The Road to Serfdom

Rating:
Summary: Why planning is doomed
Review: - Planning is the root to the most sinister evil.
- Money is one of the greatest instruments of freedom ever invented.
- Security is dangerous.

These are not excerpts from the Newspeak of Orwells 1984, but three of the conclusions Friedrich Hayeks draws in this very well written book. His motive for writing it was observations of the public debate in England during the 1930s, and into WWII. As an Austrian, Hayek had witnessed the same path of public discussion earlier, in Germany and Austria during the 1920s. The path included a strong disbelief in the market economy, and a strong belief in the planned economy. Hayek was very afraid about how this would end in England, and the book could be seen as a general warning. The connection between political and economic freedom is shown in great logic. A certain degree of economic freedom is a prerequisite for political freedom (not the other way around, though). He also explains how the planned economy, even promoted with the best intentions, is doomed to fail. The Directorates in power will soon attract the selfish ones, and that they will use their ultimate power for the worst.

As we know now, Hayeks fear did not materialize. The liberal democracies of the west stayed democratic and free. This could prove that either he was wrong, or the public understood the dangers of planning soon enough to avoid the path to dictatorship.

An important flip side of the book is a small sentence on page 180: In any society freedom of thought will probably be of direct significance only for a small minority. This sentence suggest that Hayeks himself did not carry the torch of idealistic freedom as high as most of the book pretends. But still: an important book, well written and filled with delightful logic.

Rating:
Summary: Bloated
Review: The actual writing of the book is its major weakness. It seems that the author uses too many words to say things. Much like any book written by Ayn Rand, between 50-70% of the book could have been omitted with no major loss in content.

Also: When talking about social theory, it is absolutely critical to back up general statements with specific examples. And this was not done to my satisfaction.

Hayek's later book, "The Fatal Conceit" covered many of the same themes that were detailed in this book. For a more concise read, try that instead.

Rating:
Summary: Dated but still a classic
Review: The Road to Serfdom is Hayek's classic exposition of the superiority of individual liberty over central planning. As he does in other writings, Hayek advocates free enterprise, competition, private property, and limited government.

Reading it in 2004, or 60 years after its initial publication, the book comes across somewhat dated. There are many references to World War II-Hayek argues that central planning, communism, socialism, totalitarianism, Naziism, fascism are all cut from the same cloth, which at the time of its original publication was a sufficient argument, but which is probably less persuasive many years later to collectivists who are not quite Naziis. Indeed, Hayek's subject may at first appear a bit like a strawman, since by now blatant, outright central planning has, for all intents and purposes, been abandoned worldwide, the Berlin Wall has fallen, and no serious thinkers any longer advocate communism.

Still, at the time the book was published, central planning was very much alive, and the subject was highly relevant indeed. One could easily argue that the book, or at least its ideas, contributed towards the downfall of communism, based on news reports that Eastern European dissidents found inspiration in Hayek's writings. Furthermore, although communism may be dead, socialism is still very much alive at least in Western Europe (where, unlike in the United States, capitalism is almost like a four-letter word and socialism continues to be a respected political-party label). And even in the United States, although it is generally understood that government ownership of the means of production is not desirable, government ownership of the fruits of economic production is still very much a fact (p. xxiii: "socialism has come to mean chiefly the extensive redistribution of incomes through taxation and the institutions of the welfare state"; cf. p. xxxiv). But these more subtle forms of central planning are addressed more fully in Hayek's subsequent publications (e.g. The Constitution of Liberty and Law, Legislation and Liberty).

If you read but one book by Hayek, you may be better off with The Constitution of Liberty. But if you want to read several, and trace the shaping of Hayek's ideas, you definitely want to include The Road to Serfdom, if only because it was his first political book, and themes of it can be recognized in the writings of subsequent libertarians. Rosen and Wolff's Oxford Reader in Political Thought quotes pp. 119-124. All in all, it is with reason that The Road to Serfdom is still considered a classic.

One last point worth noting: Hayek is frequently credited with the idea that it is the price mechanism as a communicative vehicle of relevant information that makes free markets far more economically efficient than centrally planned economies. The usual citation on this is an article Hayek published in 1945, but The Road to Serfdom, published a year earlier in 1944, contains two paragraphs that make very much the same point in layman's language (pp. 55-56 of the 1994 edition).


