Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Introduction
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- The Social Market Economy
- From Post-Communism to Civil Society: The Reemergence of History and the Decline of the Western Model
- Asymmetrical Reciprocity in Market Exchange: Implications for Economies in Transition
- Institutions, Nationalism, and the Transition Process in Eastern Europe
- The Economic and Political Liberalization of Socialism: The Fundamental Problem of Property Rights
- Democracy, Markets, and the Legal Order: Notes on the Nature of Politics in a Radically Liberal Society
- Liberalism: Political and Economic
- Socialism as the Extension of Democracy
- Liberalism, Welfare Economics, and Freedom
- Some Rules of Constitutional Design
- The Morality of Inclusion
- A New Contractarian View of Tax and Regulatory Policy in the Emerging Market Economies
- Associations and Democracy
- Index
Socialism as the Extension of Democracy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Introduction
- Acknowledgments
- Contributors
- The Social Market Economy
- From Post-Communism to Civil Society: The Reemergence of History and the Decline of the Western Model
- Asymmetrical Reciprocity in Market Exchange: Implications for Economies in Transition
- Institutions, Nationalism, and the Transition Process in Eastern Europe
- The Economic and Political Liberalization of Socialism: The Fundamental Problem of Property Rights
- Democracy, Markets, and the Legal Order: Notes on the Nature of Politics in a Radically Liberal Society
- Liberalism: Political and Economic
- Socialism as the Extension of Democracy
- Liberalism, Welfare Economics, and Freedom
- Some Rules of Constitutional Design
- The Morality of Inclusion
- A New Contractarian View of Tax and Regulatory Policy in the Emerging Market Economies
- Associations and Democracy
- Index
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Are socialists best regarded as those who are most truly and consistently committed to democracy, under modern industrial conditions? Is the underlying issue that divides liberals from socialists the degree of their wholeheartedness in affirming the ideal of a democratic society? On the liberal side, Friedrich Hayek has remarked: “It is possible for a dictator to govern in a liberal way. And it is also possible that a democracy governs with a total lack of liberalism. My personal preference is for a liberal dictator and not for a democratic government lacking in liberalism.” No doubt many socialists would wish to quibble with Hayek's free-market oriented conception of liberalism. But I am wondering whether the conceptual map implicit in Hayek's remark is apt. Hayek appears to assume that there are two independent lines of division, one marking greater and lesser commitment to liberal values, the other marking greater and lesser commitment to democratic procedures. According to the conception of socialism as democracy that I wish to examine, a better picture of the political landscape would show one line of division with gradations indicating greater and lesser commitment to democracy. On this continuum, socialists are located at the extreme pro-democratic end, those who favor autocracy at the other end, and liberals somewhere in the middle. The analyst who finds this latter conceptual picture the more illuminating of the two will say that Hayek reveals his rejection of socialism by being less than wholehearted in his support of democracy.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Liberalism and the Economic Order , pp. 145 - 171Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1993
- 2
- Cited by