Was Mises a racist?

[Vanguard101]

I've been reading some quotes and I'm starting to wonder if he actually was one.

"It is perfectly legitimate to assume that the races are different in their cognitive abilities and in their willpower and accordingly are unequally suited for the task of setting up societies, and that the better races are characterized in particular by their special ability to strengthen social bonds."

Source: Ludwig von Mises, The Market Economy, trans. Danny Lewis, (Jena: Gustav Fischer, 1932), p. 297



Seems like he's a racist just like Rockwell and Rothbard

[fr33]

Probably.

[NewRightLibertarian]

I wouldn't call any of the three of the men racists.

[amy31416]

Everybody is a racist, including black/brown/red/yellow people. It's called discrimination, and while that now sounds like a terrible thing, it's really not. We all discriminate--and we should.

I really don't care at all if they were "racists."

[tod evans]

Everybody is a racist, including black/brown/red/yellow people. It's called discrimination, and while that now sounds like a terrible thing, it's really not. We all discriminate--and we should.

I really don't care at all if they were "racists."

But, but........

The governments indoctrination centers are pushing for the homogenization of humanity and every one of us has been tasked with pointing out instances of disparity whether just perceived or not...

[FloralScent]

I've been reading some quotes and I'm starting to wonder if he actually was one.

"It is perfectly legitimate to assume that the races are different in their cognitive abilities and in their willpower and accordingly are unequally suited for the task of setting up societies, and that the better races are characterized in particular by their special ability to strengthen social bonds."

Source: Ludwig von Mises, The Market Economy, trans. Danny Lewis, (Jena: Gustav Fischer, 1932), p. 297



Seems like he's a racist just like Rockwell and Rothbard

He sounds like a realist.

[FloralScent]

But, but........

The governments indoctrination centers are pushing for the homogenization of humanity and every one of us has been tasked with pointing out instances of disparity whether just perceived or not...

boom...

[Christian Liberty]

It sounds like a racist quote, but why is racism the sin of all sins?

I find the idea that Mises supported the draft more concerning, honestly.

And how does this make Rothbard or Rockwell racists? Is there any evidence at all that those guys were/are racists?

[Ronin Truth]

And I should give a flying crap one way or the other because ____________________________________?

[Brian4Liberty]

I'll bet he used the term "negro" too. Racist!

Cultural Marxism at work. Demonize the messenger.

[Vanguard101]

Everybody is a racist, including black/brown/red/yellow people. It's called discrimination, and while that now sounds like a terrible thing, it's really not. We all discriminate--and we should.

I really don't care at all if they were "racists."

Uh.......


It's safe to say Rockwell wrote the newsletters and Rothbard has some stupid stuff to say about the bell curve.

[William Tell]

Uh.......


It's safe to say Rockwell wrote the newsletters

Is it?

[TonySutton]

If he was thinking whites were the ones poorly suited, would he still be a racist?

[Occam's Banana]

I've been reading some quotes and I'm starting to wonder if he actually was one.

Oh, you "read some quotes," did you? Provided by whom? In what context? For what purpose?

Did you read the actual book - or at least the section from which the quote (not quotes) you cited came from?

And where are these other quotes you claim to have read? What are their contexts?

Or are you just breathlessly regurgitating what someone else is spoon-feeding you?

Seems like he's a racist just like Rockwell and Rothbard

Really? So where are the out-of-context "quotes" to back up your new accusations against these other people?

Seems like you're a character assassin who can't be bothered to do more than drive-by smear jobs ...

Uh.......

It's safe to say Rockwell wrote the newsletters and Rothbard has some stupid stuff to say about the bell curve.

Uh.......

It's safe to say you've got nothing but baseless accusations and mealy-mouthed innuendos to offer.

And speaking of "stupid stuff to say" - you really don't seem to have much business throwing brickbats in that direction.

[Vanguard101]

Oh, you "read some quotes," did you? Provided by whom? In what context? For what purpose?

Did you read the actual book - or at least the section from which the quote (not quotes) you cited came from?

And where are these other quotes you claim to have read? What are their contexts?

Or are you just breathlessly regurgitating what someone else is spoon-feeding you?



Really? So where are the out-of-context "quotes" to back up your new accusations against these other people?

Seems like you're a character assassin who can't be bothered to do more than drive-by smear jobs ...



Uh.......

It's safe to say you've got nothing but baseless accusations and mealy-mouthed innuendos to offer.

And speaking of "stupid stuff to say" - you really don't seem to have much business throwing brickbats in that direction.

I'm sorry you are offended. No need to snap.

That quote clearly is racially charged. There is no context that justifies being able to make an assumption that races are different in cognitive abilities. There are multiple discussions about it on the web. I asked. I wasn't sure. Unless you have a warrant to justify your anger, back off.

Rothbard has already made ridiculous comments on the bell curve. Rockwell wrote half or ron's newsletters.

Again, you can continue to be angry but unless you have a warrant, just back off.

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm sorry you are offended. No need to snap.

