At first glance, the Hayek Society seems to have calmed down a bit.

The liberal association, which aims to pass on the ideas of the economic researcher Friedrich August von Hayek, who died in 1992, re-elected its board of directors with a large majority on Friday.

At a meeting in Würzburg, the members confirmed Stefan Kooths, an economist from the Kiel Institute for Economic Research, as chairman.

The meeting went "constructively and harmoniously", according to Kooths.

But behind the scenes of the approximately 300-member club, there is a lot of rumbling.

Johannes Pennekamp

Responsible editor for economic reporting, responsible for “Die Lounge”.

  • Follow I follow

The background to this is a dispute between the Berlin Hayek Foundation, which has so far played an important role in financing the society, and the leading figures in society.

The conflict broke out in January, now there is a legal dispute and the fronts have hardened.

The first chapter of the dispute began at the beginning of the year when the council of the Hayek Foundation declared in writing that membership in the AfD was “incompatible with the concerns, the work and the person of Friedrich August von Hayek”. The foundation demanded a clear demarcation from the right-wing party and de facto an exclusion of AfD members such as Alice Weidel and Beatrix von Storch. The foundation threatened to no longer finance any company events in which members of the AfD are involved.

The Hayek Society did not want to hear about any of this. The FAZ said the chairman Kooths in February: "Both the statutes and the non-profit status of the society require strict non-partisanship - and that is also a good thing in order to keep debate rooms open and party politics outside." People should be based on their personality and not on the basis of group affiliations be assessed. Some members, including Alice Weidel and FDP politician Linda Teuteberg, left the society as a result of the dispute.

The demarcation from the political right is not the only reason for the conflict. It is also about money and personnel changes in the organizations. An important person is Gerd Habermann, who once co-founded the foundation and society, but was not reappointed to the board of the foundation after many active years, which caused friction.

All of this ultimately led to a break between the foundation and society - with considerable financial consequences. To understand this, one has to know the triangular construction in which the foundation, society and another organization - the Inge and Edmund Radmacher Foundation - stand. The foundation, which goes back to the entrepreneur Radmacher, had supported the Hayek Foundation in the past, from which the money then flowed into society. In the meantime, the Radmacher Foundation has withdrawn financial support from the Hayek Foundation. According to CEO Kooths, the money will now go directly to the company. The Hayek Foundation, which now only has income from its own assets, dismissed several employees of the office as a result of the cut - including Habermann.There is now a legal dispute initiated by the Radmacher Foundation that has not yet come to a hearing.

The Hayek Foundation Chairman Johannes Bachmann wrote an email to the members of the Hayek Society shortly before the Hayek Days, which are currently taking place in Würzburg. Because he does not expect parts of the company's board of directors to present “an objective description of the situation”, he describes his view of the events in the mail. Among other things, he criticizes the fact that the jury of the Dr. Edmund Radmacher Prize selected a former member of the Junge Alternative Niedersachsen as the winner in an essay competition. The AfD's youth organization was assessed as extremist by the State Office for the Protection of the Constitution in Lower Saxony and was dissolved by the AfD itself in 2018. In the end, the award did not come about, partly because there was criticism from the Hayek Society itself.The company's chairman, Kooths, contradicts many of the allegations outlined in the email and emphasizes that the uncrowned winner of the essay competition has long since distanced himself from the Junge Alternative and that the jury's selection of the winner was made by consensus - also with the blessing of a foundation member may be. The outcome of the dispute, which publicly overshadows the substantive work of society, is open. In any case, the tablecloth seems permanently cut.which publicly overshadows the substantive work of the company is open. In any case, the tablecloth seems permanently cut.which publicly overshadows the substantive work of the company is open. In any case, the tablecloth seems permanently cut.