Mason, Mises cites L. G. Tirala in his HUMAN ACTION.

http://books.google.com/books?id=UPMno5rs0QYC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=L.+G.+Tirala+%22Geist+und+Seele%22&source=bl&ots=239xHaBDVw&sig=stczdTdhzVKgfPdEfKQ2AOGh4eg&hl=en&ei=dk7yTaPvA9T3gAe93MnSCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=L.%20G.%20Tirala%20%22Geist%20und%20Seele%22&f=false

Insofar as you are really interested in disentangling, I suggest that 
you look at Chapter Three of HUMAN ACTION.

There is no mystery here and no reason to be so politically provocative.

On 6/10/2011 9:01 AM, mason gaffney wrote:
> When it comes to rewriting history, Pat Gunning is well behind front-runner
> Sarah Palin, but he's closing the gap when he writes that "The racists
> (who?) argued (when? Where?) that thought is determined by race (how
> defined?)."
>
> It's hard to disentangle racism from classism, along with ethnocentrism and
> sectarianism. Not only hard, but probably misleading and counterproductive.
> Thus Malthus and his sympathizers (like Arthur Young and Nassau Senior)
> faulted the lower classes for breeding, but their lower classes were to some
> extent Irish and Catholic and rent-paying, as discerned and mocked in
> Swift's "Modest Proposal", and confirmed in English heartless and fumbling
> reaction to the Great Famine. Others were slaves of African descent.
>
> In the later 19th Century the flood of cheap grain from various new world
> frontiers put Malthus on the back burner, so eugenics took his place, with
> its overt racism, blended of course with classism. This continued clear up
> until Kaiser Wilhelm's Teutonism and Hitler's Aryanism discredited applied
> eugenics. This smooth transition is brilliantly expounded in a chapter of
> Dr. George Miller's 2000 book, On Fairness and Efficiency. Our profession's
> warm embrace of Vilfredo Pareto indicates an underlying academic sympathy
> for ideas of this orientation.
>
> Mason Gaffney
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Societies for the History of Economics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of michael perelman
> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 3:42 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [SHOE] Polylogism in Marxist
>
> I might be tempted to respond to this proposition if I could make
> sense of it.  The problem may be that we people here in Chico have our
> own logic.
>
> By the way, I would like to learn where Marx said anything as
> simplistic as thought is determined by class interest -- as if he
> precluded other influences.
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Pat Gunning<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>> How is this related to Marx? My answer is that Marx believed that thought
> is
>> determined by class interest and that the economics of Smith was bourgeois
>> economics. See the reference below. How is Marxism related to racism?  The
>> racists argued that thought is determined by race.
>
>

-- 
Pat Gunning
Professor of Economics
Melbourne, Florida
http://www.nomadpress.com/gunning/welcome.htm