Liberalism's Last Man: Hayek in the Age of Political Capitalism
Autor Vikash Yadaven Limba Engleză Hardback – 23 aug 2023
Friedrich Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom was both an intellectual milestone and a source of political division, spurring fiery debates around capitalism and its discontents. In the ensuing discord, Hayek’s true message was lost: liberalism is a thing to be protected above all else, and its alternatives are perilous.
In Liberalism’s Last Man, Vikash Yadav revives the core of Hayek’s famed work to map today’s primary political anxiety: the tenuous state of liberal meritocratic capitalism—particularly in North America, Europe, and Asia—in the face of strengthening political-capitalist powers like China, Vietnam, and Singapore. As open societies struggle to match the economic productivity of authoritarian-capitalist economies, the promises of a meritocracy fade; Yadav channels Hayek to articulate how liberalism’s moral backbone is its greatest defense against repressive social structures.
Preț: 248.76 lei
Nou
Puncte Express: 373
Preț estimativ în valută:
47.61€ • 49.45$ • 39.55£
47.61€ • 49.45$ • 39.55£
Carte disponibilă
Livrare economică 13-27 ianuarie 25
Livrare express 27 decembrie 24 - 02 ianuarie 25 pentru 33.68 lei
Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76
Specificații
ISBN-13: 9780226821474
ISBN-10: 0226821471
Pagini: 288
Ilustrații: 2 line drawings
Dimensiuni: 152 x 229 x 30 mm
Greutate: 0.54 kg
Ediția:First Edition
Editura: University of Chicago Press
Colecția University of Chicago Press
ISBN-10: 0226821471
Pagini: 288
Ilustrații: 2 line drawings
Dimensiuni: 152 x 229 x 30 mm
Greutate: 0.54 kg
Ediția:First Edition
Editura: University of Chicago Press
Colecția University of Chicago Press
Notă biografică
Vikash Yadav is associate professor of international relations and Asian studies at Hobart and William Smith Colleges.
Extras
The generally flaccid response of liberal and libertarian scholars to nearly four decades of expansive leftist critique of the concept of “neoliberalism” has left a lacuna in academia even as capitalism in its various guises has spread globally. For the first time in human history, almost all of the planet is economically organized under the flag of capitalism. And while liberal governance is increasingly in retreat globally, it remains an admired ideal. In this context, a mechanical form of economic policy- making (i.e., a revived laissez- faire) has come to legitimate itself solely on the promise of economic growth— a benchmark that may have limited connection to the expansion of individual freedom— while masking increasingly rigid income inequality and a crony- capitalist actuality. It is time to update and reinvigorate the cause of economic and political liberalism, to cast off the cronyism and state protection that bleeds the economy of its vigor and face the intellectual challenges emanating from all parties on the horizon.
Friedrich A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom (1944) is the seminal twentieth-century text in defense of economic liberalism. Hence, any recovery and restatement of economic liberalism for the twenty- first century should begin by sifting the arguments laid out there. Published near the end of World War II, the book sought to steel Britain against the intellectual battle with centralized planning that lay ahead of victory by once again restating the liberal values on which Britain’s freedom and prosperity were built. Hayek argues that liberalism faced a challenge from the import of German ideas (e.g., Hegel’s statism, Marx’s socialism, List’s economic nationalism, Schmoller’s historicism). Defeating those ideas by defending the rationale of liberal political economy, Hayek thought, would clear the terrain for a revival and restatement of liberalism.
To some, the need for an intellectual revival of liberalism may seem less pressing today, given the near universality of capitalism and the lingering prestige of liberal democracy, but clouds of dissent from the liberal order have been amassing for some time. Liberalism once more faces threats from revived and intellectually reconstructed communists and fascists as well as less systematic new challenges from environmentalists and (in some regions) religious textualists. And while socialism, understood as control of the commanding heights of the economy, centralized planning, and one- party domination, has been marginalized in high- income countries, it remains popular as an ideology in middle- and low- income countries, particularly in South America.5 Moreover, “democratic socialism” has demonstrated significant popular appeal in high- income countries in recent years. However, the twenty- first century is unlikely to be characterized by a simple ideological reenactment of the Cold War, in large part because the failed and discredited ideologies of fascism and communism lack broad popular appeal today.
