The Carlyle Institute: A Proposition

Intended as a speech for Nomos x Mises

If you weren’t already aware, The Mises Institute in October of 2022 reached its 40th birthday. Of course founded in 1982 by Lew Rockwell who we are lucky enough to still have with us today. It was Nine years after Ludwig Von Mises’ death, that Margit Von Mises gave Lew her blessings to set up an educational institute in her late husband’s name to better spread the works and insights of Mises and the wider Austrian School. With none other than Murray N Rothbard selected as the academic vice president.

Lew Rockwell was driven to found the Mises Institute as he felt that other Libertarian institutes such as the Cato Institute had gone too far in their want to be accepted as an official think tank, and essentially lowered itself to the task of lobbying. This too was the opinion of Rothbard who was removed from Cato for being outspoken on this very matter. What else would one expect from an institution heavily run and managed by the Koch brothers who would likely put their multi-billion dollar interests before moral or intellectual integrity. Cato latterly attempted to engage with George W Bush’s government and subsequently degenerated into the embarrassment it has become today pushing open border policies and becoming a mouth piece for untrammelled progressivism.

It is no wonder then that Rockwell, Rothbard, and many others saw the need for a more radical organisation not reliant on funds from the Koch brothers, and neither aimed at shameless lobbying for easy money. So for 16 years the Mises Institute grew in small lecture halls and pokey offices within Auburn University until 1998 when it moved to it’s now permanent and dedicated home just across the road. It cannot be put into words just how impressive the building is, it is a working shrine and archive to the Austrian School.

During this period the Institute spread and developed Libertarian ideas, with Rothbard and Rockwell’s keen eye on the tradition of the Old Right always being present to manage and steer the Institute’s output. Which I will take the chance to address now. I would no longer call myself a libertarian, as would many of those I know have come through the same intellectual adventure, alongside even some of those at the Institute themselves. Regardless of this we cannot dispense with the Institute, it’s developmental teachings, and the wider networking and patronage that such a truly dissident organisation has allowed for.

This has been shown time and again as the Institute has become a central hub for political dissent, rarely shying away from even intense controversy. Be it in the pioneering countering of lockdown on principle from early 2020 which is much better than can be said for many a dissident today. Or in it’s tradition of supporting various causes of succession for the splitting up of corrupt empires or writing historical wrongs. Personally I find the Institutes historical support for The South to be a mighty brave one, one which you wouldn’t expect from an organisation pulling in, and making use of, 7 figure sums year on year. For decades there has been a strong historical revisionist tint to many of those who have worked within the Institute, with the likes of Ralph Raico whose written work on periods of history we are still to this day fighting over the appropriate interpretation.

I for one would grant that the Institute’s association with the Old Right, expressed as Paleo-Libertarianism, offers the perfect gateway out of liberal thinking and into the ideas of tradition and reaction whilst providing the head-cooling anchors of economic and decision making realities. Too often do we see our peers become lost in their radicalism, and in doing so they misinterpret or completely misunderstand the lessons of politics and history that are integral to what it is we do. It is important to remember that radicalism is not just good for its own sake, I believe in our position a sensible radicalism is required, one that is best exemplified by the Mises Institute and its representatives. As I have argued before I see many of us nowadays as picking up the pieces from where the wider Paleo-Libertarian/Paleo-Conservative movement left off. Rothbard alone had an immensely well spread taste in reading, from various revisionist accounts of important historical events and figures, to direct sources from the likes of Lenin, and treatise of Elite Theory such as Gaetano Mosca’s The Ruling Class. To name just a few of the oh so many.

Through my own hard work, profile building, a little bit of luck, and some generous donors who I am eternally grateful too. I was able to visit the Mises Institute last year for Mises U, a week of lectures going from the basics building up to complex insights from the Austrian School which has helped to refresh and consolidate my knowledge. On arrival I was amazed that such an organisation could exist, I had known about it for years but even as I was flying over the Atlantic it still seemed all too good to be true. Alas it is so. The building itself is a marvel stocked full of books from Rothbard’s and others personal libraries, investigating this alone would easily fill a weeks holiday and more. Throw on top of this some 20 plus hours of lectures, delivered by world class economic scholars, and socialising with dozens of like minded people from across the globe. I can only hope that I have the opportunity to attend again one day. I implore you all to try and be present in Auburn just once, I guarantee you will not regret it.

Given all this, and so much more which could be said, I wish to make a proposition. That we in the UK can, and if we wish to be a permanent aspect of our culture, should have the same. The Carlyle Institute would be a beacon of hope, solidarity, and most importantly organisation for the disparate network of dissidents we exist amongst. Carlyle stands as a mighty figure in history, a great man to use his own words, one who integrated what we understand now as elitism, realism, perennialism, traditionalism, and a staunch opposition to democracy and equality into writing both fictional, non-fictional, and historic in nature. Is this not almost perfectly what many of us strive to do?

In such a case why wouldn’t we consolidate our resources, centralise our efforts, and manifest our passions into something real—something bigger than ourselves. For those dedicated to a life of intellectual dissent what other aim could we rightfully choose. I would argue that if we were to prioritise one goal, the establishment of The Carlyle Institute as a physical space in which writers, artists, poets, organisers, lectures and much more can collaborate together and build a body of work backed by something tangible. It may feel like an impossible task now but we are in luck as we have 40 years of the Mises Institute to learn from. Once we achieve its founding anything will seem possible. The struggle never ends for radicals, because there are no obstacles in our way only opportunities for further greatness.

At almost all previous Nomos Events we have discussed or ruminated on the importance of permanence, in having our viewpoint be present and consistent over time. Just imagine what 40 years of focused and organised work would allow us to both develop and concentrate our world view into. Great works of writing, great verse and depicting our culture in great physical works of art. Only so little of this can be achieved if we remain scattered to the wind. Even some of the most simple organisational tasks will require us to come together and operate around our own physical hub.

In 40 years from now I want to be confident in the fact that the works we reference, and the works we ourselves develop will survive on past our life times. Ensuring that such information and the organisation around it can be passed on to a generation that succeeds us. Much of the waffle that passes for political commentary, new ideologies or accompanying propaganda will not last into the next decade, never mind nearly a half century. If we can simply put our money and time where our mouths are, and apply the effort needed to achieve what has been laid out above then we stand to inherent cultural capital, prestige, wisdom beyond our own years and maybe one day the power required to set our own agenda. I challenge anyone to propose an effective solution not following this path.

For someone who is typically thought of as a pessimist it is probably of no surprise that I disagree with the assessment that we are the children of winter. I instead consider us more the children of autumn who still haven’t felt the bite of the cold hard winter that is to come. History will rear its head again one day, and wash the masses away in its swell, we cannot allow this to happen to us. We must imbue ourselves and those who come after us with the lessons of history necessary for weathering the storm. So many of the informational and communication luxuries we take for granted today may be gone in short order. When our techno-utopia does crash and our communication lines are slashed in the ensuing whiteout we will need something else and The Carlyle Institute is the only answer.

“Who is he that says always, There is a lion in the way? Sluggard, thou must slay the lion then; the way has to be travelled!” - Thomas Carlyle