Thursday, January 17, 2013

Jeff Tucker Declines to be Interviewed on the Robert Wenzel Show

I have asked Robert Wenzel Show executive producer, Chris Rossini, to contact Jeffery Tucker and invite him on RWS.

Many of you have suggested that I do so in the comments to this post and in emails. Unfortunately, Rossini has informed me that Tucker has declined. If Tucker did come on the show, I would have simply asked him about the lack of Murray Rothbard books being featured on front pages at Laissez Faire Books and why that is so.  I always give my guest plenty of time to answer, as will be reinforced by my interview of Doug Wead that will be posted this weekend. I would extend Tucker the same courtesy. However, since Tucker has declined, unless some of you email Tucker and are able to convince him to come on RWS, we are unlikely to learn Tucker's explanation.

As a further point, if I have some trick up my sleeve and go beyond a discussion of LFB and this is Tucker's concern, my response is wouldn't that appear on the broadcast for all to see?

45 comments:

  1. This is all very weird. I used to frequently haunt Mises.org and he was a....HUGE part of that organization. So, I'm very troubled.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You know what, Bob? You are being a complete fucking asshole! I let this go, but no more.

    You're trying to create some illusion of an anti-Rothbardianism and controversy against a man that has more cred than you have now or will ever have, and you're only doing it to try to shower attention upon yourself. Tucker's been around a lot longer than you, has done far more than you, has more credibility than you, is far more civilized than you, and he was actually a close friend of Rothbard's. THAT'S why he won't go on your "show".

    He has better things to do than to sit there and be berated by some two-bit punk criticizing him about his "Rothbardian" credentials. Most people would never have even heard about Rothbard if not for Tucker's work, you shit. And certainly nobody would have heard of you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nobody would have heard of Wenzel, if it wasn't for Tucker?

      Good one, Joe. Please explain.

      And what is your explanation for LFB not having any Rothbard books prominent?

      Delete
    2. Fetz can't read straight. Wenzel says he is asked Tucker on the show because commenters suggested it. It sounds like a good suggestion. What was Wenzel supposed to do ignore it?

      It's too bad Tucker didn't take Wenzel up on the offer. If Wenzel was out of line, we would have all heard it during the interview. On the other hand, it would have been valuable to know from Tucker why he isn't featuring Rothbard. I still curious about that.

      Delete
    3. I'm a big fan of Wenzel's show. There's no bullshit. He'll go where everyone else is afraid to.

      What's with Fetz putting the word show in quotes?

      Take a look at Wenzel's guest list, he's had some friggin' heavy hitters on....Definitely not the guest list of a "two-bit punk".

      Tucker should man up and answer a few questions.

      Delete
    4. Wow, when a guy starts cursing like Fetz and attacks RW for tough interviews, you have to wonder.

      I come to this site to get fresh views. I don't always agree with them, but you have to know RW tells it like it is. Since he seems to spend so much time in DC, I am amazed how tough he is on Rand Paul. Most people would never be able to live here and do what RW does. It's impressive, everyone else here is concerned about access. We need more RWs not less.

      As for the Tucker controversy, RW does seem to have a point that Rothbard isn't featured. And it seems odd that Tucker won't address the point, if there is a simple explanation. I really wish Tucker would go on Wenzel's show.

      Delete
    5. When people start calling you an asshole, you know you've done something right. Congrats!

      Delete
    6. Oh gawwd Joe Fetz "white knighting" for JT, clear display of "butthurt".

      who wants to bet JT face-palmed when he read fetz's post? "Hey Joe...YOU"RE NOT HELPING DUDE!"

      Maybe if you promise not to get into any Intellectual Property line of discussion he may decide to attend. Ohhhhh, that last line may set Fetz off again.....

      Keep up the good work RW...you're just asking a simple question.

      Delete
    7. So, I wrote a message defending Joe and agreeing that Bob is out of line and it never made it past the moderation. It looks like one critical post was allowed through and then a lot of defense for Bob. Is this place being censored now? Are voices critical of Mr. Wenzel not permitted?

