Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Mises and Austrofascism

rated by 0 users
Not Answered This post has 0 verified answers | 22 Replies | 9 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
205 Posts
Points 2,945
Johnny Doe posted on Fri, Nov 25 2011 5:48 AM

It`s claimed by a couple of norwegian writers(http://wp.respublica.no/?p=1600) that Mises supported the austrofascist Dollfuss(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engelbert_Dollfuss). Does anyone know anything about it, true/not true?

  • | Post Points: 95

All Replies

Top 150 Contributor
Male
554 Posts
Points 9,130

No citations are given for this assertion. Mises did state that fascism had succeeded in saving Europe from communism for the time being (which was certainly true, looking at the existant and influencial political factions of the time), but whether he included this Dollfuss fellow in it is beyond me. Of course, a lot of the Progressives (including FDR) also praised Mussolini, as did the British leftist George Bernard Shaw. Mussolini's economics were theoretically syndicalist, but in practice were simply reactionary and counter-communist more than doctrinaire and theorist of any sort.

Even before translation, I knew this was going to be one of those hit pieces about the mythical "neoliberalism" that has supposedly swept the West. Kind of like Tom Woods "Interview with a Zombie" video, except with neoliberals replacing neoconfederates. Mises is obscure and little known in academic circles or mainstream discourse, and none of his policy prescriptions are currently being used in any Western country, save perhaps nations like Andorra and Liechtenstein. The assertion he, or any variant of classical liberalism or laissez faire capitalism, represents the ruling ideology in the West is laughable in the extreme, especially coming from a writer who is almost certainly a social democrat.

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 500 Contributor
Male
220 Posts
Points 4,980
tunk replied on Fri, Nov 25 2011 6:42 AM

According to Richard Ebeling:

Austria’s crises in the early 1930s were both political and economic.  Between 1929 and 1932, Austria had  four changes in the government, with finally Engelbert Dollfuss becoming Chancellor in May 1932.

According to Hoppe:

Engelbert Dollfuss [was] the Austrian Chancellor who tried to prevent the Nazis from taking over Austria. During this period Mises was chief economist for the Austrian Chamber of Commerce. Before Dollfuss was murdered for his politics, Mises was one of his closest advisers.

Mises had the misfortune of having already served as a close economic advisor to the Austrian government for decades just as Dollfuss, and his abortive attempt to establish "austrofascism" which lasted all of one year before he was killed in a 1934 Nazi coup, came along. As a result, it appears he simply got stuck with the job of advising him too. How this constitutes "support" of fascism, as opposed to merely having been in the wrong place at the wrong time (considering that what followed Dollfuss was far worse than what came before), is beyond me. Unless the moronic hacks who were paid to write that garbage can somehow demonstrate that Mises personally advised Dollfuss to assume dictatorial powers, they have no case.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
312 Posts
Points 4,310

Norwegian author clearly forget to mention that Mises was jewish and fled from the nazis to the West. Mises also was first one to state the nazis, fascists, socialists and communists are same thing with different names. This kind of rubbish is published when people want to 'proof'' that free market and nazis are closely related ideologies.

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
99 Posts
Points 3,540
aervew replied on Fri, Nov 25 2011 2:30 PM

 

 
The reverse is certainly true. Check out racist and white supremacist communities - Stormfront is dominantly free-market thin government minded in the policy view polls they have published, as are the crypto-facist republican sub-communities. The fact is clear  - free-market attracts racists.
  • | Post Points: 95
Top 500 Contributor
312 Posts
Points 4,310
The reverse is certainly true. Check out racist and white supremacist communities - Stormfront is dominantly free-market thin government minded in the policy view polls they have published, as are the crypto-facist republican sub-communities. The fact is clear  - free-market attracts racists.
There is lots of multiculturalists and anti-racists who support free market. Supporting free market-leaning thoughts is not so rare that we can draw conclusions from place like Stormfront.
-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
2,439 Posts
Points 44,650

"The reverse is certainly true. Check out racist and white supremacist communities - Stormfront is dominantly free-market thin government minded in the policy view polls they have published, as are the crypto-facist republican sub-communities. The fact is clear  - free-market attracts racists."

I like the logic here...

Mises spoke out against all forms of statism beyond a minimal government and especially totalitarian states like fascist governments. Also, the Nazis wanted him dead and came close to killing his family. Mises would have been killed if he hadn't fled the country in the first place.

At last those coming came and they never looked back With blinding stars in their eyes but all they saw was black...
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Male
516 Posts
Points 7,190
bbnet replied on Fri, Nov 25 2011 3:35 PM

aervew wrote:
"...The fact is clear  - free-market attracts racists."

This fact is clearer - free markets attract everyone except the political class.

We are the soldiers for righteousness
And we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
2,360 Posts
Points 43,785
z1235 replied on Fri, Nov 25 2011 3:52 PM

aervew:

The reverse is certainly true. Check out racist and white supremacist communities - Stormfront is dominantly free-market thin government minded in the policy view polls they have published, as are the crypto-facist republican sub-communities. The fact is clear  - free-market attracts racists.

