Criticisms of the Cato Institute and the Mises Institute
The main criticisms of the Cato Institute and the Mises Institute are as follows:
Cato Institute
- Criticized for being politically correct and not presenting a more balanced and worthwhile analysis on foreign policy issues, particularly in the Middle East.
- Criticized for having a squishy stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is a departure from its legacy of speaking unpopular truths regarding foreign policy issues.
- Criticized for not producing an abundance of op-eds and policy statements that examine the deeper causes of the latest bloody episode and assess the degree of culpability between Israel and the Palestinians.
- Criticized for regurgitating biased, pro-Israel myths in its analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
- Criticized for having strident partisans of Ukraine among its analysts, who fully condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine and endorsed economic sanctions against Russia.
👉 Also Read: Cato Institute Internship
Mises Institute
- Criticized for being explicitly politically incorrect and hardcore in its approach to libertarianism.
- Associated with neo-Confederate positions and conferences on secession.
In summary, the Cato Institute is criticized for its stance on foreign policy issues, particularly in the Middle East, and for not presenting a more balanced and worthwhile analysis. The Mises Institute is criticized for being explicitly politically incorrect and hardcore in its approach to libertarianism, and for being associated with neo-Confederate positions and conferences on secession. Do follow Internshipslive for more information on various internship and job opportunities.