News

Loading...

Friday, September 14, 2012

How Cults Self-Perpetuate

Check out this thread. When a Mises Institute initiate has the temerity to ask what non-Austrian economic books he should read, some posters mock him for thinking of doing anything so pointless. He defends himself by saying he only reads them to be able to refute them.

No sense whatsoever that there is the least possibility he might discover some of his earlier views are wrong. In order to remain a member in good standing, you must swear that you are not reading books from outside the cult-approved list to learn anything new, but only to know how to attack them.

6 comments:

  1. "Some" people will always mock others for being different. After reading through the posts, it looks like the majority of commenters make some good suggestions and are not at all discouraging him from wanting to learn other perspectives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So long as he is just learning them to refute them!

      Delete
    2. E.g.:

      "The light must know the dark to establish itself."

      "Simply because other schools of economic thought are 'incorrect' does not mean we should shy away from them. If anything, we should and must read up on non-Austrian economic schools, if only to improve our ability to counter their assertions."

      "Do you merely want an alternate perspective... or do you want something to apply Austrian methodology (praxeology) to, and read the works to then come up with your own refutations of them?"

      And yes, there are one or two exceptions.

      Delete
  2. Gene, you are nuts. ONE GUY said a wise-ass remark; he was the first out of the chute. Other people jumped on *him*, not the original poster. The "light must know the dark" was arguably a response to that wiseass.

    Every single other poster, besides the one wiseass, was trying to help the first guy's question.

    You really have no idea how much you magnify things when you now look at the Mises Institute. I am not saying there's no such as, say, a tendency to defend Rothbard aggressively or to go nuts if a media person criticizes Ron Paul. Rather, I am saying you "see" things from them that just aren't there. This post is a great example.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's funny Bob, but *lots* of other people are having the same hallucinations I am.

      Delete
    2. At least you admit it. I wonder, did you hallucinate those "other people", too? Or are they all in your head?

      Delete