Re: The Road to Serfdom

[Eubulides <paraconsistent@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eubulides" <paraconsistent@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The Road to Serfdom


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <bendien@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

> ==============================
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg07575.html

=====================

Hodgson goes on further with this thread in his "Economics and Evolution" turning the tables on
the Hayekians in discussing the collapse of the Soviet Bloc:

"But what if the tables are turned? What if we are faced with the dilemmas of reform in a
country which is not dominated by market relations and private property? Such problems are
illustrated no more graphically than by speculation on the Hayekian attitude to the post 1989
reforms of the former Eastern Bloc economies. Gerard Roland points out that in the context of
the introduction of private property rights in the East, Hayek is caught between two
irreconcilable arguments: his support for markets, on the one hand, and his opposition to
deliberate structural change or 'constructivism' on the other. If he takes one horn of this
dilemma he should oppose reform in the Soviet Union, as this is essentially interventionist and
'constructivist' in nature. But it would seem that the construction of the Great Society here
takes priority. The 'burden of proof' is thus no longer placed on those advocating reform. In
the context of Soviet type societies that onus is seemingly now placed on the conservative
elements who resist the growth of markets and private property. Clearly, and especially with
Hayek's disposition of the 'burden of proof', there is the danger that a double standard may be
operating here."