Making Economic Sense
Making
Economic Sense
by Murray Rothbard
(Contents
by Publication Date)
Chapter 111
The Story of the Mises Institute
The Mises Institute comes at both economic
scholarship and applied political philosophy
from a very different perspective. It believes that "policy analysis"
without principle is mere
flim-flam and ad-hocery--murky political
conclusions resting on foundations of sand. It also
believes that policy analysis that does not rest on scholarly
principles is scarcely worth the paper
it is written on or the time and money devoted to it. In short, that
the only worthwhile analysis of
the contemporary political and economic scene rests consistently on
firm scholarly principles.
On the other hand, the Mises Institute challenges
the all-too-prevalent view that to be
scholarly means never, ever to take an ideological position. On the
contrary, to the Mises
Institute, the very devotion to truth on which scholarship rests necessarily
implies that truth must
be pursued and applied wherever it may lead--including the realm of
current affairs. Economic
scholarship di vorced from application is only emasculated intellectual
game-playing, just as
public policy analysis without scholarship is chaos cut off from
principle.
And so we see the real point underlying the
uniqueness of the Mises Institute's twin
programs of scholarship and application: the artificial split between
the two realms is healed at
last. Scholarly principles are carried forward into the analysis of
government and its
machinations, just as contemporary political economy now rests on sound
scholarly research.
From first axioms to applications, both scholarship and applied
economics are an integrated
whole, at long last.
And now, too, we see the real point behind the
title of the Mises Institute. It is no accident
that the Institute is the only organization in the United States that
honors Ludwig von Mises in its
title. For Ludwig von Mises, in his life and in his work, exemplified
as no other man the fusion,
the integration, of scholarly principle and principled application.
Mises, one of the greatest
intellects and scholars of the 20th century, scorned any notion that
scholarship should remain
content with abstract theorizing and never, ever apply its principles
to public policy.
On the contrary, Mises always combined scholarship
with policy conclusions. A man of
high courage, a scholar with unusual integrity, Ludwig von Mises never
knew any other way than
pursuing truth to its ultimate conclusions, however unpopular or
unpalatable. And, as a result,
Ludwig von Mises was the greatest and most uncompromising champion of
human freedom in
the 20th century.
It is no wonder, then, that the timorous and the
venal habitually shy away from the very
name of Ludwig von Mises. For Mises scorned all obstacles and
temptations in the pursuit of
truth and freedom. In raising the proud banner of Ludwig von Mises, the
Mises Institute has
indeed set up a standard to which the wise and honest can repair.
The Mises Institute is expanding and flourishing as
never before. Its scholarly journal, the Review of Austrian
Economics, a high level
journal in the theory and applications of Austrian
economics, is also the only journal in the field.
It serves to expand and develop the truths of
Austrian economics. But it also nurtures
Austrians, encourages new, young Austrians to read and
write for the journal, and finds mature Austrians heretofore isolated
and scattered in often lonely
academic outposts, but who are now stimulated to write and submit
articles.
These men and women now know that they are not
isolated, that they are part of a large
and growing nationwide and even international movement. Any of us who
remember what it was
like to find even one other person who agreed
with our seemingly eccentric views in favor of
freedom and the free market will appreciate what I mean, and how
vitally important has been the
growing role of the Mises Institute.
The Institute's comprehensive program in Austrian
education also includes publishing
and distributing working papers, books, and monographs, original and
reprinted, and holding
conferences on a variety of important economic topics, and later
publishing the conference
papers in book form. Its monthly policy letter, The Free
Market, provides incisive commentary
on the world of political economy from an Austrian perspective. And its
Austrian Economics
Newsletter brings news and comments about important
developments.
Furthermore, the Mises Institute now has its
academic headquarters at Auburn University,
where M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in economics are being granted. The Mises
Institute also provides
a large number of graduate fellowships, both resident at Auburn
University, and non-resident to
promising young graduate students throughout the country.
Last but emphatically not least, the Institute
sponsors a phenomenally successful
week-long summer conference in the Austrian School. This program, which
features a
remarkable faculty, has attracted the best young minds from the world
over, and gained deserved
recognition as the most rigorous and comprehensive program anywhere.
Here, leading Austrian
economists engage in intensive instruction and discussion with students
in a lovely campus
setting. Participants are literally the best, the brightest and the
most eager budding Austrians.
From there they go on to develop, graduate, and themselves teach as
Austrian scholars, or
become businessmen or other opinion leaders imbued with the truth and
the importance of
Austrian and free- market economics.
In addition, the Institute is unique in that
instructors avoid the usual academic practice of
giving a lecture and quickly retiring from the scene; instead, their
attendance at all the lectures
encourages fellowship and an esprit de corps
among faculty and students. These friendships and
associations may be lifelong, and they are vital for building any sort
of vibrant or cohesive long-
run movement for Austrian economics and the free society.
The basic point of this glittering spectrum of
activities is twofold: to advance the
discipline, the expanding, integrated body of truth that is Austrian
economics; and to build a
flourishing
movement of Austrian economists. No science, no discipline, develops in
thin air, in the abstract; it must be nurtured and advanced by people,
by individual men and
women who talk to each other, write to and for each other, interact and
help build the body of
Austrian economics and the people who sustain it.