That quote clearly is racially charged. There is no context that justifies being able to make an assumption that races are different in cognitive abilities. There are multiple discussions about it on the web. I asked. I wasn't sure. Unless you have a warrant to justify your anger, back off.

Rothbard has already made ridiculous comments on the bell curve. Rockwell wrote half or ron's newsletters.

Again, you can continue to be angry but unless you have a warrant, just back off.

Sure there is. Anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers, and the like talk about such things routinely. Lookie here-skeletal structures of caucasians are different than those of negroes. OH NOEZ! I'M RACIST!!!

[James Madison]

Sure there is. Anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers, and the like talk about such things routinely. Lookie here-skeletal structures of caucasians are different than those of negroes. OH NOEZ! I'M RACIST!!!

Why next you're going to tell me having fair skin provides Caucasians a competitive advantage at high latitudes.

[Vanguard101]

Sure there is. Anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers, and the like talk about such things routinely. Lookie here-skeletal structures of caucasians are different than those of negroes. OH NOEZ! I'M RACIST!!!

Yes tell me more.

[Occam's Banana]

I'm sorry you are offended. No need to snap.

That quote clearly is racially charged. There is no context that justifies being able to make an assumption that races are different in cognitive abilities. There are multiple discussions about it on the web. I asked. I wasn't sure. Unless you have a warrant to justify your anger, back off.

Rothbard has already made ridiculous comments on the bell curve. Rockwell wrote half or ron's newsletters.

Again, you can continue to be angry but unless you have a warrant, just back off.

My warrant is the fact that you are carelessly flinging around accusations of racism, stupidity, etc. - against multiple people, and without offering so much as a single shred of evidence apart from one brief quote and a string of unsupported assertions and personal opinions. And just to add to the irony, you complain about what Mises said about the "cognitive abilities" of others while you yourself hypocritically impugn the cognitive abilities of Rothbard. So YOU back off and stop getting pissy when someone calls you on retreading all this tiresome bull$#@!.

The Mises quote is "clearly ... racially charged" only through the lens of modern sensibilities. It would not have been at all "charged" or controversial when he originally made it in 1932. That does not make it right, and Mises may well have been wrong (and I believe that he was wrong) - but being wrong about such things does NOT make one a "racist." It just makes one wrong. [retraction: see post #45 below] To call Mises a "racist" on that basis alone is a ridiculous and entirely unwarranted smear - especially today, when attitudes about such matters are so profoundly different than they were then. Today, the label "racist" has become so meaningless as to be worthless - and it is systematically and all but exclusively used to categorically defame and condemn any person someone dislikes or disapproves of (for whatever reason), usually on the basis of some "juicy" quote or other that has been dug up and trotted out for people like you to self-righteously "tsk-tsk" and "tut-tut" over. (And I have no doubt that the web is indeed full of multiple such "discussions" - the web is full of a lot of crap.)

So unless you have some actual evidence (from the context of the material from which the quote was lifted) that actually demonstrates that Mises was an actual "racist" - that is, that he disliked or hated people of other races and/or that he approved of depriving them of their life, liberty or property - then let's not hear any more about how it "seems like he's a racist just like Rockwell and Rothbard." (For whom, by the way, you have offered even less "evidence" of "racism" than you have for Mises - which is to say, none at all.)

[Nirvikalpa]

Sure there is. Anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers, and the like talk about such things routinely. Lookie here-skeletal structures of caucasians are different than those of negroes. OH NOEZ! I'M RACIST!!!

To be fair, anthropologists have noted many more differences within members of the same race than between different races.

The scientist in me shuddered at using that word... ugh.

[Vanguard101]

My warrant is the fact that you are carelessly flinging around accusations of racism, stupidity, etc. - against multiple people, and without offering so much as a single shred of evidence apart from one brief quote and a string of unsupported assertions and personal opinions. And just to add to the irony, you complain about what Mises said about the "cognitive abilities" of others while you yourself hypocritically impugn the cognitive abilities of Rothbard. So YOU back off and stop getting pissy when someone calls you on retreading all this tiresome bull$#@!.

The Mises quote is "clearly ... racially charged" only through the lens of modern sensibilities. It would not have been at all "charged" or controversial when he originally made it in 1932. That does not make it right, and Mises may well have been wrong (and I believe that he was wrong) - but being wrong about such things does NOT make one a "racist." It just makes one wrong. To call Mises a "racist" on that basis alone is a ridiculous and entirely unwarranted smear - especially today, when attitudes about such matters are so profoundly different than they were then. Today, the label "racist" has become so meaningless as to be worthless - and it is systematically and all but exclusively used to categorically defame and condemn any person someone dislikes or disapproves of (for whatever reason), usually on the basis of some "juicy" quote or other that has been dug up and trotted out for people like you to self-righteously "tsk-tsk" and "tut-tut" over. (And I have no doubt that the web is indeed full of multiple such "discussions" - the web is full of a lot of crap.)

