real outcome of inquisitions -- they do not achieve even their own stated goals. In reality, they invariably descend into the very kind of dystopia they claim to be trying to eradicate. By way of metaphor, an inquisition is like an inflammatory response. The immune system generates this response when it "doesn't know what's wrong", in a manner of speaking. There is a general immune response as the body makes a mad scramble to resolve the unknown stressor. But we know what Marxism is. We know how it operates. We don't need an inflammatory immune response. We just need to apply well-known pest-control methods. We're not living in 1957 (or 1597, either) and this is not the Cold War or an Inquisition...

 

[Occam's Banana]

^ is exactly what a Marxist infiltrator would say