Rating: 
Summary: Freedom vs. Capitalism
Review: The book is an excellent example of a socio-economic paradigm of the first half of the 20th century. For those who are not familiar with the concept, Erich Fromm's "Escape from Freedom" will be an essential reading as well. I see the only problem with the book: it is brilliant in style but obsolete in thought. The concept of freedom is going to be different in a nowadays physically limited world. I wonder if China with its eastern philosophy give us real answers to these new challenges.
Rating: 
Summary: Strategic omissions
Review: The widely recognized, and oft-qouted, authority on Capitalism, is Adam Smith. The widely recognized and oft-quoted authority on Communism and Socialism is Karl Marx. The two examples that the author uses to illustrate the "failure of Socialism" are so far removed from the system that Marx proposed, that it would be tantamount to comparing the current U.S. economy to that of Nicaragua. What is typically, and strategically ignored in this work, and most others of this philosophical and political bent, is the fact that the two systems in question are figments of memory, while the true bureaucratic control of "global" economics is in the hands of multinational Corporations. Unlike most institutions that wield such power, coporate entities do not even attempt to pretend to answer to anyone but their stockholders, much less a democratic popular process. This presents the real danger to the loss of individual power and autonomy, and proves this book, and its theories to be irrelevant for the twenty first century.
Rating: 
Summary: A definate Read
Review: I was a little disappointed in this book. Not so much in and of itself but because of the flowing reviews of those who respect the individual and the venom of those who do not. When I see reviews that compare a libertarian author to fascists I can usually expect an extremely good read. Most Hayek's arguments are sound and valid. The book is excellent but I did not find it as earth shaking as I expected due to the reviews.
Rating:
Summary: Against the wind
Review: When Hayek wrote "The Road to Serfdom" in 1944, the the economic portion of the political climate was steeped in Keynesian thought, and Hayek's work went almost unnoticed. Fifty-seven years later, there is little doubt as to who was right. The most prosperous nations on Earth are also the most free - socially AND economically. Hayek is one of the fathers of the neo-classical school of economic thought, and modern libertarianism. In this book, Hayek demonstrates the inherent contradiction between freedom and a command economy, and the inevitable descent of socialism into totalitarianism. The accuracy of his predictions of the long-term results of communism were uncanny, and a dire warning against attempting this road yet again. This is an absolutely essential book for a modern libertarian or student of economics, as well as any liberal or conservative with an open mind and a desire to understand the vastly differing economies and governments of the world. Written for the layman, it is lucid, clear, to-the-point, and, most importantly, has been backed up by world events during last half-century. A classic work in the field of economics.
Rating:
Summary: An Economic and Social Classic
Review: Hayek joins Friedman among the 20th century's greatest economists. Hayek's work to justify capitalism is made all the more impressive considering that in 1944 Britain it appeared obvious that socialism was a more efficient system. A masterpiece!
Rating:
Summary: timeless classic
Review: As I write this review, I'm saddened by the people I suspect should read this book but, for whatever reason, won't. After reading this book, I finally explicitly understand what I found troubling with socialism--it *requires* obedience to ensure adherence to the plan. As I read this book, I couldn't help notice the parallels between this book and "1984." Since that book was written in 1948, I suspect Orwell was directly influenced by this book. Furthermore, I found "The Socialist Roots of Naziism" a unique take on how socialism and naziism are brethren of the same cloth. The only thing I found annoying were the periodic German and Latin idioms. This is an extremely minor complaint given the era as well as the intended (presumably academic) audience. A final comment, Forbes' Ronald Bailey is quoted on the front jacket, "Nearly half a century ago, most of the smart people sneered with Friedrich Hayek published "The Road to Serfdom." The world was wrong and Hayek was right" If "most of the smart people sneered" then this book was truly a courageous and visionary work.
Rating:
Summary: Understand politics and economics.
Review: Some economics books are statistical and metrical. Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations argued from simple observations about human nature with which most people will agree. The Road to Serfdom is in that vein. Hayek's book has paragraph after paragraph that makes me thing "that's just what I think." Only said much better. For instance when he talks about the imporance of economics, or acqusition of money he agrees that to all but a miser it is not the highest of human goals. The seductive idea of planners it that the creation of our necessities could be automated by technocrats. He turns this by pointing out that the reason that in a free society the reason that what money buys is not important is because when we have too little, the things we choose to do without are the very things for which we have the least regard. The fundemental message is that economies are too complex for humans to direct and that any attempt to do so winds with the worst of both worlds. We wind up without personal freedom and bad economies as well. Apparetly, this books was utterly rejected when it was written, but history has shown the results of socialism and what he says reads almost like a history book rather then lucid model of the relationship between politics and economics that it is.
