Misplaced Pages

Mises Institute: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:16, 23 July 2005 editCberlet (talk | contribs)11,487 edits Moved more actual text to paleocon section← Previous edit Revision as of 23:17, 23 July 2005 edit undoCberlet (talk | contribs)11,487 editsm formatNext edit →
Line 21: Line 21:
The LVMI has drawn criticism from the ] ] (SPLC), itself a controversial group. In its article criticizing the Institute, the SPLC alleges that the LVMI is nostalgic for a time when "because of selective mating, marriage, and the laws of civil and genetic inheritance, positions of natural authority likely to be passed on within a few noble families." Citing some mutual affiliations between the Institute's faculty, such as research director ], and the ], the Center called the Mises Institute a "] organization." . The LVMI has drawn criticism from the ] ] (SPLC), itself a controversial group. In its article criticizing the Institute, the SPLC alleges that the LVMI is nostalgic for a time when "because of selective mating, marriage, and the laws of civil and genetic inheritance, positions of natural authority likely to be passed on within a few noble families." Citing some mutual affiliations between the Institute's faculty, such as research director ], and the ], the Center called the Mises Institute a "] organization." .


The SPLC reports that Livingston once said that it is evil to believe that Lincoln acted out of good motives. The SPLC objects to Livingston's critique of Lincoln's motives and to his connection to the League of the South Institute. The SPLC reports that Livingston once said that it is evil to believe that Lincoln acted out of good motives. The SPLC objects to Livingston's critique of Lincoln's motives and to his connection to the League of the South Institute.


The SPLC criticizes Lew Rockwell's website for having a section entitled "King Lincoln" with topics such as "Heil, Abe," "Lincoln vs. Liberty," and "Hitler Was a Lincolnite." ], another adjunct faculty member, is quoted as saying "We're tired of carpetbagging professionals coming to our campuses and teaching that the South is a cultural wasteland." The SPLC criticizes Lew Rockwell's website for having a section entitled "King Lincoln" with topics such as "Heil, Abe," "Lincoln vs. Liberty," and "Hitler Was a Lincolnite." ], another adjunct faculty member, is quoted as saying "We're tired of carpetbagging professionals coming to our campuses and teaching that the South is a cultural wasteland."


As with many political activities involving the SPLC, the group's application of the "neo-confederate" label and allegations against LVMI are controversial and have been described as defamatory. Several Ludwig von Mises Institute affiliates have denounced the organization for making allegations that they deem irresponsible. Myles Kantor has denounced the SPLC, stating that it engages in fear mongering and the smearing of legitimate, non-racist groups in pursuit of profitable financial contributions and ideological goal. According to Kantor, the SPLC's labelling tactics make the "egregious" and "defamatory" implications that "the Center for the Study of Popular Culture and Mises Institute seek to restore Hitlerian policies." Gail Jarvis, writing for Rockwell's website, accuses the SPLC's ] of using scare tactics including "hate group" labelling to solicit and accumulate financial contributions. She accuses former SPLC President ] of "]." Tibor Machan asserts that the SPLC and Dees are "not fighting poverty but they were a major threat against the First Amendment and the presumption of innocence in our criminal justice system." Karen DeCoster writes that Dees and the SPLC "have made zillions from anti-free speech, anti-free press hate campaigns" by making false allegations of racism. As with many political activities involving the SPLC, the group's application of the "neo-confederate" label and allegations against LVMI are controversial and have been described as defamatory. Several Ludwig von Mises Institute affiliates have denounced the organization for making allegations that they deem irresponsible. Myles Kantor has denounced the SPLC, stating that it engages in fear mongering and the smearing of legitimate, non-racist groups in pursuit of profitable financial contributions and ideological goal. According to Kantor, the SPLC's labelling tactics make the "egregious" and "defamatory" implications that "the Center for the Study of Popular Culture and Mises Institute seek to restore Hitlerian policies." Gail Jarvis, writing for Rockwell's website, accuses the SPLC's ] of using scare tactics including "hate group" labelling to solicit and accumulate financial contributions. She accuses former SPLC President ] of "]." Tibor Machan asserts that the SPLC and Dees are "not fighting poverty but they were a major threat against the First Amendment and the presumption of innocence in our criminal justice system." Karen DeCoster writes that Dees and the SPLC "have made zillions from anti-free speech, anti-free press hate campaigns" by making false allegations of racism.