The most pressing new challenge to liberalism in the twenty- first century stems not from a nostalgic revival of communism or fascism— although paroxysms are to be expected— but from the emergence of what Milanovic has labeled “political capitalism” in countries such as China, Vietnam, and Singapore. Political capitalism is an alternative form of capitalism associated with efficient technocratic bureaucracy, the absence of the rule of law, and the autonomy of the state in matters of private capital and civil society. Political capitalism, as an ideal- type model, is usually the product either of a communist revolution or of a revolutionary one- party state that successfully leveled precolonial cultural impediments in order to achieve economic transformation and political sovereignty. These states are technocratic and oriented toward legitimacy based on economic performance and political competence under the banner of a ruthless one- party state that rules by selectively using the law as a weapon against dissidents and opponents. Political-capitalist states are highly autonomous from the owners of capital when they need to be and capable of formulating a nationalist (i.e., mercantilist) policy agenda. The selective use of anticorruption purges is one mechanism for maintaining state autonomy (although a highly disciplined party apparatus could achieve the same effect without tolerating high levels of corruption). These societies are highly inequitable, owing at least in part to the discretionary authority of the law- administering bureaucracy and decision makers’ public policy preferences for economic performance over social equity. The state keeps corruption and dissent in check because of its need to deliver tangible economic performance and to demonstrate competence in crisis management. Despite the authoritarian nature of political capitalism, these are capitalist economies characterized by (1) a majority of production in the private sphere, (2) a majority of workers operating as wage laborers, and (3) a majority of production decision- making that is market determined (i.e., not centrally planned). In essence, the competition on the global stage is no longer between alternate systems of economic organization, but between alternate variants of capitalism.
Friedrich A. Hayek’s Road to Serfdom (1944) is the seminal twentieth-century text in defense of economic liberalism. Hence, any recovery and restatement of economic liberalism for the twenty- first century should begin by sifting the arguments laid out there. Published near the end of World War II, the book sought to steel Britain against the intellectual battle with centralized planning that lay ahead of victory by once again restating the liberal values on which Britain’s freedom and prosperity were built. Hayek argues that liberalism faced a challenge from the import of German ideas (e.g., Hegel’s statism, Marx’s socialism, List’s economic nationalism, Schmoller’s historicism). Defeating those ideas by defending the rationale of liberal political economy, Hayek thought, would clear the terrain for a revival and restatement of liberalism.
To some, the need for an intellectual revival of liberalism may seem less pressing today, given the near universality of capitalism and the lingering prestige of liberal democracy, but clouds of dissent from the liberal order have been amassing for some time. Liberalism once more faces threats from revived and intellectually reconstructed communists and fascists as well as less systematic new challenges from environmentalists and (in some regions) religious textualists. And while socialism, understood as control of the commanding heights of the economy, centralized planning, and one- party domination, has been marginalized in high- income countries, it remains popular as an ideology in middle- and low- income countries, particularly in South America.5 Moreover, “democratic socialism” has demonstrated significant popular appeal in high- income countries in recent years. However, the twenty- first century is unlikely to be characterized by a simple ideological reenactment of the Cold War, in large part because the failed and discredited ideologies of fascism and communism lack broad popular appeal today.
