The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Robert Leeson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Free Market knowledge seven suggested research topics
2019Co-Authors: Robert LeesonAbstract:This chapter highlights a number of issues that require further investigation. What, for example, is the numerator and the denominator of the Austrian tax dependency ratio (X/Y), where X is the millions (or billions?) of dollars that Austrians have appropriated, and Y is their ‘research’ output? It would be useful to have a metrics-based examination of what type of producer-sovereignty students of Austrian economics have been exposed to; what ‘Free’ Market donors believe they are funding; plus a systematic study of Mises’ influence over the anti-democratic spectrum—including those who funded Hitler. Most if not all of those ‘scholars’ who promote the ‘Free’ Market are on the payroll of the Tobacco, Obesity and Fossil Fuel industries. It would be useful to examine the cluster of behavioural characteristics of those who put ‘financial considerations’ ahead of their ‘professional’ reputation. What would be revealed by a Mises-inspired examination of ‘life history by the psycho-analytical method’ (or any other method) of those who assert that ‘Waking and dreaming man’s wishes turn upon sex’?
-
orwellian rectifiers and the Free Market welfare state
2018Co-Authors: Robert LeesonAbstract:Should ‘Free’ Market religion be accorded the same epistemological status as a science? If Austrian economics is a branch of divinely revealed ‘knowledge’—as the epigone Godfather, Hans Sennholz, insists—what validity do its policy recommendations have? Through fraudulent recommendations, Hayek created a Welfare State for his unqualified disciples—almost all of his ‘intermediaries’ are (according to conventional metrics) academically unemployable. Yet patronage-based office-holding—working as an ‘independent’ policy ‘expert’ for the tobacco and fossil fuel industries—has become the ‘shortest road to boundless wealth.’ Should the beneficiaries of this ‘Free’ Market largesse be obliged to register as lobbyists?
-
the Free Market use of ideological knowledge in society
2018Co-Authors: Robert LeesonAbstract:In The Constitution of Liberty, Hayek stated that ‘To do the bidding of others is for the employed the condition of achieving his purpose.’ And according to Mises, ‘again and again, the early historians of capitalism have—one can hardly use a milder word—falsified history.’ Historians are trained to evaluate evidence; while ideologues use it to serve a preconceived agenda. Every major assertion made by Bruce Caldwell about Hayek and Mises is either not supported by or flatly rejected by the evidence. Courtesy of the Koch-funded Centre for the History of Political Economy, Duke University appears to have embraced the denial of both science (climate change) and historical evidence. Caldwell and Leonidas Montes deny that ‘Hayek’s meeting with Pinochet constituted a personal governmental consultation prior to the final drafting’ of ‘The Constitution of Liberty’; or that the Hayekian, Jaime Guzman, ‘was influenced by Hayek’s ideas’; or that ‘Hayek exercised further influence through his relationship’ with the Hayekian Carlos Caceres. Murray Rothbard was motivated by pornographic arousal – he was ‘filled with a loathing for its content … almost driven to blast away at it, swearing a mighty oath that the offending verbiage would not be allowed to stand unanswered.’ According to Peter Boettke, Rothbard-inspired students at City Grove College and George Mason University get ‘hyped up on your ability to walk through fire for the truth.’ Can ‘Masonomics’ shed light on the process by which vulnerable young people become recruited to Jihad (the perceived duty to maintain religion)? The Austrian School of Economics maintains a ‘united front’ with ‘Neo-Nazis’ - and the Southern Economic Association and History of Economics Society are the vehicles through which they seek academic respectability. This chapter examines the ‘Free’ Market misuse of knowledge in society.
-
who lies behind the Free Market
2018Co-Authors: Robert LeesonAbstract:In 1938, almost 100% of Austrians voted in favour of Anschluss with Germany; and then, Eastern ReichThird Reich Austrians—who comprised only 8% of the total population—rapidly became disproportionately represented as SS members, concentration camp staff and commanders. Austrian territory was the road to serfdom for the 800,000 victims who were compelled to work as war-time slave labourers (many of whom were murdered as the Allies advanced). This history was rectified by the war-time Austrian National Committee which united all Austrian ‘rightwingers’ and provided them with political representation in Washington. One of their successes was the proclamation of ‘Austrian Day’ (25 July 1942) by twelve U.S. State Governors (the ‘dissociation of German villains and Austrian victims’). Otto the Habsburg Pretender—Opus Dei’s candidate as monarch to rule over a united Catholic Europe—was the leading force behind this Orwellian rectification. In 1980, Hayek and Brian Crozier also used ‘unscrupulous methods’ to try and get Habsburg’s associate, Franz-Josef Strauss, elected as West German Chancellor. They were assisted and funded by the carbon lobby and the Heritage Foundation, where ‘scholars’ ‘hovered’ around Hayek ‘with a combination of delight and awe that makes them seem like small boys around a football hero.’
