Talk:Ludwig von Mises

Edit Request

I request that we make this page semi-protected, as a user keeps doing the exact change, while we try to undo it. BasedMises (talk) 14:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Requests for page protection go to WP:RFPP ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:46, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Debates on Mises's Fascism: Yay or Nay

Hi! I am in a bit of a quarrel with a fellow user over the state of the fascism section- he keeps adding original research and is not following N-POV, but I would like the opinions of others. F. A. Hayek 23:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• User:BasedMises, yes you are. To the onlookers: both BasedMises and User:VolkVulture are blocked for a ridiculous edit war. Further investigation might suggest that these blocks be longer. Drmies (talk) 02:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Ludwig Von Mises supported free competition - the opposite of Fascism (for example he condemned the Fascist National Industrial Recovery Act and National Recovery Administration in the United States), Mises totally rejected Corporate State "Stakeholder Capitalism" Fascist principles and, as already stated, supported free competition. To suggest that Mises supported Fascist Stakeholder Capitalism ideas (rather than free competition), based on an out of context quote from his 1927 book "Liberalism" (the clue is in the title - it was Classical Liberalism, not Fascism, that Mises was supporting in this book) is utterly absurd.2A02:C7E:1CD7:8C00:5D1A:D540:53F2:FD34 (talk) 08:34, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

How come he was an advisor to Dolfuss then? 46.239.116.153 (talk) 10:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Since when advising means sharing views on economics of person you are advising? John Mallows (talk) 11:32, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Adding this at a much later date - I think in the spirit of transparency his remark on fascism should stay. The quote itself undermines his support of fascism, and that he in all other parts of his work much more clearly denounces it, means only the most obtuse and silly people will be able to contort his quote into a support for fascism. The fact that it is 2 marxist writers who have somehow gleaned from that quote a supposed "support" for fascism only suggest a lack of intellectual rigor on their behalf. I think the quote goes to show an enormity of empathy that he had for all his opponents as to never impute bad intentions to any of them. Follynomics (talk) 13:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Philosophical views

I added this section, as I believe it is the most unique part of Mises' thought, and it was sorely missing. It is thus currently in its first and most rudimentary implementation, and I welcome revision. I have mostly focused on methodological individualism, his arguments against polylogism, a bit on praxeology (not to be redundant with its mention under economic contributions), and a large section on his views regarding teleology of human action. I believe this is one of the most interesting and hard to grasp parts for any new reader of Mises, and deserves much ink, although I may have overdone it to the point of redundancy. I have tried to strike a balance between the incredible nuance and thought provocation of his perspective, with the fact that this paradigm is well outside of contemporary economic science, and may never be reconciled with the direction the field has moved towards. Follynomics (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Economic contributions

This section had a lot done previously, but I found the grammar and ease of reading to be pretty poor. I've run some of the previous paragraphs through GPT 4 to enhance their clarity. I also added a lot about praxeology, attempting to articulate Mises' position and why he needed it for economic methodology. The section is probably too long, and I hope someone with an impartial view can come along and axe all the weakest parts to distill it down a bit. Follynomics (talk) 20:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Primary sources

This needs a major reworking, as about half of references are from author's writings/organizations linked to author. This is especially flagrant in the sections about his views, which also appear to constitute OR in a great part. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 15:42, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Went through a dozen of my old econ textbooks and some old russian economists writings to add 3rd party citations to a bunch of stuff that otherwise would've been deleted. Regarding the use of source material for some citations about Mises' own positions the wiki sourcing guidelines state: "Material from self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves." Follynomics (talk) 18:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

We shouldn't list people's beliefs at such a great length when there is so little other content, because then it is undue weight. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I added {{Primary source inline}} to a sentence about Mises creating praxeology. That sentence is not a statement of his views, but a statement of general historical fact that should not be sourced to his own book. In fact, Mises created only one kind or school of praxeology. Biogeographist (talk) 21:13, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't know the details about praxeology, but I do know that a biography of person X should not have half its sources as X's writings, "X institute", or "X.com". — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 09:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Political views?

I think there is far too much crammed into philosophical ideas and reception that has little to do with either. I propose we add a section for his politics given that it played such an enormous role in his life and made up much of his body of work. This would separate out much of the talk about socialism, liberalism, and fascism from the rest of the article where it seems to be jammed in at the end of each section. Follynomics (talk) 18:42, 3 August 2024 (UTC)