MPS members resisted donor interference in program decisions

Evidence

Other members of the Society felt uncomfortable about the degree to which Crane was attempting to shape the American meeting. Fritz Machlup, a Johns Hopkins professor and treasurer of the society, wrote to Hayek after a meeting of the financial committee, “Crane began with a discussion of your program. I did not like the idea that this Committee should at all get into a matter which is entirely in your prerogative, but I did not say anything as Crane began with a nice statement that he would not like to interfere but he had a great interest in the program because of his assurances to the various donors.” Hayek responded, “Crane is sometimes a little bit of a nuisance but on the whole I have been fairly successful at disregarding suggestions from him I did not like.” — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1466

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the tension in Milgrom’s work between private funders/institutions and professional autonomy; also parallels the FEE-MPS ideological split in the next paragraph. — connects to: Grant competitions let funders steer think-tank agendas more than direct persuasion did — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 578; Big donors could dictate the MPS agenda and displace Hayek’s intellectual leadership — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 973; Funders sought to shape MPS program and membership through their money — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 1465 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Lane rejected the idea that donors should not dictate recipients’ views #contradicts (0.82) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 1525
• MPS faced a founding tension between populist reach and elite exclusivity #qualifies (0.72) — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, 324