So unless you have some actual evidence (from the context of the material from which the quote was lifted) that actually demonstrates that Mises was an actual "racist" - that is, that he disliked or hated people of other races and/or that he approved of depriving them of their life, liberty or property - then let's not hear any more about how it "seems like he's a racist just like Rockwell and Rothbard." (For whom, by the way, you have offered even less "evidence" of "racism" than you have for Mises - which is to say, none at all.)

I asked if he was a racist. It was warranted through the quote. It wasn't careless. Unless you are referring to the Rothbard/Rockwell comment which I could have easily defended. I really could care less about that part. The OP was about Mises. You just seem more mad than able to have a legitimate discussion. Ok buddy.

Yes go ahead and talk about modern sensibilities. At one point, it wasn't possibly racist to own slaves too. Guess it doesn't make it any more controversial then. No matter how you look at it, the statement is racially charged. I asked if he was a racist. That's all. Attitudes today compared to back then do not matter. Even if Mises hypothetically would act different than back then, that doesn't change the fact that he made those statements. You are really digging at straws here to defend him. I'm not trying to condemn him. I'm holding him to the same standards I hold every1 else libertarians criticize when they violate our principles.

If you don't think this comment is enough to question it, you are as blind as the people you criticize.

[tod evans]

Attempting to hold folks of another era to standards taught this century is pretty deceitful...

Try holding some of the behaviors and verbiage used today to the standards of yesteryear...

By the standards of conduct exhibited during Mises's life he was extremely tolerant of others.

[Occam's Banana]

Attempting to hold folks of another era to standards taught this century is pretty deceitful...

Try holding some of the behaviors and verbiage used today to the standards of yesteryear...

By the standards of conduct exhibited during Mises's life he was extremely tolerant of others.

Mises is not known as "The Last Knight of Liberalism" for nothing. ("Liberalism," of course, meaning "classical liberalism.")

[Origanalist]

I'm sorry you are offended. No need to snap.

That quote clearly is racially charged. There is no context that justifies being able to make an assumption that races are different in cognitive abilities. There are multiple discussions about it on the web. I asked. I wasn't sure. Unless you have a warrant to justify your anger, back off.

Rothbard has already made ridiculous comments on the bell curve. Rockwell wrote half or ron's newsletters.

Again, you can continue to be angry but unless you have a warrant, just back off.

A warrant?

[Vanguard101]

Attempting to hold folks of another era to standards taught this century is pretty deceitful...

Try holding some of the behaviors and verbiage used today to the standards of yesteryear...

By the standards of conduct exhibited during Mises's life he was extremely tolerant of others.

How is that deceitful?

[milgram]

For the sake of reference, the term "racist" barely existed in 1932.

Word Origin & History

racist
1932 as a noun, 1938 as an adjective, from race (n.2); racism is first attested 1936 (from Fr. racisme, 1935), originally in the context of Nazi theories. But they replaced earlier words, racialism (1907) and racialist (1917), both often used at first in a British or South African context.

[heavenlyboy34]

How is that deceitful?

It's an apples/oranges comparison.

[idiom]

It sounds like a racist quote, but why is racism the sin of all sins?

Because it greenlights genocide. If humans are of separate breeds or races then logically rules apply differently to different races.

If you are communist, then only a particular race may be worthy of survival.

If you are rothbardian then certain races may not be able to homestead. Self owner-ship and the ability to homestead property is inexplicably restricted to humans, even a humanoid fully competitive AI is apparently unable to own itself. If that definition is restricted to exclude human sub-species then hilarity ensues. If someone *can't* own themselves by definition then they won't mind if you kill them.


It matters in academics because it tends to show a lack of critical thinking.

This is separate from from a cultural class-ism which believes sections of society may have been raised to act a certain way. If one believes in population-wide genetic inferiority then it behooves one to cleanse the gene-pool either by genocide or restrictions on breeding. Its the logical end. It applies to non-evolutionary thinking also. Plenty of bible-thumpers defend the Hebrew genocides during the conquest of Palestine as removing peoples who had interbred with demons, citing giants as examples.

Rothbardian definitions of the NAP are highly susceptible to it due to their tight restriction of all rights to a tight definition of human. Other moral codes such as jainism are impervious, as rights are not limited to humans.

[idiom]

If he was thinking whites were the ones poorly suited, would he still be a racist?

Of course.

[osan]

I've been reading some quotes and I'm starting to wonder if he actually was one.

And? What's your point?

"It is perfectly legitimate to assume that the races are different in their cognitive abilities and in their willpower and accordingly are unequally suited for the task of setting up societies, and that the better races are characterized in particular by their special ability to strengthen social bonds."

This assertion predicates entirely on the definitions of the various nouns and modifiers contained therein. Mises is dead so we are probably $#@! out of luck there.

Define "better", for example. It could have been used in a very general way or it may have been used as jargon with a very specific meaning. Mises was a smart guy but I doubt he was immune from $#@!-ups.

Seems like he's a racist just like Rockwell and Rothbard

I reiterate: what's your point? You post this quote, then go all weepy because... ??? Try making a point with something other than wholly incomprehensible and poorly applied innuendo.