Sunday, July 3, 2016

Vicious Attack This Weekend on Murray Rothbard and the Mises Institue

I'm told by a couple of attendees to an Ayn Rand Institute "Objectivist Summer Camp" being held this week at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Bellevue, Washington that a vicious attack was made on Murray Rothbard and the Mises Institute.

Specifically, a Sunday discussion “Objectivism and Libertarianism” by Yaron Brook and Onkar Ghate was at the epicenter from which the attacks occurred.

Hardcore Rothbardian @RyanDGriggs  tweeted out some of the hate that was spewed at the conference.
"we can't stand @RonPaul's foreign policy"

"It's very bad what [Murray] Rothbard is putting forth"

Murray rothbard was "trying to be the spokesman for everyone... The spokesman for Mises"

"How do you still deal with the Mises and Hazlitt of the world, and avoid the Rothbards?"

"anarchism is a form of statism"

"anarchism is about the concentration of power in groups"

Objectivists: "government is necessary and good... It's necessary for human life, to flourish"

Must [re-] "consider associating" with "anarchists" who want to "smash the state"

Ted Cruz getting much praise at #OCON2016 setting aside his religious views.

"There's such a string nihilistic bend at the @mises institute" many there are "really evil" so "we don't deal with them".

 [Murray Rothbard] "should be avoided like the plague"...he's a" bad guy".. "You should avoid being positive about him in any way"

@RonPaul and his followers described as "sadly... anti-establishment," "emotional," and "not intellectual"

the discussion of Murray Rothbard and @mises was vitriolic. He's a "bad guy" & some at Mises are "really evil"

Pretty bizarre to say that "anarchism is a form of statism." I'm told contradictions galore were made during the discussion. At one point, it was said that Rothbard cheered communists at another that he hated the state.

There was also quite a bit of religion hating, I'm told, especially of Catholics. What does religion have to do with libertarianism? Religions are not the problem, states are. If there is no state, no religion can rule from it. Very confused dudes.



 David Gordon Responds to Ayn Rand Institute Attack Against Murray Rothbard


  1. Rand didn't agree with Rothbard/anarchism and vice versa. This is not news. Also, the Mises Institute, at times, is more Rothbardian than Misesian. Not surprised at the conflict. The Ron Paul hate surprised me, though.

  2. Sounds like the type of confused statements caused by jealousy.

  3. This is an interesting take on your last comment RW, the State is the problem.

  4. Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt, Leonard Read, Percy Greaves, Milton Friedman, and Robert Nozick were all minarchist classical liberals. Ayn Rand was sometimes, but the Randians seem to be very hawkish.

  5. But Murray Rothbard is worse than Immanuel Kant. I know this because it says so in the Good Book.

  6. I consider myself Objectivist and a Ron Paul supporter, although my experience has been that many Objectivists will not even hear it. They tend to be very neo-con, blaming the welfare state for all the government's problems while promoting supreme US military power to defend "our interests" around the globe, whatever that means. And, despite Rand being a lover of gold, they cannot seem to connect the evils of government with banking and fiat currency.

    As far as religion goes, I think Objectivism is correct that, as long as people accept irrational philosophies, we can expect them to hold irrational political views. As a libertarian, I'd love to live in a free world with diverse religious views, but I think that, so long as people cling to faith and mysticism, they will be inclined to live under authority. The "Non Aggression Princple" is a principle, and most people do not even understand principles.

    My two cents. Cheers.

  7. Nietzsche could have written this about the ARI - "I mistrust all systematizers and avoid them. The will to a system is a lack of integrity." I guess quoting Nietzsche makes me evil too in the eyes of the ARI. I guess I'll just have to live with that.

  8. Harold: Quite the contrary, man. Seems objectivity following Ann Rand-like "rabid hate" attitude toward faith, especially Biblical, are more vulnerable to the worst totalitarianism. And the biggest victims and enemies of wolves in sheep's clothing are the most dedicated God-worshiping "fundamentals" believers.

    Note even in America where warmongers dominate the "Christian Establishment", it is atheists who dominate the grand larceny thieves on the Left and who pivot on a dime to beating war drums with Hillary.

    And objectivism so specifically showed you another example of this. For a "non-mysticist", A.R. sure laid out the Satanist doctrine against the Garden of Edens narrative. And rationality? I left atheism for the Bible based on real physical world evidence. And the Bible preaches clearly setting captives free, against the kings of the world, so much more.

  9. I saw Onkar Ghate give a talk at an objectivist student conference last year, and he said similar things about Rothbard and libertarianism. Other speakers were equally pathetic (and irrational) in their attacks, but he was the worst.

    This is funny, coming from people who are supposed to be against indoctrination:
    [Murray Rothbard] "should be avoided like the plague"...he's a" bad guy".. "You should avoid being positive about him in any way"

    "There was also quite a bit of religion hating, I'm told, especially of Catholics. What does religion have to do with libertarianism? Religions are not the problem, states are. If there is no state, no religion can rule from it. Very confused dudes."

    Well, objectivism is not just a philosophy of politics or the state, like libertarianism is. Objectivism is a more general philosophy, so it's fair game, although if it was during this panel, yeah, it was probably out of bounds and confused. But maybe that's the problem. Objectivists don't hate the state, they hate attacks on the individual's mind, so perhaps they think it's justifiable to kill religious fanatics even if it means needing a gigantic unrestrained military to do it.

  10. Three cheers for everyone who agrees or disagrees with this article. Some people say you're wrong, and they know you're wrong, but I know you are doing one thing RIGHT! And I love when people do things RIGHT, so I want to tell you what you are doing right.

    If you are reading this thread and all the different opinions on this thread, you may have realized that everyone communicating on this thread agrees on at least one thing.


    I say it, and I repeat it. You all agree on one thing: that ideas are important. Think about it.

    If ideas are important, then truth matters. Truth matters to you whether you are a libertarian or an objectivist. If you (according to the other guy) are confused, that is still okay, because confusion is ALLOWED. NO ONE IS INFALLIBLE.

    Everyone can learn. If you learn one thing from this thread, the takeaway is that ideas matter to YOU, and ideas matter to some people who violently OPPOSE YOU.


    Do you want a better world? Do you want to change the culture? Do you want a flourishing life for you, your family, your friends and the whole human race?

    This is a yes or no question, guys. Answer it.

    Ilene Skeen

    PS: Don't tell me that a better world is Utopian or impossible. Just tell me what YOU WANT. Do you WANT A BETTER WORLD, yes or no?