Pages:
Author

Topic: What kind of man was Ludwig von Mises? (Read 1801 times)

legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1004
September 05, 2011, 04:18:07 PM
#23
Quote
Neither the Marxians nor the racists nor the supporters of any other brand of polylogism ever went further than to declare that the logical structure of mind is different with various classes, races, or nations. They never ventured to demonstrate precisely in what the logic of the proletarians differs from the logic of the bourgeois, or in what the logic of the Aryans differs from the logic of the non-Aryans, or the logic of the Germans from the logic of the French or the British. In the eyes of the Marxians the Ricardian theory of comparative cost is spurious because Ricardo was a bourgeois. The German racists condemn the same theory because Ricardo was a Jew, and the German nationalists because he was an Englishman. Some German professors advanced all these three arguments together against the validity of Ricardo’s teachings. However, it is not enough to reject a theory wholesale by unmasking the background of its author. What is wanted is first to expound a system of logic different from that applied by the criticised author. Then it would be necessary to examine the contested theory point by point and to show where in its reasoning inferences are made which—although correct from the point of view of its author’s logic—are invalid from the point of view of the proletarian, Aryan, or German logic. And finally. it should be explained what kind of conclusions the replace- ment of the author’s vicious inferences by the correct inferences of the critic’s own logic must lead to. As everybody knows, this never has been and never can be attempted by anybody.

From Human Action.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
September 05, 2011, 03:49:16 PM
#22
Btw, the most ironic part is that Marx said that the buorgeois class had a different logic, but he himself was a buorgeios, therefore (according to that line of thinking) the workers should not listen to Marx. Its the limit of irony a buorgeios telling the workers not to listen to any other buorgeios but himself.

Exactly.  Mises talks about this in Human Action.  Also, Engles was a bourgeois and paid Marx a handsome salary to write articles.  This is because Marx refused to do manual labor, he'd rather starve (and came close a couple times).  It's interesting to see how much Marx got paid to write his Communist theories.  His stipends put him in the top 5% or so for income when he lived in Britain and in France.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
Radix-The Decentralized Finance Protocol
September 05, 2011, 03:42:09 PM
#21
It's ironic that you dismiss Mises because his writing simply serves the purpose of the capitalist class, which prevents you from actually reading his logical destruction of Marxian class analysis itself.  Marx was more clever than I give him credit for.  He couldn't attack the ideas of the liberal economists themselves, so he had to attack the very idea of logic itself.  His class analysis says that human logic is different for every class in society and therefore it's pointless to read works by the "capitalist class" because their logic can only serve their needs.  That way proponents of Marxian class analysis never have to actually defend their point of view or read any critiques of it.  It's invalid by the very definition.  Which, by-the-way, shares a trait with most of the fundamental Religions....

Yes, marxism has a lot of the components of cults, thats why it works so well on some people.

Btw, the most ironic part is that Marx said that the buorgeois class had a different logic, but he himself was a buorgeios, therefore (according to that line of thinking) the workers should not listen to Marx. Its the limit of irony a buorgeios telling the workers not to listen to any other buorgeios but himself.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
September 05, 2011, 03:37:07 PM
#20
The internet is used - and was developed - by the dreaded dominant class, better get off it Wink

Nope, brainwashed again... What you are using is the World Wide Web! The Web was invented in CERN, Switzerland by the British scientist Tim Berners-Lee in 1989.

Quote
By Christmas 1990, Berners-Lee had defined the Web’s basic concepts, the URL, http and html, and he had written the first browser and server software.

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/About/History90-en.html

You mean Sir Tim Berners-Lee?  The MIT professor?  So exactly what makes someone part of the dominant class and what makes them part of the "proletariat"?

It's ironic that you dismiss Mises because his writing simply serves the purpose of the capitalist class, which prevents you from actually reading his logical destruction of Marxian class analysis itself.  Marx was more clever than I give him credit for.  He couldn't attack the ideas of the liberal economists themselves, so he had to attack the very idea of logic itself.  His class analysis says that human logic is different for every class in society and therefore it's pointless to read works by the "capitalist class" because their logic can only serve their needs.  That way proponents of Marxian class analysis never have to actually defend their point of view or read any critiques of it.  It's invalid by the very definition.  Which, by-the-way, shares a trait with most of the fundamental Religions....
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
September 05, 2011, 03:29:14 PM
#19
Which of his works have you read?
I have not. Have I missed something? I thought I've read every 'laissez-faire' theory that deserves reading.

This would be like me claiming to have read every government interventionist economics text worth reading and yet not reading Keynes' General Theory
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
September 05, 2011, 01:12:47 PM
#18
You don't have to try to excuse Rand's cuntiness, everyone knows she was absurdly dogmatic and inflexible in her (simplistic) thinking.