Rating:
Summary: A sage for all seasons
Review: I have given over 100 copies of this book to friends and family, and even to a few strangers who had a lot of opinions about the world and economies without an understanding of human nature. One of the recipients of this book nearly had a heart attack when reading it because it was so effective in disabusing him of his liberal core beliefs that the bureaucrats who populate the faceless heartless beast of big government know best. He was fortunate enough to be able to leave Canada and its socialist medical system and come to the US before he died waiting for treatment. Hayek was one of those extraordinary humans who was unafraid to look the lion in the mouth and pull out his teeth when he wrote this during the detour to hell that freedom took in the era of the march of socialism across the globe during the 1930's, 40's and 50's and 60's. Few books have been so right at a time when so many of his fellow economists/philosophers were so horribly wrong. Whether it was the NAZI "National Socialism" the Soviet's communism, the Labour Party in the UK, or the Democrat Party in the USA, among others, the title says it all. There have always been serfs in human society, some with more liberty to choose that path than others, but it is rare to find someone who can identify the root causes of poverty; economic, moral, and intellectual, as Hayek did. This is really one of the most important books in the history of human thought.

Rating:
Summary: Not an easy read, but excellent points
Review: Some of the negative critics here said, to paraphraze, "in capitalism, if you're not rich, you don't count". NEWSFLASH: it is not ANY different in a socialist/communist/fascist society (that's right, I believe there's no difference between the three).

The Soviet Union did not fall for no reason. It did not fall because of some CIA secret conspiracy ploy. _It fell because in reality, socialism simply does not work._ As simple as that. I should know, I was born and raised in the former USSR. Sure, we had free healthcare and education, but have you ever asked the question, dear socialists, what was it LIKE? Here's a hint: you get what you pay for. People died from simple diseases like the flu because their doctors did not have enough knowledge or experience to diagnose and treat them. Children were not allowed to learn anything beyond the school's approved program, and as little as asking the wrong question could get you kicked out, which would essentially doom you for a life of sweeping streets. NO ONE wanted to work because there was no motivation, no reward. You may work all day while the guy next to you may slack all day, but in the end you'll both get the same pay. You can be the brightest in you class, and the boy next to you may be the dumbest creature in existence, but you can bet he will get into the Soviet equivalent of Harvard and you never will, because his daddy is some big shot in local government and yours is a simple welder. And no matter how much you work, you will still struggle to feed your family. No matter how much you try you know nothing will ever change. So why work? Why try? Why bother to do anything? That was the overall feeling, and overall ambience of the soviet times. That's the socialist system for you. It's a utopian idea that goes completely against human nature, which is why it does not work. Capitalism is dog eat dog world, but at least here I feel I have freedom to do anything, be anyone, be in control of my life.

I believe the far-left today are so drunk on these ideas that they don't take one minute to stop and think about it from a practical point of view. Take it from someone who's experienced socialism ON HER OWN HIDE: it will NEVER work. Sure, you have a nice view of the world, but understand that the world will not bend to your desires. Whenever a book like this comes out - something that's hard to argue with - all you can do is fling insults at it. A shame.

A must read for everyone interested in the topic, and especially
for those who are too pig-headed to see the world for what it is.

Rating:
Summary: A must have in any household
Review: This book has been in print for about half a century, and yet its lessons and warnings are as relevant now as they were when first published.

Hayek makes the compelling case that without economic freedom, political and individual freedoms cannot possibly exist. His book is not a polemic, but a very even-handed warning to his socialist friends in WWII-era Britain. Those who desire the government to have greater economic controls do not realize that by giving these powers to the government, they are also giving away their own political and legal freedoms. A government that can exert great control over an individual's economic choices and decisions can just as easily expand its reach to include an individual's personal liberties and freedoms.

The book serves as a timeless warning for those who seek the creation of a modern-day Utopia. In their quest for creating an all-knowing and well-reasoned central planning organization that will make the national economy more fair and even-handed, they lay the foundation for that centralized organization to expand its powers and curtail individual liberties, all in the name of benefiting the greater good.

This book is a must-have in any library and household. Even if you disagree with its arguments, Hayek's book is the definitive summary of all that capitalism represents in the field of freedom and liberty.

One other point: it is interesting to note how much of Hayek's warnings have been disregarded by both American political parties. Both parties have embraced the sort of socialistic policies that Hayek warned against, all in the name of pleasing the fickle electorate and giving voters what they supposedly want. Which makes one wonder that if the government can regulate all sorts of aspects of individual economic decisionmaking, what is stopping it from expanding its reach to include oversight over other kinds of individual choices and decisions?