The remarkable achievement of the Mises Institute
can only be understood in the context
of what preceded it, and of the conditions it faced when it began in
1982. In 1974, leading Mises
student F.A. Hayek won the Nobel Prize in economics, a startling change
from previous Nobel
awards, exclusively for mathematical Keynesians. 1974 was also the year
after the death of the
great modern Austrian theorist and champion of freedom, Ludwig von
Mises. Hayek's prize
sparked a veritable revival in this long-for-gotten school of economic
thought. For several years
thereafter, annual scholarly week-long conferences gathered the leading
Austrian economists of
the day, as well as the brightest young students; and the papers
delivered at these meetings
became published volumes, reviving and advancing the Austrian approach.
Austrian economics
was being revived from forty years of neglect imposed by the Keynesian
Revolution--a
revolution that sent the contrasting and once flourishing school of
Austrian economics down the
Orwellian memory hole.
In this burgeoning Austrian revival, there was one
fixed point so obvious that it was
virtually taken for granted: that the heart and soul of Austrianism
was, is, and can only be
Ludwig von Mises, this great creative mind who had launched,
established and developed the
twentieth-century Austrian school, and the man whose courage and
devotion to unvarnished,
uncompromised truth led him to be the outstanding battler for freedom
and laissez-faire
economics in our century. In his ideas, and in the glory of his
personal example, Mises was an
inspiration and a beacon-light for us all.
But then, in the midst of this flourishing
development, something began to go wrong.
After the last successful conference in the summer of 1976, the annual
high-level seminars
disappeared. Proposals to solidify and expand the success of the boom
by launching a scholarly
Austrian journal, were repeatedly rebuffed. The elementary
instructional summer seminars
continued, but their
tone began to change. Increasingly, we began to hear disturbing
news of an odious new line being spread: Mises, they whispered, had
been "too dogmatic, . . . .
too extreme," he "thought he knew the truth," he "alienated people."
Yes, of course, Mises was "dogmatic," i.e. he was
totally devoted to truth and to freedom
and free enterprise. Yes, indeed, Mises, even though the kindliest and
most inspiring of men,
"alienated people" all the time, that is, he systematically alienated
collectivists, socialists, statists,
and trimmers and opportunists of all stripes.
And of course such charges were nothing new. Mises
had been hit with these smears all
of his valiant and indomitable life. The terribly disturbing thing was
that the people mouthing
these canards all knew better: for they had all been seemingly
dedicated Misesians before and
during the "boom" period.
It soon became all too clear what game was afoot.
Whether independently or in concert,
the various people and groups involved in this shift had made a
conscious critical decision: they
had come to the conclusion they should have understood long before,
that praxeology, Austrian
economics, uncompromising laissez-faire were popular neither with
politicians nor with the
Establishment. Nor were these views very "respectable" among mainstream
academics. The
small knot of wealthy donors decided that the route to money and power
lay elsewhere, while
many young scholars decided that the road to academic tenure was
through cozying up to
attitudes popular in academia instead of maintaining a commitment to
often despised truth.
But these trimmers did not wish to attack Mises or
Austrianism directly; they knew that
Ludwig von Mises was admired and literally beloved by a large number of
businessmen and
member of the intelligent public, and they did not want to alienate
their existing or potential
support. What to do? The same thing that was done by groups a century
ago that captured the
noble word "liberal" and twisted it to mean its opposite--statism and
tyranny, instead of liberty.
The same thing that was done when the meaning of the U.S. Constitution
was changed from a
document that restricted government power over
the individual, to one that endorsed and
legitimated such power. As the noted economic journalist Garet Garrett
wrote about the New
Deal: "Revolution within
the form," keep the name Austrian, but change the
content to
its virtual opposite. Change the content from devotion to economic law
and free markets, to a
fuzzy nihilism, to a mushy acceptance of Mises's ancient foes:
historicism, institutionalism, even
Marxism and collectivism. All, no doubt, more "respectable" in many
academic circles. And
Mises? Instead of attacking him openly, ignore him, and once in a while
intimate that Mises really, down deep, would have
agreed with
this new dispensation.
Into this miasma, into this blight, at the point
when the ideas of Ludwig von Mises were
about to be lost to history for the second and last time, and when the
very name of "Austrian" had
been captured from within by its opposite, there entered the fledgling
Mises Institute.
The Ludwig von Mises Institute began in the fall of
1982 with only an idea; it had no
sugar daddies, no endowments, no billionaires to help it make its way
in the world. In fact, the
powers-that-be in what was now the Austrian "Establishment" tried their
very worst to see that
the Mises Institute did not succeed.
The Mises Institute persisted, however, inspired by
the light of truth and liberty, and
gradually but surely we began to find friends and supporters who had a
great love for Ludwig von
Mises and the ideals and principles he fought for throughout his life.
The Institute found that its
hopes were justified: that there are indeed many more devoted champions
of freedom and the
free market in America. Our journal and conferences and centers and
fellowships have
flourished, and we were able to launch a scholarly but uncompromising
assault on the nihilism
and statism that had been sold to the unsuspecting world as "Austrian"
economics.
The result of this struggle has been highly
gratifying. Thousands of students are exposed
to the Austrian School as a radical alternative to mainstream theory.
For the light of truth has
prevailed over duplicity. There are no longer any viable competitors
for the name of Austrian.
The free market again has principled and courageous champions. Justice,
for once, has
triumphed. Not only is the Austrian economic revival flourishing as
never before, but it is now
developing soundly within a genuine Austrian framework. Above all,
Austrian economics is once
again, as it ever shall be, Misesian.
Previous Page * Next Page