Hayek: Fighting the Planners part 1 of 4

Documentary about the ideas of Friedrich August von Hayek.

Contents

Part 1 Covers the early life of Hayek in Vienna and outlines Hayek's classical liberalism.

Part 2 Covers Hayek's time at the London school of Economics, his battle with John Maynard Keynes and the differences in their conceptions of society.

Part 3 Covers Hayek's wartime move to Cambridge, and starts an outline of the arguments of The Road to Serfdom illustrated by East German experiences.

Part 4 Continues a basic outline of the Road to Serfdom illustrated with an interview with a former East German Stasi officer, and the absurdities of bureaucratic licensing laws in the west.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Friedrich
• August
• von
• Hayek
• F.A.
• liberalism
• libertarianism
• economic
• central
• planning
• John
• Maynard
• Keynes
• Freedom's
• Philosopher
• freedom
• free
• markets
• mises

[TheVoiceOfReason93]

Whenever anyone has this idea, remember the lessons of Thomas Hobbes - people are inherently greedy and exploitive, always putting self interest ahead of everything else. Try giving them full freedom and they would end up running around like animals

[Malthus0]

@TheVoiceOfReason93

Surely you do not subscribe to Hobbsian egoism. That is a very simplistic way of looking at human nature. Even if it was true the Leviathan state is not the answer. As Hobbsian egoists will act badly whenever they are not being watched by the state. The only to logical positions left are to leave people in the state of nature or to create a omnipotent totalitarian state. Then you have to trust the sovereign not to act like a bastard like everybody else does.

[Arjozof]

Nope. Rothbard is far from being "typical academic mish mash" and he was always radically anti-imperialistic, as a true Libertarian.

His 4 volume "Conceived in Liberty" is the epitome of libertarian historiography, where he denounces British Empire for what it was.

So I can't really understand where do you get this obsession :D

[Arjozof]

That's a proof of how ignorant in the history of ideas you are.

Libertarianism isn't economic, it's metapolitical philosophy, which includes the theory of the state, the relations of state to the individual, and its effects on the loss of individual freedom.

And libertarianism was born on the American soil, among the British colonists, who longed for freedom from the English crown. How that makes libertarianism "British imperialism apology", hm?

Besides, what is wrong with economics?

[tonymartini666]

Isn't that Montgomery Mall shown in the film???

[Garhunt05]

@stealthswimmer that statement is contraditory because any could say anything so "repudible" vary greatly. Just look at the news today and the blogosphere anyone can say anything and even some of the most blatant falsehoods are sometimes read as truth.

in your society there would be no real confirmation of ownership outside of the direct parties. and the last great Homesteading occurred from government seized land.

[stealthswimmer]

@Garhunt05

Public smearing works "too well" now because people know there are laws against slander and such, so they assume that anything that's said is true. If they KNEW that anyone could say anything, they'd go to reputable sources to fact check.

OH and yea, property definitely exists because of force....but it doesn't have to be the *intiiation* of force because homesteading unowned resources doesn't use force against anyone else.

[Garhunt05]

@stealthswimmer I know about the "wild west" but it wasn't so peachy either. Public smearing works now but the problem with that technique is that it is too effective. You can easily ruin someones reputation with just a rumor whether it is true or not.

Property can only exist through the threat of using force.

I like how you said that fear is not neccessary except it is. ANYONE can be a criminal so it is based on fear. (which is natural)

[stealthswimmer]

@Garhunt05

Wrong. There would likely be evidence put into trade magazines or people could look online to find reputable sources. Public smearing of reputation worked in the "Wild West" which turns out wasn't as wild as the movies make it out to be.

And no, fear is not necessary in the system I advocate (unless you mean scaring criminals so that they stop engaging in criminal activity).

Force? Sure - to be used against people who first initiate force or threaten to do so.

[Garhunt05]

@stealthswimmer problem with the first two: lying people do lie to get what they want and since there would be no official channel that people would trust most boycotts would be inneffective since there would be too many conflicting stories.

I'm where aware of the lack of need for laws I am saying that there is a need of the potential use of force. Basically I'm arguing that fear is neccessary in your system and the other edge of your argument is what the lack of fear would cause.

[stealthswimmer]

@Garhunt05

There are already laws against fraud, however even without such laws there could be ways of creating incentives to not engage in fraud - for example, boycotts and such and smearing a firm's reputation in a trade magazine.

The force came in taking the other person's stuff without permission(whether you consider it the "bank's money" or the money of another depositor at the bank).

As well, you don't need laws to enforce contracts either.

[Garhunt05]

@stealthswimmer the experiment is a very good appropriation of risk in the real world "should I go for the garuntee or the risk"

Forcing no lying and coercing yes

how is that "force" what did that person do by being idle that would be constituted as "force" theft is in the eye of the beholder and the contract can only exist if both parties believe in it the contract itself does not enforce itself so basically if it is not enforced it is as if it never existed.

[stealthswimmer]

@Garhunt05

experiment - and in the real world most people are not given that option. A person giving you a loan does not have the option of forcing you to take the loan. As well, there's a more complicated example of the experiment you mentioned that is discussed here on Youtube with Steven Levitt.

Debt - the force is by the person who isn't repaying the loan since they're violating terms of agreement and in this case can be construed as theft.