-
the Free Market emergency demand for fascism
2018Co-Authors: Robert LeesonAbstract:The political ‘Fascists’ that Mises believed had ‘saved European civilization’ included ‘Ludendorff and Hitler.’ Mises was a card-carrying Austro-Fascist and member of the official Fascist social club; Rothbard described the interwar emergency that Fascism had solved; and Hayek, his fellow fourth-generation Austrian School leader, saw similar merits in the Operation Condor dictatorships that targeted dissidents for liquidation.
Joh Cook - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
neutralizing misinformation through inoculation exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence
PLOS ONE, 2017Co-Authors: Joh Cook, Stepha Lewandowsky, Ullrich K H EckeAbstract:Misinformation can undermine a well-functioning democracy. For example, public misconceptions about climate change can lead to lowered acceptance of the reality of climate change and lowered support for mitigation policies. This study experimentally explored the impact of misinformation about climate change and tested several pre-emptive interventions designed to reduce the influence of misinformation. We found that false-balance media coverage (giving contrarian views equal voice with climate scientists) lowered perceived consensus overall, although the effect was greater among Free-Market supporters. Likewise, misinformation that confuses people about the level of scientific agreement regarding anthropogenic global warming (AGW) had a polarizing effect, with Free-Market supporters reducing their acceptance of AGW and those with low Free-Market support increasing their acceptance of AGW. However, we found that inoculating messages that (1) explain the flawed argumentation technique used in the misinformation or that (2) highlight the scientific consensus on climate change were effective in neutralizing those adverse effects of misinformation. We recommend that climate communication messages should take into account ways in which scientific content can be distorted, and include pre-emptive inoculation messages.
Ullrich K H Ecke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
neutralizing misinformation through inoculation exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence
PLOS ONE, 2017Co-Authors: Joh Cook, Stepha Lewandowsky, Ullrich K H EckeAbstract:Misinformation can undermine a well-functioning democracy. For example, public misconceptions about climate change can lead to lowered acceptance of the reality of climate change and lowered support for mitigation policies. This study experimentally explored the impact of misinformation about climate change and tested several pre-emptive interventions designed to reduce the influence of misinformation. We found that false-balance media coverage (giving contrarian views equal voice with climate scientists) lowered perceived consensus overall, although the effect was greater among Free-Market supporters. Likewise, misinformation that confuses people about the level of scientific agreement regarding anthropogenic global warming (AGW) had a polarizing effect, with Free-Market supporters reducing their acceptance of AGW and those with low Free-Market support increasing their acceptance of AGW. However, we found that inoculating messages that (1) explain the flawed argumentation technique used in the misinformation or that (2) highlight the scientific consensus on climate change were effective in neutralizing those adverse effects of misinformation. We recommend that climate communication messages should take into account ways in which scientific content can be distorted, and include pre-emptive inoculation messages.
Stepha Lewandowsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
neutralizing misinformation through inoculation exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence
PLOS ONE, 2017Co-Authors: Joh Cook, Stepha Lewandowsky, Ullrich K H EckeAbstract:Misinformation can undermine a well-functioning democracy. For example, public misconceptions about climate change can lead to lowered acceptance of the reality of climate change and lowered support for mitigation policies. This study experimentally explored the impact of misinformation about climate change and tested several pre-emptive interventions designed to reduce the influence of misinformation. We found that false-balance media coverage (giving contrarian views equal voice with climate scientists) lowered perceived consensus overall, although the effect was greater among Free-Market supporters. Likewise, misinformation that confuses people about the level of scientific agreement regarding anthropogenic global warming (AGW) had a polarizing effect, with Free-Market supporters reducing their acceptance of AGW and those with low Free-Market support increasing their acceptance of AGW. However, we found that inoculating messages that (1) explain the flawed argumentation technique used in the misinformation or that (2) highlight the scientific consensus on climate change were effective in neutralizing those adverse effects of misinformation. We recommend that climate communication messages should take into account ways in which scientific content can be distorted, and include pre-emptive inoculation messages.
Rolf Wustenhagen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
when energy policy meets Free Market capitalists the moderating influence of worldviews on risk perception and renewable energy investment decisions
Energy research and social science, 2014Co-Authors: Sylviane Chassot, Nina Hampl, Rolf WustenhagenAbstract:Whether or not targets to increase the share of renewable energy will eventually be met critically hinges upon the effectiveness of policies to mobilize private investment. However, just as energy policy can create opportunities, it can also create risk. This paper adds to a growing stream of literature at the intersection of energy research and social sciences that empirically investigates investor perceptions of regulatory risk, and their influence on investment decision-making. Based on choice experiments with 29 venture capital investors from Europe and the United States conducting 1064 investment decisions, we show that high levels of regulatory risk have a negative effect on the likelihood to invest in renewable energy. Furthermore, we find that investors’ worldviews moderate the impact of perceived regulatory risk: respondents who expose strongly individualistic “Free-Market” worldviews are less likely to invest in renewable energy ventures with high regulatory exposure than other investors.