      Delete
    8. Did you look at Fetz's comment? And you think voices critical of Wenzel are not permitted?

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. As Wenzel would say, "Popcorn time."

      Delete
  4. I just went to Wenzel's original post on this controversy:

    http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/01/murray-rothbard-slowly-going-down.html

    Although he states his concern and lists the facts, he seems quite courtious to Jeff Tucker. He concludes with this:

    "Perhaps, Jeffrey Tucker, the publisher and executive editor of Laissez-Faire Books, can explain at the LFB blog, what gives."

    That doesn't strike me as a major attack on LFB or Tucker. He is asking Tucker for an explanation. Is that unreasonable?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why wouldn't he just appear on the show if this is all a misunderstanding? Or at least type out an explanation? These days with the hit count Wenzel generates, he is actually a bigger influence on the libertarian movement than Tucker.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Joe Fetz, I think you owe Wenzel an apology. Wenzel asks tough questions, but he has never stooped to the level you did in your comment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome to the Wild, Wild, West otherwise known as the Internet.

      Delete
    2. Yup. It's a crazy but interesting place, eh? :P

      Delete
  7. Hay everybody, we're about to top 17,000,000 page loads!

    Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
    And never brought to mind?
    Should auld acquaintance be forgot,
    And auld lang syne!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hey Fetz, EPJ just crossed 17 million page views. Was Tucker responsible for that?

    ReplyDelete
  9. You know, I just realized something. You rarely see at EPJ the kind of abusive language that Fetz launched. I think its partly because EPJ attracts a class crowd but, I also think RW may not allow abusive attacks--outside of those aimed at him.

    Nice job, Bob!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think a Wenzel-Tucker interview might have been interesting. Unfortunately, RW's insinuations were not terribly couth, and a rather uninteresting basis for an interview. That uncouth approach may have cost him the interview.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For what it's worth, I suspect it's due to the past feud Mr. Wenzel has had with Tucker over intellectual property.

    As for the lack of Rothbard books not being featured, I will point out that LFB has featured plenty of Hans-Herman Hoppe books and HHH is as Rothbardian as you get.

    That said, I do love the RW show. Keep them up!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wenzel, if Tucker agrees to give the interview you should get a copyright on it and charge us 3 bitcoins to listen.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Why would a full blown ancap, Austrian, and man with credentials such as Jeffrey Tucker choose to have those credentials questioned by anybody?

    If i was him, i wouldn't go on either.

    To ask hard questions to absolute frauds, or those who do not even seem familiar with the works of someone like Murray Rothbard (e.g. Gary Johnson) is one thing, but to act like a jackass to pure ancaps for some imagined "deviation" from pure Rothbard-worship or conservative family values (e.g. Stefan Molyneux, Jeffrey Tucker) is quite another.

    I usually think those whining about divisive treatments are wrong, but if anyone proves those whiners right now and then, it's Wenzel with nonsense like this.

    Rothbard is NOT the god of libertarianism. Stop worshipping him.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Next up: Tom Woods gets raked over the coals by EPJ for not mentioning Murray Rothbard's name at least once in every Youtube video.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it a controversy? Can Dr. Woods get payment out of mentioning (Dr.) Rothbard? Does Woods have a long-standing association with Rothbard? Does Woods' not mentioning Rothbard in every video strike anyone as being the slightest bit odd, and could one simple mention of him be done without affecting the rest of his message entirely?

      Well, I imagine one could answer "yes" to the last one - the last part of it, at least - but as for the rest..."not so much."

      Delete
  15. What is the controversy? If you're selling books, why feature Rothbard books that are distributed free of charge on Mises.org? If you navigated your way to LFB, then you probably already know about Murray, why not take the opportunity to feature other works with the limited space you have? Makes sense to me.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Why MUST LFB prominently feature Rothbard? There are plenty if free market writers past and present. Seems like a tempest in a teapot. What an awkward to kick up a fuss over. Rothbard's influence is all over mises.org, happily. I don't think there would be any reason to suggest that Tucker would be doing a disservice to him.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Though Joseph is being too over the top I don't think Tucker really owes you Bob or anyone an explanation. Just my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  18. There's a lot of history between Jeffrey Tucker and Bob Wenzel and not just this LFB controversy so maybe that would be the reason why Jeff won't appear on the show (although I can't speak for him). It would have been interesting to hear a good IP debate between the two though.

