3 ms·

Hayek was practically senile by 1973. It does not make sense to critique the legacy of someone who is mostly known for his work in the 1920s-40s with some of hi

by scythe 9y ago

Hayek was practically senile by 1973. It does not make sense to critique the legacy of someone who is mostly known for his work in the 1920s-40s with some of his more outlandish ideas many decades later.

ekianjo 9y ago
That sounds dubious that he was senile in 1973 when he wrote this in 1980: > Well, I would say that, as long-term institutions, I am totally against dictatorships. But a dictatorship may be a necessary system for a transitional period. At times it is necessary for a country to have, for a time, some form or other of dictatorial power. As you will understand, it is possible for a dictator to govern in a liberal way. And it is also possible for a democracy to govern with a total lack of liberalism. Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism. My personal impression — and this is valid for South America — is that in Chile, for example, we will witness a transition from a dictatorial government to a liberal government. And during this transition it may be necessary to maintain certain dictatorial powers, not as something permanent, but as a temporary arrangement.
- ttoinou 9y ago
  Seems like he was right about Chile at least
  - ekianjo 9y ago
    Yes because Chile ended up as a democracy after a short period of dictatorship (relatively speaking).
  - RobertoG 9y ago
    It seems to me, that what happens (and not only in Chile) is this: A few political parties alternate in government without big changes. More or less, they have the same program, with minor differences. They, both, are part of the Establishment and the owners of everything, normally a few families, can live with them. Democracy it's good. Nevermind the conditions of the rest of society. For some reason, despise the media being owned by "reasonable" hands, somebody outside of the establishment it's elected. Then, democracy it's not so good, and a dictatorship is needed to restore the power to the correct people, sorry, to "protect the freedom". When the situation it's stabilized we can go back to the democracy simulacrum. I would like to see how long would take for a new dictatorship appear if the people in power since always feel their position threaded.

by scythe 9y ago

ekianjo 9y ago

That sounds dubious that he was senile in 1973 when he wrote this in 1980: > Well, I would say that, as long-term institutions, I am totally against dictatorships. But a dictatorship may be a necessary system for a transitional period. At times it is necessary for a country to have, for a time, some form or other of dictatorial power. As you will understand, it is possible for a dictator to govern in a liberal way. And it is also possible for a democracy to govern with a total lack of liberalism. Personally I prefer a liberal dictator to democratic government lacking liberalism. My personal impression — and this is valid for South America — is that in Chile, for example, we will witness a transition from a dictatorial government to a liberal government. And during this transition it may be necessary to maintain certain dictatorial powers, not as something permanent, but as a temporary arrangement.

ttoinou 9y ago
Seems like he was right about Chile at least
- ekianjo 9y ago
  Yes because Chile ended up as a democracy after a short period of dictatorship (relatively speaking).
- RobertoG 9y ago
  It seems to me, that what happens (and not only in Chile) is this: A few political parties alternate in government without big changes. More or less, they have the same program, with minor differences. They, both, are part of the Establishment and the owners of everything, normally a few families, can live with them. Democracy it's good. Nevermind the conditions of the rest of society. For some reason, despise the media being owned by "reasonable" hands, somebody outside of the establishment it's elected. Then, democracy it's not so good, and a dictatorship is needed to restore the power to the correct people, sorry, to "protect the freedom". When the situation it's stabilized we can go back to the democracy simulacrum. I would like to see how long would take for a new dictatorship appear if the people in power since always feel their position threaded.