Revision as of 23:17, 23 July 2005

Ludwig von Mises Institute for Austrian Economics, Auburn, Alabama

The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LVMI) is a foundation, based in Auburn, Alabama, dedicated to research on economics and political economy. It subscribes to a view of government and economics inspired by the Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises.

History

The Ludwig von Mises Institute was established in 1982 under the direction of Margit von Mises, widow of Ludwig von Mises, who chaired the Institute's board until her death in 1993. The Institute's founder and current president is Llewellyn Rockwell Jr. Murray Rothbard was a major influence on the Institute's activities, and he served as its vice president until his death in 1995.

Beliefs

The Institute's goal is to "undermine statism in all its forms." It opposes both communism and the American System school of economics. The Institute runs various seminars and a comprehensive Web site aimed at teaching about the Austrian School of Economics. In addition, it funds scholarly research in the area of Austrian Economics all over the world through various endowments and fellowships.

In addition to its commentary on Austrian economics, the Institute takes a critical view of all U.S. government activities, foreign and domestic, in American history. Unlike some neoconservative organizations, the paleolibertarian Institute takes an antiwar, anti-interventionist stand on American foreign policy, and considers war to be an ultimate violation of rights to life, liberty, and property, for Americans and foreigners, with destructive effects on the market economy and empowering effects for the government. The Mises Institute's website offers a large number of writings in support of individualism, and explicitly critical of collectivism, fascism, socialism, and communism. An upcoming seminar, for example, explicitly condemns fascism.

The Institute's web site frequently criticizes Abraham Lincoln's handling of the American Civil War and supports a right of secession.

Paleoconservative Themes

The Institute circulates views of race and gender consistent with other paleoconservative groups. For instance, the LVMI holds a critical view of President Abraham Lincoln, who Institute scholars believe to have contributed to the growth of authoritarianism in the United States. LVMI senior faculty member Thomas DiLorenzo authored a well known critical biography of Lincoln which included his description of the 16th President as "a paragon of wickedness, a man secretly intent on destroying states' rights and building a massive federal government."

Adjunct faculty member Donald Livingston shares a similar view of Lincoln, who he attributes with the creation of "a French Revolutionary style unitary state" and "centralizing totalitarianism."

Dispute with the Southern Poverty Law Center

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The LVMI has drawn criticism from the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), itself a controversial group. In its article criticizing the Institute, the SPLC alleges that the LVMI is nostalgic for a time when "because of selective mating, marriage, and the laws of civil and genetic inheritance, positions of natural authority likely to be passed on within a few noble families." Citing some mutual affiliations between the Institute's faculty, such as research director Jeffrey Tucker, and the League of the South, the Center called the Mises Institute a "Neo-confederate organization." .

The SPLC reports that Livingston once said that it is evil to believe that Lincoln acted out of good motives. The SPLC objects to Livingston's critique of Lincoln's motives and to his connection to the League of the South Institute.

The SPLC criticizes Lew Rockwell's website for having a section entitled "King Lincoln" with topics such as "Heil, Abe," "Lincoln vs. Liberty," and "Hitler Was a Lincolnite." Clyde N. Wilson, another adjunct faculty member, is quoted as saying "We're tired of carpetbagging professionals coming to our campuses and teaching that the South is a cultural wasteland."

As with many political activities involving the SPLC, the group's application of the "neo-confederate" label and allegations against LVMI are controversial and have been described as defamatory. Several Ludwig von Mises Institute affiliates have denounced the organization for making allegations that they deem irresponsible. Myles Kantor has denounced the SPLC, stating that it engages in fear mongering and the smearing of legitimate, non-racist groups in pursuit of profitable financial contributions and ideological goal. According to Kantor, the SPLC's labelling tactics make the "egregious" and "defamatory" implications that "the Center for the Study of Popular Culture and Mises Institute seek to restore Hitlerian policies." Gail Jarvis, writing for Rockwell's website, accuses the SPLC's Morris Dees of using scare tactics including "hate group" labelling to solicit and accumulate financial contributions. She accuses former SPLC President Julian Bond of "race hustling." Tibor Machan asserts that the SPLC and Dees are "not fighting poverty but they were a major threat against the First Amendment and the presumption of innocence in our criminal justice system." Karen DeCoster writes that Dees and the SPLC "have made zillions from anti-free speech, anti-free press hate campaigns" by making false allegations of racism.

Faculty and administration

External links

Category: