The Road to Serfdom (Abridged Edition) [Paperback]

Hayek wrote the Road to Serfdom during one of the darkest times of modern history. World War and economic depression left many people yearning for new and better social and political institutions. Most Europeans had come to oppose the laissez faire ideas of the enlightenment, and were now socialists of one sort or another. Some socialists were unabashed totalitarians; others looked to social democracy or market socialism as ways of combining economic planning with political freedom. How could socialism be stopped if both totalitarians and liberals supported it? Hayek made the case that the terms `liberal socialism' and `social democracy' are oxymoronic. Socialism and political freedom are incompatible. The adoption of socialist programs and policies erodes political freedom and leads to despotism.

The Road to Serfdom explains focuses on the rise of totalitarianism in twentieth century Europe. Yet it also made a more general argument concerning the incompatibility of democracy and comprehensive central planning. Hayek argues that the pursuit of socialist ideals leads to totalitarianism. While socialist ideals seem noble to many, those who persist in realizing these ideals will find it necessary to adopt coercive methods that are incompatible with freedom. Thus socialists must choose between their egalitarian goals and the preservation of individual liberty.

Hayek describes how Europeans came to expect progress, and became impatient for faster progress. The liberal reforms of the 19th century delivered unprecedented economic progress. Much of this was directly due to scientific discovery. The role of free competition in promoting scientific discovery was less obvious. Europeans increasingly came to believe that scientific planning of society itself could accelerate greater progress.

Europeans also changed how they thought about equality and freedom. Insistence upon freedom from want displaced the yearning for freedom from coercion. Democracy came to be seen as a means of realizing an increasing number of social goals, rather than as a means of preserving freedom. To Hayek, these were dangerous errors. Democracy could only work effectively in areas where agreement upon ultimate ends could be attained with little difficulty. A democratic government could enforce general rules of conduct that applied to all equally (i.e. free speech and free association). Democracy can never produce agreement over policies that affect specific economic results. One always gains at the expense of others in such matters. Such Economic planning places impossible demands upon democracy. This is because pursuit of specific ends requires timely and decisive action. Democracies move too slowly to attain specific ends, so arbitrary powers of government will grow. A planned economy will ultimately require acceptance of dictatorship. This is a dire consequence, as it is the worst sort of tyrants who are most adept at wielding dictatorial powers.

Some might say that these arguments are unduly pessimistic. Hayek points to the examples of Hitler and Stalin to support his case. Of course, these are worst case scenarios. Have not England, Sweden, and the US adopted large welfare-regulatory states without such tyranny? This is a fair point, yet we should remember two things. First, Hayek claimed that centralized control of the economy would destroy freedom ultimately, but gradually. Second, Western nations have not yet gone as far in planning their economies as did Russia and Germany in the 1930's. The fact that we have yet realized the horrible results of Stalinism implies neither that were are safe from despotism in the future, nor that our present situation is entirely satisfactory. One can easily argue that we have already started on the wrong path. For instance, Hayek's chapter on `The End of Truth' applies to modern political correctness.

Hayek wrote this book not only to warn people about the limits of democracy and the incompatibility of planning and freedom. This was the start of his project concerning the abuse of reason. His warning is also about the tendency to overestimate the abilities of even the best and brightest individuals. Not even the best and brightest can comprehend modern societies. Socialists who favor comprehensive planning, and even modern liberals and conservatives who want to plan part of society, proceed on a false assumption concerning human reason. Ultimately, Hayek makes a strong case for limited constitutional government. To expect more of democracy than what Madison and Jefferson intended invites disaster.

The Road to Serfdom is a profound defense of commercial society and limited government. The RTS also is where Hayek started his 'abuse of reason' project. To fully appreciate Hayek's genius in the RTS, one should read his subsequent books in this project- The Constitution of Liberty and Law Liberty and Legislation V1-3.

The condensed version of this book makes Hayek's ideas more accessible. Not everyone has the time to plow through long and complicated books. Of course, the original version of the Road to Serfdom is not terribly long, but the condensed version is much easier. It is also true to the original version.

Hayek wrote the original 'Road to Serfdom' which appeared in 1944 and which still, today, is a salutory reminder of the fate which awaits us should we put too much faith in the state under whichever political persuasion.

This little book, a reprint of the version which appeared in the Reader's Digest, deserves five stars for a number of reasons.

Firstly for the central message which it contains about the dangers of the collectivist state and the concentration of powers that such a state holds unto itself. Hayek dedicated his book to the socialists of all parties by which he meant that in all political parties, and indeed in the minds of many who hold no party affiliation, there are those who hold that the only way to achive a particular end is through the power of the state. He shows however, that the state which accumulates power eventually will turn that power onto the people and in the process dehumanizes those that wield power such that any revolting activity becomes justifiable. This book contains the central tenents of his arguments which are laid out in full in the unabridged version. Hayek abhors the development of the state in modern societies seeing the entity which is the state as a sort of evil empire and cautions people to be watchful and on their guard so that they maintain a healthy suspicion of the state and act to keep it from becoming too powerful. Yet, ironically, Hayek sees the tendency for such states to flourish in the so-called free societies of England and the United States. Here in New Jersey, earlier in 2002, the city of Morristown passed an ordinance which limits the number of pets which can be held in an individual household. Clearly the state intervenes too much in our lives already.

Secondly, the original Reader's Digest version, reflecting consumer demand, published this reprint at the front of it's magazine instead of at the end which was it's normal practice as well as exceeding it's normal print run many times over.

Thirdly, the editing down of the original to the condensed size is a marvel given that none of the essential essence of the original is not lost.

Hayek was originally writing in the face of the existing totalitarian regimes which existed in a number of European countries in the early 1940's and the growing strength and power of the USSR. He cautions the free nations of the West to beware the growth of the state and to fight against it. The book has a real contemporary relevance too with the world's attention being foccussed mainly on Iraq but also increasingly on the nations of Africa. Clearly the terrible and dramatic series of events unfolding in Zimbabwe are a horrific reminder of what can happen if the state and it's servants become too powerful.

For anyone believing in freedom this is a must read book.

This condensed book by Nobel prize co-winner Friedrich Hayek is more actual and needed than ever in the current economic crisis (2007-?). Every crisis presents an opportunity for government to increase their powers and to reduce the individual liberty. I deeply fear that the current crisis will result in more government bodies, intervention, regulation, spending and power. Similarly, after the attacks of the 11th of September, the US was quick to pass the (in)famous 'Patriot Act' - as always, the ends justify the means.

It seems that we never learn from history, and we are doomed to repeat it over and over again.

Hayek clearly shows the dangers of collectivism and central planning, and how a democratic socialism - an utopian dream - is impossible. He demonstrates how the free market and individual liberty are so necessary for greater prosperity and happiness. This is in contrast with the ever-growing government, which in the name of the vague 'National Interest', 'National Security', 'General Welfare' buzzwords systematically violates the liberty and reduces the freedom of their citizens.

Along the same lines, but more Economics oriented, I highly recommend Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics by Henry Hazlitt.

'A policy of freedom for all individuals, is the only truly progressive policy', and remember, never surrender your freedom!