 Grin
legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1004
September 04, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
#17
I'm sure the same would apply to Ayn Rand. After experiencing the terrors of the bolshevik revolution, I'm sure it would have had an effect on her attitudes. It would have spurred disgust and anger.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
September 04, 2011, 05:56:23 PM
#16

I think the man was intolerant for a good reason. He escapes the Nazis to find more socialists elsewhere, surely he would not be happy with them?

Milton Friedman agreed:

"Fritz Machlup was a student of Mises's, one of his most faithful disciples. At one of the Mont Pelerin meetings, Fritz gave a talk in which I think he questioned the idea of a gold standard; he came out in favor of floating exchange rates. Mises was so mad he wouldn't speak to him for three years. Some people had to come around and bring them together again. It's hard to understand; you can get some understanding of it by taking into account how people like Mises were persecuted in their lives."
legendary
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1004
September 04, 2011, 04:07:45 PM
#15
I've seen this before.  It's pretty good.  Do you read much Mises?

I've been reading Human Action but haven't finished yet. I read quite a lot on mises.org and other places which of-course refer to Mises's work.

On a more personal level, he was belligerently intolerant of ideas he did not agree with. To the point of childishness.

I think the man was intolerant for a good reason. He escapes the Nazis to find more socialists elsewhere, surely he would not be happy with them?
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
September 04, 2011, 10:33:14 AM
#14
Grin


What "politically incorrect" theories do/have you read, btw? Always looking for new things.
One such example is Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a 'politically incorrect' invention. This is why I'm reading this forum.  Smiley

Forget the free-market theories and the 'classical' capitalism. They are dead. Capitalism was very ill during last decades and finally died in 2008. Now we have a neo-feudal society and the respective economy. During 2008 a coup-d'etat took place. The racketeers demanded 700 billion and threatened that 4 trillion will be evaporated from the economy in a single night if they don't get what they wanted. The US Government surrendered. After couple of years they demanded another 600 billion. They got what they wanted again. Now they want more... Some people prefer to name those rackets QE1, QE2, QE3...

I ask for reading recommendations and I get a brief manifesto... you sure are scatterbrained, aren'tcha? Maybe von Mises isn't a good place for you to start Wink

Not that I don't agree with a significant portion of your analysis, BUT...
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1001
Radix-The Decentralized Finance Protocol
September 03, 2011, 02:53:41 PM
#13
Still one of the most brilliant minds we've had.
It is actually very simple. As Marx put it your position in the society defines your convictions and beliefs.

If you have a lot of money, all you need is more freedom or liberty to spend them for everything you wish to suit your individual needs. The more things your money can buy the better for you. Unfortunately, this means more people with less money that are desperately ready to sell whatever they can sell - including their body, blood and organs!

If you have no money, all you need in the first place is food and basic necessities for you and your family. This, however, suggests limited scope for products and services money can buy - that is less freedom and liberty for the rich.

I don't see where is the genius of this 'brilliant' mind?

Marx himself is a contradiction for this. Marx was a bourgeois with money that never worked until he was old (and all he did was publishing some articles) and travelled in first class all over Europe. And all of this while at the same time claiming to know what the workers felt and needed. And some people, usually government payed intellectuals, consider this bourgeois a valid representative of the working class.
legendary
Activity: 3431
Merit: 1233
September 03, 2011, 12:19:26 PM
#12
Grin


What "politically incorrect" theories do/have you read, btw? Always looking for new things.
One such example is Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a 'politically incorrect' invention. This is why I'm reading this forum.  Smiley

Forget the free-market theories and the 'classical' capitalism. They are dead. Capitalism was very ill during last decades and finally died in 2008. Now we have a neo-feudal society and the respective economy. During 2008 a coup-d'etat took place. The racketeers demanded 700 billion and threatened that 4 trillion will be evaporated from the economy in a single night if they don't get what they wanted. The US Government surrendered. After couple of years they demanded another 600 billion. They got what they wanted again. Now they want more... Some people prefer to name those rackets QE1, QE2, QE3...
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
September 03, 2011, 11:53:00 AM
#11
The internet is used - and was developed - by the dreaded dominant class, better get off it Wink

Nope, brainwashed again... What you are using is the World Wide Web! The Web was invented in CERN, Switzerland by the British scientist Tim Berners-Lee in 1989.

Quote
By Christmas 1990, Berners-Lee had defined the Web’s basic concepts, the URL, http and html, and he had written the first browser and server software.

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/About/History90-en.html

 Grin


What "politically incorrect" theories do/have you read, btw? Always looking for new things.
legendary
Activity: 3431
Merit: 1233
September 03, 2011, 11:36:28 AM
#10
The internet is used - and was developed - by the dreaded dominant class, better get off it Wink

Nope, brainwashed again... What you are using is the World Wide Web! The Web was invented in CERN, Switzerland by the British scientist Tim Berners-Lee in 1989.