With brain processing capabilities such as these, I have to question your ability to cross a road or go down a flight of stairs. Honestly, can you do all of these by yourself?

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
205 Posts
Points 2,945

In a collective one is coerced into living/sharing with everyone, so to a racist free-markets are alot better, i.e. they get to choose who to cooperate with.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
645 Posts
Points 9,865
James replied on Sun, Nov 27 2011 5:48 PM

Engelbert Dolfuss did call his plans "Austrofascism", but he was trying to suck up to Mussolini, who wasn't entirely trusting of Hitler at that point.  He was trying to galvanise some sort of nationalist impetus against the immanent Nazi takeover of Austria.  He saw Nazism and Bolshevism as very similar things, and he thought he could use nationalism against them.  He was wrong, and Nazi assassins gunned him down in his office.

If use of fascist symbols is so terrible, what are we to make of the fasces decorating the US House of Representatives?  Ron Paul is clearly a racist Nazi, because of all the times he's stood up in Congress in front of those terrible symbols to advise the House of what a mess they've been making.  The link between von Mises and fascism is essentially as close.

Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
1,389 Posts
Points 21,840
Moderator

Any one who focuses on Anarchism, freedom, fascism, democracy, authoritarianism, republicanism, etc are focsing on some of the most empty and retarded rhetorical musings and ponderings an individual can waste time doing.  These things are very literally nonsense, and not worth the words they are used to type with.  Mises focused on actual factual forces and actions that could be discussed - not BS ideal words as "things in themselves".  I may dare go as far to say, If you miss this point you miss a major point of the Austrian outlook on what a market is. 

If anything this is a somewhat good rule of thumb/ rubric what Mises meant by utlitarianism and liberalism.  Focusing on suc words is the last gasp of a scoundral aka lefty  French deconstructionist - at least Marx and Hilferding had the balls and mind to actually try to say something and not gleefully hide behind subsidy and fashionable word play.

"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann

"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence"  - GLS Shackle

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
6,885 Posts
Points 121,845

+1 vive ... these political labels are meaningless

The trouble with being a thorough-going, ethical anti-statist is that you are easily confused with all the other opportunistic anti-government types who only oppose this government simply because they're not running it. I remember telling one of my Democrat friends in 2008 that "I'm an anarchist, I don't believe we need government at all" and his reply was "I'm not surprised - with Obama about to sweep into office, it only makes sense that a hardline conservative like yourself would have an 11th hour conversion to anarchism." The implication is that I'll regain my faith in government once a Republican President takes power again.

It is interesting to observe the often strange use of cui bono by leftists. "You're just saying that because you're right-wing." "Oh, you're just repeating the tired old anti-government rhetoric of the ultra-conservatives." It's as if they believe that being "right-wing" or "conservative" is some kind of psychic motivation in itself. Right-wing! Hurrah! Long live conservatism! Why do I care about conservatism again!?

The use of cui bono as a component of critical thinking, on the other hand, looks for real benefits. Monetary benefits. Promotional and status benefits. Stuff you can take to the bank. This is always termed "corruption" nowadays but it used to just be called politics which shows just how far down the rabbit-hole we've gone.

So, how did Mises benefit from his supposed Austrofascism? Cui bono?

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
2,493 Posts
Points 39,355
Johnny Doe:

In a collective one is coerced into living/sharing with everyone, so to a racist free-markets are alot better, i.e. they get to choose who to cooperate with.

Actually, all racists have to do in a collective is get into a position of power and systematically deny state benefits to people they hate. They also get to take it easy and ride on the work undoubtedly performed by some members of his disliked race in a multicultural collective. If society really wanted to eliminate racism, they would make it legal to discriminate, so we would know who the actual racists were. Its much easier to use the pejorative of "racist" as a political/social weapon in a society where no one is allowed to do anything that would be considered racist. If there wasnt any actual or perceived racism, then there wouldnt be any affirmative action or any political benefits for being a racist. It's kind of like the cycle of violence. The cycle of insidious racism.
Keep the faith, Strannix. -Casey Ryback, Under Siege (Steven Seagal)
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
205 Posts
Points 2,945

Malachi:
Johnny Doe:
In a collective one is coerced into living/sharing with everyone, so to a racist free-markets are alot better, i.e. they get to choose who to cooperate with.
Actually, all racists have to do in a collective is get into a position of power and systematically deny state benefits to people they hate. They also get to take it easy and ride on the work undoubtedly performed by some members of his disliked race in a multicultural collective. If society really wanted to eliminate racism, they would make it legal to discriminate, so we would know who the actual racists were. Its much easier to use the pejorative of "racist" as a political/social weapon in a society where no one is allowed to do anything that would be considered racist. If there wasnt any actual or perceived racism, then there wouldnt be any affirmative action or any political benefits for being a racist. It's kind of like the cycle of violence. The cycle of insidious racism.
Are you sure people who are openly racist today, would stop being racist, if discrimination was legal?

  • | Post Points: 50
Page 1 of 2 (23 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS