Home / Education / The Ivy League’s Blackballing of Austrian School Economists
Print Friendly and PDF

The Ivy League’s Blackballing of Austrian School Economists

Written by Gary North on October 9, 2012

There has never been an Austrian School economist on the faculty of an Ivy League university. There have been two ex-Austrians.

Three decades ago, Fritz Machlup taught at Princeton, but he had long since abandoned his Austrian views. He had been a follower of Mises until the 1940s. Mises saved his life by persuading him to get out of Europe before the Nazis took over.

Gottfried Habeerler taught at Harvard. He was famous for his book on depressions. It abandoned Mises’ theory of the business cycle. He left Harvard in 1971.

There is a pattern here. The Ivy League does not consider Austrian School economics to be economics. This is fine with me. Mises did not consider Keynesianism to be economics.

There are no witch hunts in Ivy League schools. Witches never get hired, so they need not be hunted.

But the mythology of academic freedom survives in Ivy League schools.

Faculty screening is analogous to editorial screening in the New York City-dominated book world, 1935-2000. There was no book burning in America. That was because conservative books rarely got into print. Throughout my youth, there were only three publishers of conservative books and non-interventinist books on American foreign policy that showed that FDR had maneuvered the Japanese to attack: Regnery (small), Devin-Adair (smaller), and Caxton (smallest). None was in New York City. Caxton was in Caldwell, Idaho. (Where?)

Recently, the younger brother of a Columbia University undergraduate in film studies asked an economics department advisor if the school had courses on Austrian economics. The professor gave him a surprised look and, trying to be helpful, responded: “We offer international economics.” She then turned to her colleague who responded tersely: “Not at Columbia.”

The first professor is simply uneducated. He is on the faculty, but he is like most economics professors: shielded from intellectual history. The other one was representative of the brighter ones who wield power: systematic in his hostility.

I have this theory of economics. If you want an education, don’t spend $250,000 of your parents’ money to attend an Ivy League school. Get your accredited degree in two or three years for anywhere from $8,000 to $15,000 at an online school. The degree will not be worth as much as a degree from an Ivy League school, but since a B.A. degree these days from anywhere is worth practically nothing anyway, you save money (or your parents d0) by doing it my way.

Why would any parent send his child into an Ive League school? Remember this ad, which was big in the real estate bubble?

Better to have your child pay his or her own way through school. This way, you may actually get to retire.

Continue Reading on lewrockwell.com

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

3 thoughts on “The Ivy League’s Blackballing of Austrian School Economists

  1. Rabelrouser says:

    AHH, the education(?) of economics. Usually what is overlooked and more pointedly ignored is the historical fact of the systematic root problem of the economic structure of economics in this nation; that of a credit/debt currency as formed by the private Federal Reserve banking cabal. Should the substance of this fact and truth ever make it to the light of day, then the false teachings of economics in academia today would be shown to be the covering of the economic problems that they forment in those minds they control.
    I have debated others on these very points, and always offered proof to substanciate my findings; only to be met with silence or ridicule without factual backing of point. I even offer the challenge of a wager: 1oz silver (my wager) vs 1 penny (their wager) to prove me wrong. But these "educated" people will not consider "critical thinking" in an attempt to make their point. I never went to college, but studied personally and independently both forms of economics. Facts always trump ideals when it comes to the truth of the fraud of the Federal Reserve.

  2. Texas Chris says:

    True, fraud is the real culprit. Ethics and logic have been abandoned at universities, as well as true economics. The fraud of the age, fractional reserve banking under the Federal Reserve, could never take place if students learned ethics first, logic second, and economics third while getting a college degree.

    Ethically, they would recognize the fraud.

    Logically, they would reject the system based on that fraud.

    Economically, they would embrace free markets as the most efficient means of directing scarce resources to their most efficient uses.

  3. And in "science" it is perhaps worse fraud. Our grants are driven by results the government seems to predetermine, thus, research on switchgrass ethanol. Sustainability is defined by the UN and includes "social justice" in its equation. On and on fraud rampant in all "science": man-made global warming, CO2 as a dangerous pollutant, freon and freon-like chemicals pulled off the market because of "holes in the ozone". At lest 5 of the 6 USDA "goals" are fraudulent including Childhood Obesity whereby the Government Nutritional Goals end up making fat kids fatter, etc.