Rating:
Summary: those who predict correctly deserve to be read
Review: For a small book it is a masterpiece of objective economic-political analysis. It is also a tour de force, written with passion, conviction and justified concern. Published in '44 while Hayek taught economics at the London School of Economics, he shrewdly observed that the British government and economic planners were falsely conceptualizing post-war policies to retain war-time centralized control. After all, so it seemed, war-time production was boosted tremendously under central governmental control of the economy. So why not retain and expand it after the war is over to boost the living standard.

This was either spelled out or implied in various White Papers or reports which drew inspirations from the theory of Hayek's chief opponent, John Maynard Keynes. Hayek warned that such dangerous policies, which he thought emulated too much German National Socialist economic policies, would fail and jeopardize liberty.
Unfortunately, his warnings were disregarded by the British post-war governments and the subsequent evolution of the British economy relative to the German one tells the story. The British centralized, nationalized industries as well as the Bank of England, passed the Town and Country Planning Act, created a national health system, etc. while the Germans decentralized, freed the central bank from political control, denationalized industries and restored private initiatives, relatively speaking. The British developed the British economic disease while the Germans pulled off one of the world's most stunning economic miracle. It was all in compliance with Hayek's profound analysis and prediction. One could almost cynically says that the British in enacting National Socialist economic policies fought the Nazis to have the right to adopt Nazi economic policies. Compare for example, the British nationalizing the Bank of England much like Hitler taking over the German central bank in '38 or, for more shocking comparison, read the British labor party platform of '45 and compare it with the socio-economic policies advocated in the l921 Twenty-Five Point Nazi party program.

Beyond this, Hayek's book is also a wonderful analysis of how knowledge pulsates throughout the economy, how economic progress is achieved, how, above all, liberty can be preserved and how the "worst wind up on top" (the title of chapter ten) of a political hierarchy. This chapter can be used to explain in part the rise of Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Saddam Hussain, Castro, and so on down to even LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, Sharon and Bush, etc.

This book has had a long life and deservedly so. All undergraduates and anyone interested in profound philosophical-economic analysis should read it, especially those interested in preserving liberty and preventing serfdom. One of the primary elements for this, according to Hayek, is to deny centralized planning. Ironically, Hayek's chief opponent, John Maynard Keynes who influenced post-war centralized economic planning tremendously, reviewed the book favorably before his death and and said something to the effect that morally and philosophically he found himself in agreement with nearly all of it and not just in agreement but in heartfelt agreement. Too bad the politicians did not heed the change of mind Keynes had just before he died. Had they followed Hayek, the corrosive consequences of politicized Keynesianism in terms of the inflation, centralized planning and other results could have been prevented. By l969, Nixon publicly stated "we're all Keynesians now."

George Orwell, a socialist, was also favorably impressed by this book and most likely was inspired by it when he wrote in 1948 his famous "1984."

But by l974, Hayek received, belatedly, the Nobel Economics Prize (though he shared it with Gunnar Myrdal) and wise scholars and graduate students in communist nations in Eastern Europe started to disseminate and read this book with vigorous enthusiam. Though it is not well known, this book, along with others Hayek wrote, did more to erode Communism than anyone or anything else. By the early l990s, several editorials in the Wall Street Journal paid tribute to Hayek and the favorable impact his publications had on eroding communism.


Rating:
Summary: waking up
Review: Many so-called liberals of today's America will have problems reading this as they are so paranoid of the agendas of the mythical "right wing". However, this is a great book to read if you can take a minute to remember the time frame; the historical "milieu" this was written in. Hayak was an academic who was describing macroeconomics in a true liberal academic sense. With a view towards a very uncertain future, he predicted exactly the fundamental problems with socialism and predicted much of the last 60 years. So-called liberals (aka close minded academic fascists) these days try to detract from Hayak's message as if he were writing a political manifesto. Pragmatists do not do so. Take the time to read this slowly as many (like me) will do well to get some basics of economics along the way... Take some joy in the fact that this Professor got it dead right!!! Rarely happens outside of hard science these days...

Rating:
Summary: An Economics classic
Review:
Great book. Hayek truly proves to be one of the best economists of the 20th century. His critique of Keynesian politics was way out of his time when he wrote this. I wished he were alive to see how his ideas and opinions influenced our society today and opened up the way to great improvement in world economies.