Thomas E. Woods, Jr., is the New York Times bestselling author of 11 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and Meltdown (on the financial crisis). A senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Woods has appeared on MSNBC, CNBC, FOX News, FOX Business, C-SPAN, Bloomberg Television, and hundreds of radio programs... (Read More)
Max Keiser has replied to my criticism of his segment last week in which he and his guest criticized Ludwig von Mises and claimed he wasn’t a true Austrian economist [!]. Read his reply. I want people to see it.
In response, I have now posted “My Challenge to Max Keiser.” He continues to peddle this weird narrative according to which Mises is a deviationist from the pure Austrian economics of Carl Menger, the founder of the school. This is as wrong as wrong can be, and one will search histories of economic thought in vain for any scholar anywhere who has even noticed a difference between Menger and Mises, much less claimed that one so deviated from the other that they no longer belonged to the same school.
In his reply to me, Keiser disputed my point that private ownership of resources leads to a greater concern for their long-term capital value than occurs under public ownership. That’s bad enough, but he then claims that this is another example of the alleged Mises/Woods deviation from Menger!
So my challenge is, show me where Menger ever said anything different.
Now he is boxed in. Menger never even wrote on these topics, as far as I know, and nothing that he did write contradicts my point even slightly. Keiser would know this, too, were he speaking from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance.
Now before I’m told that back-and-forths like this are silly or unproductive, let me note that I have tried to take the high road from the start, and the whole matter began because I wanted to exonerate Mises of the crazy charges leveled against him on Max’s show. That is an honorable motive. Max’s reply is filled with angry invective that was nowhere to be found in my essay. Again, defending oneself against this kind of treatment is honorable and just.
Incidentally, Max tweeted, when I posted my original article: “Takedown? Tom, we just started. When we’re done, they’ll be nothing left of you.”
Then he wrote, “Fake Mises stooge @ThomasEWoods running scared.”
Someone who knows he’s in the right doesn’t need to act like that.
Now he’s claiming he’s really taken me down this time, over at his website. I’m on my way to Tampa, so this will have to wait until next week. Count me dubious.
But “running scared”? How does issuing a public challenge qualify as running scared? It’s a challenge Max will not answer or even acknowledge, because there is no reply.
Answer my challenge, Max. Stand up and defend your statement. If not, all the alleged replies on your website will be further confirmation of who is really running scared.
Find me on Google