MPS members preferred stricter ideological policing over Popper’s open debate

Evidence

Popper continued to argue at early MPS meetings against the idea that fruitful discussions of politics required prescreening for ideological homogeneity, or as it was delicately put, “common basic assumptions”; but essentially, he was ignored. Many other participants, rather, expressed concern that ideological agreement was already not being sufficiently policed; a few, such as Maurice Allais, withdrew due to its perceived dogmatism. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 196

Categorization

• SEED: The reverse-of-cliché finding that a society founded for free-market pluralism actively suppressed dissent could anchor a piece on how ideological discipline, not debate, built neoliberalism’s coherence.
• XREF: connects to: The 1961 Tübingen Popper-Adorno debate failed to surface the real divide — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2402; The Popper-Adorno debate turned on pessimism versus reformist optimism about social change — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2414; Habermas radicalized Popper’s falsificationism through a pragmatist perspective to restrain technical rationalism. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2417 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Popper’s open-society ideal directly contradicted the MPS’s closed founding design #corroborates (0.88) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 194