The Mont Pèlerin Society refused single-source funding to avoid dependency.

Evidence

In part, this was a product of a deliberate strategy: in order to limit the impact of any single funding orga ni za tion, the society’s leadership labored to ensure that meetings were fi nanced by a range of supporters located near the rotating sites of the annual meetings. “We always refused to take money solely from one source,” Albert Hunold, the society’s primary fundraiser in its fi rst de cade, later recalled. “We insisted on a wide geo graph i cal dispersion of the different funds received,” and the society never took “any money from po liti cal parties or their affi liates.” The 1954 Venice meeting, for example, was fi - nanced by the Banca d’Italia, industrial organizations based in Rome and Milan, and a Venetian foundation; the 1957 St. Moritz meeting was fi nanced by twentythree fi rms throughout Switzerland; and the 1960 Kassel meeting was fi nanced by six enterprises from fi ve German cities. — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, 319

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the broader literature on how intellectual movements deliberately structure funding to preserve independence — parallels think-tank funding strategies discussed in neoliberal historiography (e.g., Medvetz on think tanks).