    ReplyDelete
  19. He's not giving interviews but Tucker's definitely talked about it at LFB:


    "Yeah, I don't even know what to say to this stuff. There's a lot I could say but it's not my way. Let's just say that this writer has a history."


    When questioned further on that comment, Tucker replied:


    "Well, I don't like to dish the dirt so I'll just stop there.

    By the way, I'm sorry I came across as defensive."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, if he is apologizing that means he is getting negative feedback from his customers.

      As for "I don't like to dish dirt, but there is history." That is dishing vicious dirt.

      Wenzel asks tough questions, but he never pulls of these sneaky innuendos the way Tucker does. Tucker is coming off more and more like a cheap shot artist and I am glad LFB customers are letting him have it.

      Delete
  20. I enjoy reading both Tucker and Wenzel. I appreciate their work and admire their different approaches. I love that Wenzel is uncompromising, always true to principle and not shy about it. I also like how Tucker calls attention to all the little joys that the market brings us, as well as the many miseries regulation brings, yet always remains optimistic about the future.

    Too bad they can't get along.

    By the way, I think Tucker is right on IP.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Just a bit of sleuthing here, but this article and embedded video includes Jeffrey Tucker’s explanation to the new owners of lfb.org (Agora Financial) about his vision for the company.

    http://newsroom.agorafinancial.com/tucker-laissez-faire-books/

    ““Books,” said Tucker. “Laissez Faire has always been about promoting commerce. Now the institution itself has become a commercial venture. This gives us a great incentive to do the best possible job, the incentive to find authors who write great books and publish them in a way that gives maximum exposure. This aspect of things I am very excited about.””

    In the video he goes on to say that the company is basically about making money on selling books (free market model) and, in doing that, bringing to light a new generation of authors that share in the message of liberty.

    As many have pointed out before, mises.org is essentially run like a college/learning institute on a donation model and publishes all of the larger and more widely know authors, including Mises and Rothbard for free. I don’t mean to put words in Tucker’s mouth, but it’s safe to say, he may have taken this role at lfb.org as a change of pace personally, and as an opportunity to expand on the publishing of lesser known authors, and in a manner to create a profitable on-line reading community. I have no idea on the financials if he has been successful or not.

    Personally, from looking at the website, I have come across several authors I have never heard of, even having been a long time reader of (and purchaser of Rothbard and Mises books from) mises.org. From the look of it I think they essentially treat themselves as an add-on to the primary reading lists trying to highlight new authors as well as overlooked older authors.

    Obviously, being for profit, they will sell and/or highlight any book that they print that is selling well which could be the reason for the “top authors” list, but the lfb book club, which is significant feature of their site, at least recently has been focusing on books that may be less well known in the liberty community. I saw recently, and now want to read, God of the Machine by Isabel Paterson someone I had previously never heard of. I came to this show late around 2000. I think Tucker wanted to take advantage of the library lfb had amassed since 1972, particularly lesser known items, and get it into the public for money. I am sure lfb customers still gravitate to more well known authors and but certain items there, but I am pretty sure the focus is elsewhere.

    Based on this it seems a little short sited to criticize the site as not highlighting Rothbard. One, it is not the mission of lfb and two, it would put lfb, in direct conflict with mises.org that generates a good deal of additional fundraising money from selling Rothbard and Mises. I don’t think mises.org expected Tucker to not sell any Rothbard or Mises items, but I think to keep on good terms, which to the best of my knowledge is the case, it would seem that they have found some sort of happy co-existence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a correct analysis. Wenzel seems to not understand basic economics on this issue. LFB has to differentiate itself from mises.org.

