I count Hayek as a far deeper and more flexible thinker than Friedman, and as utterly unlike Rand. In saying this, I recognize that there are many people whose thinking has been influenced by all three. I do think, however, that negative influences from Hayek are largely based on simplistic and debased derivatives of his ideas.

Hayek's thinking is characterized by a profound respect for law and decentralized human social orders regulated by law. He was neither an anarchist, a conservative, nor a rigid ideologue. His profound skepticism regarding strong, lawless state power was shaped by his witness of the mass murder that grew from this during his lifetime. His aims, I believe, were entirely directed toward the common good.

There is no point in expending intellectual effort to understand why one's policy preferences differ from Rand's. It is worth considering why they differ from Hayek's -- what we have learned that he didn't know, and what misperceptions may have set his views askew.

A major fact to remember in evaluating his work: When he refers to "socialism", he means the term in the early- to mid-20th century sense, that is, the economics and (he argued) associated governance of states like the Soviet Union. Detailed central planning failed, and for reasons he articulated. This "socialism" is quite unlike the variety of socialism that has widespread support today.



Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.