Rating:
Summary: A Snapshot of History - A Profile in Intellectual Courage
Review: The late Professor Hayek's book is one of the most important books of the twentieth century. It is dedicated to "the socialists of all parties". When Hayek wrote the book, virtually no one was left believing in a competitive market economy in mainstream English politics. The book was utterly defiant in terms of the zeitgeist. Indeed, the Attlee Labour government in England was elected not long after the book's publication and Hayek had long enjoyed a substantial connection with the London School of Economics. A wave of socializations followed - coal, steel, electricity, gas, water utilities, etc. Whilst Hayek's arguments are valuable and important and should not be forgotten, because we are doomed to repeat history that we forget, the world has moved on. The truths Hayek had to argue for trenchantly are today commonplace. No one of any political significance in the English speaking Western world believes that he or she can secure election by promising to end private property and inheritance rights, for example. The Holocaust, which was not fully appreciated in 1944 by the public and the Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 have concretely made Hayek's points. However, Hayek's surmounting of the vilification that he suffered for writing this important work and and his having the courage to speak against "the powers that be in academia" who expected an ocean of jobs from the socialization of the economy mark him as a man of profound intellectual courage, vigour and honesty. It is noteworthy that Professor Hayek lived to see the fall of the Berlin Wall. This is an important book written by a Nobel economics laureate at the height of his intellectual powers, against the impending death camp of a totalitarian future. We are all in his debt for his courage. That one can read the book today in horror that his arguments were arrogantly dismissed shows how far the world has come.
Rating:
Summary: Ground zero of my worldview
Review: After years of keeping up with current events, studying economics, and generally trying to discover my principles through news magazines and typical school literature, I read this book my senior year in college. It laid most of the groundwork for my worldview...at the risk of sounding melodramatic, I'd say that my entire intellectual journey to the point when I picked up this book was mere prelude...it opened lots of doors for me. I'm still amazed that this book is so small, and it for me it defines the word "insight". WOW! I wish Friedrich were alive today so I could just say "thank you". (Check out Reason magazine and the Constitution of Liberty too).
Rating:
Summary: Read this book to find out how the Holocaust came to be.
Review: "The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek is an excellent book about history, economics, capitalism, socialism, fascism, and the Holocaust. Most importantly, the book talks about how the Holocaust came to happen. The Holocaust did not just come about overnight. Instead, it was the result of decades of government planning and control. The Holocaust was the final result of the real world adoption of the ideas of socialism. Under socialism, property rights do not exist. And in the absence of property rights, no other rights are possible. I find it very ironic that many of those who supposedly are against fascism are in favor of socialism. In this book, Hayek explains that, with regard to their lack of individual liberty, there is no real different between socialism and fascism. I should point out that in this book, the word "liberal" does not mean the same thing that it means today. This book uses the 19th century meaning of the word. Back then, a liberal was a person who favored individual liberty, property rights, freedom of contract, free markets, and strict limits on the size of government. Today, the word means the exact opposite. During the several decades before the Holocaust, Germany had adopted pretty much all of the ideas and policies of socialism. The government was very strongly involved in "planning" and "directing" the economy. Hayek gives many quotes which describe the ideas that were dominant in Germany's political climate during the several decades before the Holocaust. The basic ideas in Germany at the time were that #1 capitalism is bad #2 the state should direct economic activity and #3 the rights of the individual were to be sacrificed in order to promote the good of society. Indeed, during this time, the Jews were among the most economically successful people in Germany. The anti-capitalist views were thus aimed primarily at the Jews. One of the ideas discussed in this book is how in order to further their totalitarian agenda, those who support such an agenda will engage in various methods of propaganda. And one of the most important methods of propaganda is that old words take on new meanings. I can see a number of ways that this is happening right now in the U.S. One example is the phrase "tax cut." The old meaning of "tax cut" meant that the tax rates were reduced, and people could keep more of the money that they earned, and they could use their money however they wanted, with no strings attached. In this sense, "tax cut" meant that people had more freedom, and the government had less control of their life. But today, the phrase "tax cut" has a very different meaning. Recently, President Clinton has supported all sorts of different kinds of tax credits. For example, there is a tax credit for day care. With this kind of tax credit, the government uses the tax code to tell people how to behave. The message from the government is, "You can keep some of your money, but only if you spend it the way that we tell you to spend it." Thus, the government is using the tax code to control people's behavior. President Clinton and the media often refer to this as a "tax cut." In reality, this tax credit actually means that the government has more control of your life, not less. Simply put, the government is using the tax code to tell people how to behave. This is not smaller government. On the contrary, tax credits are a sign of bigger government. Thus, an old phrase ("tax cut") has taken on a new meaning. Another example of this kind of propaganda is the changing in the meaning of the word "right." The old meaning of the word "right" meant that you have a right to do things that do not infringe on other people's rights. For example, you have a right to own property. But today, the word "right" means that you are entitled to other people's property. An example of this is the so-called "right" to health care. Of course, the only way that the government can provide you with health care is by forcing someone else to pay for it. Thus, by giving you this supposed "right" to health care, the government is violating someone else's right to own and control his own property. Another way that the government uses propaganda is by having public schools. Many people think that because the public schools in the U.S. have done such a bad job of teaching academic subjects, these schools have been a failure. But if you believe that the real purpose of the public schools is to teach people to believe in the ideas of collectivism, and to discourage individual thought, then the public schools have actually been highly successful...
| 
