Even as the members of the Mont Pèlerin Society experienced greater public and professional infl uence in its later years, many of its found ers remained distinctly ambivalent about its trajectory. Some stopped attending meetings, sending notes to Hayek in which they indicated that the tenor of its arguments no longer refl ected their perspectives; others continued to participate while expressing private dismay at the direction its membership had taken. Their frustrations were not related to the society's impact: its membership continued to expand rapidly, its leading fi gures advised politicians who were well positioned to enact their ideas, and the institutional apparatus in support of freemarket principles was growing ever more intricate and extensive. Rather, the early members worried that the ideas the society now represented were quite different from those that had dominated the initial meetings at Mont Pèlerin. Friedman's persuasive capacity had proved to be far more potent than their own, but they expressed concern that it was leveraged in the ser vice of a very different social philosophy. Members who had come of age reminding socialists of unwelcome complexities could not wholly embrace the simpler logic that now shaped the public understanding of their worldview.

Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion, loc. 562