      Delete
    2. That argument doesn't wash. Mises.org does the same thing with Ludwig von Mises books, but Tucker has them on the frontpage. And if this was the case, why didn't Tucker says so in his answer. He really offered no explanation.

      Delete
    3. Well, like I said, the lfb site is based on money, and the top sellers are listed on the front page. I have no idea what or how the copyrights work for Rothbard’s works are vis-à-vis selling books, but for whatever reason, lfb sells a lot of Mises and does not sell a lot of Rothbard.

      The larger issue is what is the point of the question? Is Jeffrey Tucker and lfb going soft on Rothbard as evidenced by their not selling or heavily promoting his books? There is simply no way based on the evidence to even approach that conclusion since there are many other factors the influence what is and is not sold at lfb.

      I am no Jeffrey Tucker expert, but I have seen him on an off in videos for over a decade and never once heard him even hedge in the direction of marginalizing the thoughts and contributions of Rothbard. Here is a video from October on Adam vs. the Man extolling the virtues of Rothbard to a young audience, discussing the time he helped put on a version of Mozart was a Red, Rothbard’s play.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7pFg4N9WfY

      It’s quite possible that Tucker is simply offended at the basic premise of the question. Watch the video. He digs Rothbard, and still does. In the video Tucker refers to him (Rothbard) as a scary example, because he was so prolific and good at so many aspects of economics, history and philosophy that it is daunting to work in the movement because people (Tucker included) feel inadequate by comparison. Doesn’t seem to me like he is short selling Rothbard here. In fact, it’s quite obvious with an ounce of googling that Tucker still holds him and his thoughts in the highest regards, as do most of us.

      The reason he does not “just come out and answer the question” in his video blog is because the question is not a question but some obtuse veiled accusation, and an asinine one at that.

      Delete
    4. ''it's possible this, it's possible that''...The question is simple: if Rothbard is not on the list because the sales of his books are low, why on earth would Tucker not say so? Why? Instead he spent two minutes mumbling inarticulately about his great appreciation for Murray, you know... um... hm...

      Delete
  22. Is Mark 'the rat' Skousen the 'new' Rothbard ?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I don't think RW is trying to take down Tucker with an interview, maybe at worse get into a friendly back and forth. The whole thing seemed very friendly to me.

    Regarding Tucker, he's a really great guy who's done a ton for the movement, but when I met him he struck me as someone who is more introverted and private than his job allows him to be. Maybe the reason he doesn't want to come on is that he's focused on other things and doesn't want to cause a controversy inside libertarian circles over a question that would be considered cocktail banter at a Mises event.

    Sometimes you can just think something isn't a good use of your time. I say give Jeff credit on this, even if I did want to see Wenzel and Tucker exchange intellectual blows. I have a tremendous amount of respect for both individuals.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think Tucker should have went on the show, would have been very interesting, as I'm sure you guys could have talked about many other things as well. Disappointed this will not happen.

    However, I do think Bob should have tried contacting LFB or Tucker by private email instead of putting up a public post which could be seen by some as trying to start trouble/questioning their libertarianism. The last thing we need is unnecessary in-fighting over non-issues (it could be a non-issue, Tucker hasn't really answered after all).

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'd love to hear you interview Stephan Kinsella on the show.

    He has done lots of work on Libertarian legal theory, especially Intellectual Property. Would be interesting to hear you discuss IP with him.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Good for Jeff Tucker. I wouldn't respond to such inane, manufactured drama either. Wenzel clearly has some personal beef with Jeff Tucker, and this ridiculous accusation that somehow Jeff's company is trying to downplay Rothbard is just the latest manifestation of this nonsense.

    Concentrate on the real enemies, Robert. Quit starting unnecessary in-fighting.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Well, he thinks you're a troll because of your made-up critique of his IP stance, so why would he go on your show?

    I have yet to see a response from Wenzel where he points to a specific quote of Tucker in which Tucker says NDAs should not exist.

    ReplyDelete