Overview
In his work, "The Road to Serfdom", F.A. Hayek explains the dangers behind "planning" (government control/interference) and how the road to totalitarianism is connected to it. F.A. Hayek begins by showcasing how the road to serfdom is often paved with good intentions and how that shift can lead to the government having more control over the economy, choice or property. This shift then leads to a totalitarian state. He uses Germany as an example, he explains that their shift paved the way for the Nazi tranny.
In his explanation of "Planning and Power", he explains that planners use more and more control to achieve their end goals. Hayek explains that planners believe that by taking the power out of the hands of individuals they "extinguish power", however they are actually creating the opposite. He says that some may argue that this central power is "no greater than the power collectively exercised by private board of directors" , however this is entirely incorrect (41).
Hayek highlights the value of individualism in society and the amount of power that is held in private property. He attributes individualism to the growth of science and later advanced technology and competition. Hayek holds competition as the key to a healthy and growing society. Hayek does mention the importance and difference between arbitrary rules set forth by a planned economy and regulations set by a government. Things such as government intervention for regulation and protect of the environment are important and the government should help with matters such as these.
Some may think that socialism and individual freedom but Hayek reflected on the French Revolution and that that a planned economy requires an authoritarian or totalitarian rule. This form of government rule will always evolve into a weapon of tyranny against its citizens. The difference of socialism and individual freedom is emphasized multiple times in his readings. Socialism treats all "equally" as a number and remains inefficient and unable to meet the needs of its citizens.
Hayek also warns readers of those who end up "on top" in these types of societies and why they get on top and remain on top. The people who end up on top are power hungry individuals who will do what ever it takes to remain. They do not have to be the smartest but they are manipulative and politically savvy in their propaganda. They seek out "dumber" individuals who will follow what is stuffed into their ears, then the power seeker will create an "us" and "them". He uses Hitler and the "Jews", as his example of this ruthless political savvy (53).
Hayek dedicates a few pages to clearly state his opinions on "planning" vs. "rule of law", as he is not completely against government or government intervention. Those who plan do not set down rules of law that are set into stone and hold them to their actions, they wish to use the law freely and arbitrary. The rule of law is not dependent on economic and citizens and look to it and see that it will remain the same in future situations.
Is Planning Inevitable? And Needed?
Towards the end of his book, Hayek also addresses the "inevitability" of planning and those who argue that planning can remove the nuisance and worry of smaller menial things in everyday life. He uses the same approach for both of these claims and prove why those assumptions are wrong and why competition is necessary in these cases. He stresses the complex problems of an complex society can only be remedied with competition. And that removing competition in areas in order for the government to control them, to take "care" of us creates an even larger problem of inefficiency and too much reliance on the government.
How does this Reflect into Today's Society?
Overall, I found Hayek's points to be thought out and based in a good foundation. With other readings from economists, that are very extreme and refute most all duties of government, and when faced with this decision, I tend to lean towards having a stronger government than no government. I would rather be "partially plundered" by the government than plundered by a completely free society. There needs to be laws in place, laws like the ones mentioned in the book, and they need to be enforced to ensure order. Hayek seems to strike a fair balance between individual freedom and a government body.
I also agree that economics today are too complex to have planning and that setting quotas or prices on everything does not allow the market to fluctuate in a way that would keep things afloat. His thoughts on the power amongst a few, leads to a tyranny of many are something I agree with and that a functional government should have safeguards in place. Laws that are continuous and set into stone, such as the constitution the U.S. government has.
My hesitancy towards some of the ideas within this book, came from how some things function in today's society. I felt as though Hayek treated a free market as the end all and down-played the power a business can have. I mean, in the U.S. some unethical business practices have been kept alive simply from the amount of money spent on lobbying. For example, H&R Block spends millions of dollars every year to keep the government from offering free pre-filled and filed taxes. Several countries do not require citizens to file taxes because the government allocates resources to do those for citizens and them have them sign off on the filings. Lastly, I felt as though Hayek believed all government intervention on the behalf of welfare to be wasteful and inefficient but I think this oversimplifies things and does not take into account what good can be done and what good has happened from it. Social programs such as the library provide tremendous value to those who use them. It also helps alleviate the difference in access to educational materials that can happen to those who are less fortunate. Social programs such as Child Protective Services are important to those whom they help. Although one may argue that CPS can be inefficient, part of that is due to lack of funding and the great need for CPS. CPS has helped many families and more often, children who would never had received any help without the government.
Works Cited
Hayek, F. A. (2005). The Road to Serfdom (Abridged). In The road to serfdom, with the intellectuals and socialism: The condensed version of the road to serfdom by F.A. Hayek as it appeared in the April 1945 edition of Reader's Digest (pp. 39–70). essay, Institute of Economic Affairs.