The most pressing new challenge to liberalism in the twenty- first century stems not from a nostalgic revival of communism or fascism— although paroxysms are to be expected— but from the emergence of what Milanovic has labeled “political capitalism” in countries such as China, Vietnam, and Singapore. Political capitalism is an alternative form of capitalism associated with efficient technocratic bureaucracy, the absence of the rule of law, and the autonomy of the state in matters of private capital and civil society. Political capitalism, as an ideal- type model, is usually the product either of a communist revolution or of a revolutionary one- party state that successfully leveled precolonial cultural impediments in order to achieve economic transformation and political sovereignty. These states are technocratic and oriented toward legitimacy based on economic performance and political competence under the banner of a ruthless one- party state that rules by selectively using the law as a weapon against dissidents and opponents. Political-capitalist states are highly autonomous from the owners of capital when they need to be and capable of formulating a nationalist (i.e., mercantilist) policy agenda. The selective use of anticorruption purges is one mechanism for maintaining state autonomy (although a highly disciplined party apparatus could achieve the same effect without tolerating high levels of corruption). These societies are highly inequitable, owing at least in part to the discretionary authority of the law- administering bureaucracy and decision makers’ public policy preferences for economic performance over social equity. The state keeps corruption and dissent in check because of its need to deliver tangible economic performance and to demonstrate competence in crisis management. Despite the authoritarian nature of political capitalism, these are capitalist economies characterized by (1) a majority of production in the private sphere, (2) a majority of workers operating as wage laborers, and (3) a majority of production decision- making that is market determined (i.e., not centrally planned). In essence, the competition on the global stage is no longer between alternate systems of economic organization, but between alternate variants of capitalism.
Cuprins
Preface
Introduction
Chapter One The Abandoned Road
Chapter Two The Great Utopia
Chapter Three Individualism and Collectivism
Chapter Four The “Inevitability” of Planning
Chapter Five Planning and Democracy
Chapter Six Planning and the Rule of Law
Chapter Seven Economic Control and Totalitarianism
Chapter Eight Who, Whom?
Chapter Nine Security and Freedom
Chapter Ten Why the Worst Get on Top
Chapter Eleven The End of Truth
Chapter Twelve The Socialist Roots of Nazism
Chapter Thirteen The Totalitarians in Our Midst
Chapter Fourteen Material Conditions and Ideal Ends
Chapter Fifteen The Prospects of International Order
Conclusion
Acknowledgments
Notes
Bibliography
Introduction
Chapter One The Abandoned Road
Chapter Two The Great Utopia
Chapter Three Individualism and Collectivism
Chapter Four The “Inevitability” of Planning
Chapter Five Planning and Democracy
Chapter Six Planning and the Rule of Law
Chapter Seven Economic Control and Totalitarianism
Chapter Eight Who, Whom?
Chapter Nine Security and Freedom
Chapter Ten Why the Worst Get on Top
Chapter Eleven The End of Truth
Chapter Twelve The Socialist Roots of Nazism
Chapter Thirteen The Totalitarians in Our Midst
Chapter Fourteen Material Conditions and Ideal Ends
Chapter Fifteen The Prospects of International Order
Conclusion
Acknowledgments
Notes
Bibliography
Recenzii
"Yadav debuts with a vigorous reappraisal of 20th-century economist Friedrich Hayek in light of todayʼs increasing authoritarian encroachment on liberal, meritocratic, free-market societies. . . . Seamlessly intertwining political philosophy, intellectual history, and textual criticism, this is an expansive and robust defense of capitalist liberalism."
"Liberalism’s Last Man performs an exceptional service in recasting The Road to Serfdom in a form that modern readers may find easier to appreciate than the original work. For too long Hayek has been treated—by admirers and critics alike—as a slogan or a caricature rather than a serious thinker. It’s time for a comeback."
"In Liberalism’s Last Man, Vikash Yadav argues that Hayek has been mischaracterized as an extreme libertarian and market fundamentalist. Yadav points out [Hayek's] support for several progressive positions, including the state’s provision of a minimum income, the promotion of social mobility, the taxation and regulation of pollution, and antitrust laws to restrain monopolies."
"Hayek is a complex figure. A careful analysis of his work is necessarily complex. Yadav provides clarity and understanding around this oft-misunderstood intellectual who is too important to misconstrue or misrepresent."
"Does Hayek’s critique of socialism and defense of liberalism in his 1944 book The Road to Serfdom have any relevance for the very different challenges the international order faces today? Yadav’s ambitious goal is to answer that question via a close reading of Hayek’s classic text. The result is a penetrating, insightful, sometimes provocative and always stimulating performance."
“Well-written, well-researched, and engrossing, the great accomplishment of Liberalism's Last Man is its engagement with modern political theory through the lens of Hayek. It’s a highly original work—and refreshing in that it takes Hayek’s critics seriously while also refraining from shortchanging Hayek for his supposed intellectual sins.”