I have been involved in the consultations preceding the establishment of the Gold Standard Institute (GSI). I did see the benefits in providing liaison with governments, central banks, universities and other research institutions, political parties, etc., in trying to rectify the deplorably low level of understanding the historical and potential future role of a gold standard; to act as the clearing house of ideas and a forum for debates. I can testify that at no point was GSI envisaged as a ‘thought police’. If it had, I would have strenuously opposed it. As a monetary scientist I firmly believe that truth can be approximated only through debate, and more debate if needed; never by the threat or exercise of the power of excommunication.
I have never been an officer of the GSI, nor have I been an advisor to it after it was established. I have kept GSI at arm’s length. I was not privy to its decision to engage in a malicious rivalry of personalities which, if it has occurred, I regret and consider it harmful to the cause.
Budapest, August 30, 2012
Here is the discussion GSI did not want heard: