I found Hayek's critique of socialism bracing when I read it about 15 years ago. But then I was also impressed by Marx's critique of Nassau Senior. The valuable part of Hayek is that he highlights the wishful thinking inherent in the systems of belief he criticizes. What Hayek didn't acknowledge is that any substantive critique has to apply to the system of belief from which it is launched.
Hayek and his followers somehow assume an exemption from precisely the scrutiny he and they direct at others. In fact, they deploy all the dishonest tactics they can muster to try to enforce that exemption. Reading the chapter "why the worst get on top", one has to wonder what magical formula prevents the organizers of markets and the sworn enemies of socialism from committing the same crimes and blunders as the Stalinists, bastard Keynesians and central bankers. There is no magical formula, no incorruptible system. That doesn't mean the alternative is nihilism. Hayek and the modern libertarians can be best understood as nihilists. Unfortunately nihilism is rampant on the left, in the middle and on the right these days. Nihilism is just the lowest form of wishful thinking. Like, "I hope the world ends so I don't have to brush my teeth." Nihilism is why Ayn Rand is so popular with eternal adolescents. On 7/11/10, Mike Spencer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sandwichman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> NY Times Sunday Book Review July 11, 2010 >> Hayek: The Back Story >> By JENNIFER SCHUESSLER >> >> Last month, a funny thing happened on the way to the best-seller list. >> A 66-year-old treatise by a long-dead Austrian-born economist began >> flying off the shelves....The economist was Friedrich von Hayek, the >> book was "The Road to Serfdom" >> >> [snip] > > Thank you, Tom. > > I have RtS, have tried to read it a couple of times over a decade or > two. Never managed to get very far. My reaction was "Life is too short > to wade through this polemic." Jennifer Schuessler's piece catches me > up, I think, as far as I need to be caught up. > > I was particularly taken by Orwell's remark, that Hayek "does not see, > or will not admit, that a return to 'free' competition means for the > great mass of people a tyranny probably worse . . . than that of the > state." The serfdom attendant on unrestrained corporatism cheerfully > does away with one part of traditional feudalism , the obligation of > the lord to provide the basic needs of his peasants. Of course, many > feudal lords didn't honor that obligation but the canon of corporatist > lordship explicitly denies any even vaguely similar obligation in the > words of The Prophet: > > Few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundations > of our free society as the acceptance by corporate officials of > a social responsibility other than to make as much money for > their stockholders as possible. -- Milton Friedman > > upon which I've remarked at greater length before. > > > BTW, welcome back, Ray. > > > - Mike > > -- > Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada .~. > /V\ > [email protected] /( )\ > http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/ ^^-^^ > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > -- Sandwichman _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