Quote
By Christmas 1990, Berners-Lee had defined the Web’s basic concepts, the URL, http and html, and he had written the first browser and server software.

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/About/History90-en.html
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
September 03, 2011, 10:42:29 AM
#9
And, finally: rofl @ your claim that you've read every laissez faire work worth reading but you haven't read von Mises. Yeah, I'm sure...
The work you're mentioning is published right after the WWII. Its goal is to prove the 'superiority' of free-market economy to government planned systems like those of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia... Yeah, I don't read 'politically correct' theories... They are designed to serve the ruling class. If the ruling elite of the dominant economy (the US) manages to promote an author of a suitable theory from a neutral country so much the better. Lets not forget that right after WWII Austria was still a neutral country!

Yep, attack the man - in this case, the time and place in which he lived - rather than his ideas. Circumstantial evidence is a good standard for determining truth. Always.

But fuck it, you're right, praxeology has no application outside of advancing elitist values...  Roll Eyes


The internet is used - and was developed - by the dreaded dominant class, better get off it Wink
legendary
Activity: 3431
Merit: 1233
September 03, 2011, 10:16:49 AM
#8
And, finally: rofl @ your claim that you've read every laissez faire work worth reading but you haven't read von Mises. Yeah, I'm sure...
The work you're mentioning is published right after the WWII. Its goal is to prove the 'superiority' of free-market economy to government planned systems like those of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia... Yeah, I don't read 'politically correct' theories... They are designed to serve the ruling class. If the ruling elite of the dominant economy (the US) manages to promote an author of a suitable theory from a neutral country so much the better. Lets not forget that right after WWII Austria was still a neutral country!
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
September 03, 2011, 08:51:27 AM
#7
Still one of the most brilliant minds we've had.
It is actually very simple. As Marx put it your position in the society defines your convictions and beliefs.

If you have a lot of money, all you need is more freedom or liberty to spend them for everything you wish to suit your individual needs. The more things your money can buy the better for you. Unfortunately, this means more people with less money that are desperately ready to sell whatever they can sell - including their body, blood and organs!

If you have no money, all you need in the first place is food and basic necessities for you and your family. This, however, suggests limited scope for products and services money can buy - that is less freedom and liberty for the rich.

I don't see where is the genius of this 'brilliant' mind?



You don't see it because you're woefully unfamiliar with his works. He contributed greatly to modern economic thought throughout his lifetime:

http://mises.org/resources/3250

Might not be best to start there but Human Action is definitely his most accomplished work.


Or you can keep spouting off Marxist interpretations of whatever you feel like for the duration of the thread. Whatever stimulates your intellect more.


Please note: I don't agree with much of Marx's analyses but I can still admit he had a brilliant mind. It's a shame when people let their ideologies blind themselves to the qualities of those they don't agree with.

And, finally: rofl @ your claim that you've read every laissez faire work worth reading but you haven't read von Mises. Yeah, I'm sure...
legendary
Activity: 3431
Merit: 1233
September 03, 2011, 08:15:39 AM
#6
Which of his works have you read?
I have not. Have I missed something? I thought I've read every 'laissez-faire' theory that deserves reading.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
September 03, 2011, 07:57:49 AM
#5
Still one of the most brilliant minds we've had.
It is actually very simple. As Marx put it your position in the society defines your convictions and beliefs.

If you have a lot of money, all you need is more freedom or liberty to spend them for everything you wish to suit your individual needs. The more things your money can buy the better for you. Unfortunately, this means more people with less money that are desperately ready to sell whatever they can sell - including their body, blood and organs!

If you have no money, all you need in the first place is food and basic necessities for you and your family. This, however, suggests limited scope for products and services money can buy - that is less freedom and liberty for the rich.

I don't see where is the genius of this 'brilliant' mind?

Which of his works have you read?
legendary
Activity: 3431
Merit: 1233
September 03, 2011, 07:27:36 AM
#4
Still one of the most brilliant minds we've had.
It is actually very simple. As Marx put it your position in the society defines your convictions and beliefs.

If you have a lot of money, all you need is more freedom or liberty to spend them for everything you wish to suit your individual needs. The more things your money can buy the better for you. Unfortunately, this means more people with less money that are desperately ready to sell whatever they can sell - including their body, blood and organs!

If you have no money, all you need in the first place is food and basic necessities for you and your family. This, however, suggests limited scope for products and services money can buy - that is less freedom and liberty for the rich.

I don't see where is the genius of this 'brilliant' mind?

Pages:
Jump to: