[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
Can the average reader understand The Road...
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature

Thread replies: 35
Thread images: 9
File: Hayek_1.jpg (36 KB, 590x392) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Hayek_1.jpg
36 KB, 590x392
Can the average reader understand The Road To Serfdom or is there some prerequisite reading? I want to read Hayek but I don't want to bother if it's written for people who already have a very deep understanding of economics
>>
Why would I read Hayek when I jerk off pretending I'm titty fucking her?
>>
>>7632657
What the fuck does that even mean?
>>
File: smug cunt.png (515 KB, 1000x1000) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
smug cunt.png
515 KB, 1000x1000
>Hayek
>understanding of economics
>>
>>7632697

>Hayek
>Nobel Laureate
>universally acknowledged within the field for his contributions, especially for his insights into the market as an information dispersement mechanism
>Unequivocally destroyed the premise of the practical viability of planned economies

I think he knew a thing or two, mate.
>>
>>7632738
Eat shit, millions of flies can't be wrong.
>>
>>7632635
>asking about Hayek
>on a board that endlessly prattles on about the evils of capitalism and neoliberalism

You have balls, OP, I respect that.

>tfw too free-market for /lit/, too socially liberal for /pol/
>>
File: 1450440913540.png (296 KB, 649x649) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1450440913540.png
296 KB, 649x649
>>7632760
>free market
>socially liberal

Wow, how does it feel to be literally the most ideologically bankrupt person on 4chan?
>>
>>7632743

Tell me, in as much detail as you can muster, how Hayek was wrong.

Keep in mind he was not a praxeologist and dissented from many of the Austrian positions, so no crying >muh logically untenable xyz

Okay?
>>
>>7632760

I'm here with you bb don't despair
>>
>>7632769

>liberalism

>not socially liberal

Conservatives are capitalistic by historical happenstance. Chinese conservatives are anti-capitalist, generally being retarded third worldists dismissing civil liberties or social justice 'bourgeois'
>>
>>7632776
>anyone who thinks that you should try to apply concepts of justice or fairness to the outcome of market forces is literally a socialist commie-nazi
>>
>>7632796

More like

>the government's well- and non-so-well- intended interferences in the price mechanism almost always lead to inefficiencies. This is theoretically and empirically demonstrable.

As to Hayek's normative defence of the market as a necessary component of a free society, it is pretty sophisticated and difficult to reproduce in green text.
>>
I asked a pretty simple question and instead of answering it the /lit/eral retards turn on each other
God dammit, /lit/
>>
>>7632826
Read Popper instead.
>>
File: 1449921589426.jpg (145 KB, 960x720) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1449921589426.jpg
145 KB, 960x720
From what I remember, it isn't too hard. At most you need high school economics under your belt.
>>
>>7632769
Breddy gud, no extensive regulatory state or anti-degeneracy squad for me.

Also social liberalism implies free market policies, at least to a fairly high extent, because the boundary between personal and economic freedom is incredibly murky. Conversely, the principles that support many free market views imply social liberalism, if not pride parades than at least condemning the aforementioned degeneracy hunts.

For the above reasons or others, I've noticed that when you go past fairly mainstream conservatism, with is moderately free-market and moderately socially conservative, those more socially conservative reject markets (see Evola, NatSocs), and those more free-market reject a lot of social conservatism (libertarians and an-caps). Off the top of my head, the stauncher anti-feminists aren't big fans of capitalism, or even economically-oriented policy for that matter, even though the redneck strawman of an anti-feminist is a Reagan Republican.
>>
>>7632826

No, you do not need any specialized knowledge to understand Road to Serfdom. It was written for a popular audience, so there are no overly technical terms nor anything else that presupposes more than a layman's understandingof the subject. This should have been made obvious to you with a single google search.
>>
>>7632819
You can dress it up as much as you want, but Hayek was a red-baiter first and an economist second. There's a whole world of difference between "the existence of the market as a necessary component of a free society" and "we must never touch the market ever". Market fundamentalism is the worst and most cancerous kind of dogmatic extremism.
>inb4 "b-but the free market has never been tried!"
>>
>>7632846

