Adorno’s fear of losing institutional security pushed Horkheimer toward a more cautious succession plan.

Evidence

The withdrawal plan caused an old argument to flare up again. This time, however, the argument was not between Horkheimer and Lowenthal and Pollock, but between Horkheimer and Adorno. Adorno’s reservations, that they would be throwing away an important element of security if they gave up the Institute, and in addition that a letter to him from Plessner on the group study had shown that Plessner saw the whole thing as a burden, made Horkheimer move to a more cautious plan. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 484

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes earlier Horkheimer-Adorno friction over Institute dependency and financial security documented in prior chapters. — connects to: Horkheimer’s late institutional caution came from fear of his own declining productivity — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 496; Horkheimer wavered between theoretician and administrator, independence and official security.; Horkheimer’s strategic indecision reflected a Jewish condition requiring Machiavellian skill for security — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 1744 (+1 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Horkheimer’s late institutional caution came from fear of his own declining productivity — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 496; Horkheimer wavered between theoretician and administrator, independence and official security.; Horkheimer’s strategic indecision reflected a Jewish condition requiring Machiavellian skill for security — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 1744 (+1 more)