Its not a matter of Hayek's comments being nuanced. Hayek was criticizing advocacy of external pressure on countries like South Africa- even when he sympathizes with the general aim. Since Hayek specifically stated that he sympathized with the general aim of those who wanted to act against South Africa, but only disagreed with their methods, I have concluded that Robert either did not understand what Hayek said, or was trying to smear Hayek. 

I thank Alan for providing this link to the interview, but I see no ethical problem with disagreeing with means towards an agreed upon end.

Robert also stated that Mises supported Fascism. Is there evidence behind this smear, or is it just another misrepresentation?

List members should be careful to verify such inflamatory and offensive claims before submitting them to this list.

Doug MacKenzie, Ph.D.
Carroll College

> From: Alan G Isaac <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [SHOE] Backhouse and Bateman, "Wanted: Worldly Philosophers"
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Thursday, November 17, 2011, 8:39 AM
> On 11/17/2011 8:00 AM, Robert Leeson
> wrote:
> > Hayek's 1978 defence of the "civilisation" of the
> Nazi-led
> > apartheid regime against the "fashion ... of human
> rights"
> > which the US discovered "two years ago or five years
> ago."
> 
> Since it may help to have a source for Robert's quote
> fragments:
> http://www.hayek.ufm.edu/index.php?title=Bob_Chitester_part_I&p=video1&b=930&e=1037
> 
> While I consider Hayek's comments to be more nuanced than
> Robert's presentation suggests, they are certainly not his
> finest hour, either analytically or ethically.
> 
> Alan Isaac
>