I don't hold as extreme a position as Hayek, but you could do far worse than 'market fundamentalism'. 'Marxist fundamentalism,' for instance, which has also been tried, was an unmitigated disaster both materially and intellectually. Compare the progress of science in the West in the 20th century to that under the dialectical materialist orthodoxy of the Soviet Union.
>>
>>7632659
Not that anon but do you even Salma Hayek?
>>
>>7632846
>market fundamentalism

>>7632834
>social liberalism
>free market
>personal and economic freedom

/lit/ seems to be just as annoyingly obsessed with talking points as /pol/.
>>
>>7632892

Great, let's hear your subtle and deeply informed opinion, then.
>>
>>7632858
>Compare the progress of science in the West in the 20th century to that under the dialectical materialist orthodoxy of the Soviet Union.

This idea is so silly. A barely post-feudal society goes to space in under 60 years, first ever in the world - communism? Most of the technology used in phones today was commissioned by the U.S. government - b-but... please no state?
>>
>>7632906

The space program in the USSR was the only thing comparable to the West, and that was due to its linkage with military development. In every other feasible arena they floundered.

As for government-driven cell technology--post hoc ergo proper hoc. Yes, the government can allocate resources in such a way that positive externalities are produced, but that does not mean those allocations were efficient, nor does it mean those externalities were necessary consequences of those allocations, nor that they cold not have been produced through private R&D.
>>
>>7632924
TOKAMAK fusion reactors were a Soviet invention, and that is still the cutting edge of nuclear fusion technology (e.g. ITER).

They were amazing at hockey too.
>>
>>7632635
Get rid of that trip
>>
>>7633103
Except that fusion is a dead end and that ITER is 10x over budget already and isn't planned to start until like 2030, tenatively.
>>
>>7632858
Nigga in the book OP asked about Hayek says billions of times that his shit ain't about no laissez faire
>>
>>7632846
Hayek wasn't actually that extreme for an Austrian. He accepted some intervention into the market. It was von Mises and Rothbard who took the Austrian school to the further libertarian hands-off side.
>>
>>7633760
>Except that fusion is a dead end and that ITER is 10x over budget already and isn't planned to start until like 2030, tenatively.

It was a revolutionary design that was way beyond anything in the west. And they gave it away too, they didn't keep it a secret.

You can't explain away the achievements of Soviet science. Nobel prizes, Advanced applications in space and nuclear energy, They we're ahead of the west on research about climatology (even if their industrial practices were worse). Pound for pound, they might be one of the greatest scientific societies of all time.
>>
File: 865161238.jpg (249 KB, 418x512) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
865161238.jpg
249 KB, 418x512
>>7632635
It doesn't really require much prerequisite reading, but it can be a little tedious. Hayek is a good economist and points out a lot of problems with statist policies that blindly embrace "progress" without any kind of democratic processes in place to guide that progress. In the cases he brings up it's pretty clear that the central planners just became feudal lords with the power to crush any opposition. The case for economic inefficiency is overstated though, and predictions of an indefinitely expanding bureaucracy becoming unable to administer the population are ridiculous. What rankles people about him the most is that he suggests socialism will always lead to a feudal society dominated by regulators, and it's ridiculous because Austria was an actual feudal society at the time that was interested in keeping uppity citizens from taking away any power from the aristocracy.

Why exactly are you considering reading it?
>>
>>7632760
>>7632779
oy vey it warms my heart to see such noble goyim
>>
No it is very easy to pick up. I'd recommend it to just about anyone
>>
File: Neo-Keynesian 02.gif (7 KB, 564x316) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Neo-Keynesian 02.gif
7 KB, 564x316
>>7633964
Don't pointlessly antagonize people shitbird

>>7632760
>Doesn't ask for any radical changes
>Economic policy actually works pretty well for the betterment of all
>Proved that austerity measures don't work
>Literally the devil

I like Keynes he's a bretty gud guy

>>7634047
Why would you recommend it?
Thread replies: 35
Thread images: 9
Thread DB ID: 473849



[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.