Comparing the Works of Karl Polanyi and F A Hayek

Two major economic thinkers of the of the early twentieth century, John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich A. Hayek, hold very different economic viewpoints. Keynes is among the most famous economic philosophers. Keynes, who's theories gained a reputation during the Great Depression in the 1930s, focused mainly on an economy's bust. It is where the economy declines and finally bottoms-out, that Keynesian economics believes the answers lie for its eventual recovery. On the other hand, Hayek believed that in studying the boom answers would be provided to lead the economy out of the bust that was sure to follow. Hayek backed the Austrian school of economics.

Modern economic society can be described as a combination of certain points from several theories combined into one. Changing dynamics and economic needs of nations has spawned a development of various, and contrasting, economic systems throughout the world. Perhaps the two most contrasting philosophies seen in existence today are that of capitalism and communism. The two philosophers most notably recognized for their views on these economic systems are Adam Smith and Karl Marx. This paper will identify several fundamental aspects of economic philosophy as described by Smith and Marx, and will compare and contrast the views of these

Marx and Hayek espouse vastly different perspectives on capitalism. While they tend to disagree on most characteristics of capitalism their ideologies’ do intersect on a few perspectives. First of all, they agree that capitalism is a powerful economic system. Secondly, both view capitalism as unpredictable. Yet, despite these similarities, Marx and Hayek disagree on most attributes of capitalism. One disagreement is the historical process of how capitalism came to be the dominant economic order. Another point of departure between the ideologies is that Hayek understands capitalism to be the most able economic system to provide for the population. Yet, Marx insists his economy is able to outperform and provide freedom for society. The economic

“The path to economic growth is not engineered by the government; rather, the path to economic prosperity is built by the people.” This quote relates to classical liberalism because it displays a ring wing perspective, which indicates devalued government authority in relation to aspects of individualism. Overall demonstrating the economic perspective that favours the absence of government involvement. It brings into question what the most efficient way to run an economy is, and what is the best way to manage an economy to maintain stability. Some believe that government intervention in an economy is dangerous because it adds to the nation’s overall inflation rate and national debt. Friedrich Hayek is an economic theorist supporting little

The ideas of John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich von Hayek have dominated the economic landscape since the end of World War II. Both of these influential economists had distinct ideas about economic freedom--ideas that were very clearly in opposition to each other. Following World War II, one major economic question dealt with the appropriate role for government in the economy. That has often been portrayed more recently as a battle between two economic titans. Hayek, in the 1970s, came to be seen as opposing everything Keynes and the Keynesian consensus stood for. More recently, many see the change towards more free-market ideas since the 1980s as the victory of Hayek's ideas over Keynes'—a process that has since reversed as a result of the Great Recession. This academic battle of ideas has even made its way into popular media.

The following paper will explore the book, The Road to Serfdom, by F.A. Hayek. I challenge that many of Hayek's assumptions are still valid today even though his book was written in 1944. Hayek's assumptions regarding 1) the government's rule of the law, 2) the concept of government-directed economic activity that includes artificial separation of economics and politics, and 3) the notion that the unscrupulous and uninhibited are likely to be more successful, are still true in today.

Modernizing over the decades, two main theories support economists, proposals, arguments, and predictions. The first theory is the Classical model perspective and the second theory is the Keynesian model perspective. The first theory promotes a hands-off approach and the second a government intervention approach. The first theory believes that if left alone, the natural market forces would right themselves and eventually achieve the proper balance. The second theory believes that people have to live through the process of

During the time of war Keynes ideas were more successful because the government was able to make a large quantity of jobs for people through goods needed for the war. Since Keynes ideas were so widely used and accepted at this time, Hayek’s ideas were rejected and considered bad because the purposed to do the opposite. After the “good 30 years” Keynes economic ideas began to show flaws through inflation and unemployment rates. This issue resulted from the restriction

In The Road to Serfdom, materialist Author F. A. Hayek presents a materialist argument concerning the nature of the universe. Hayek argues that is the nature of the universe to produce conditions that are based upon freedom. Hayek makes this argument by providing several examples of freedom existing within the universe and describing different kinds of freedom. Hayek adds strength to his argument that the nature of universe is to produce freedom by suggesting that even when the creatures of the universe try to stray away from freedom, they must inevitably return to it.

The relationship between economists John M. Keynes and Friedrich A. Hayek is quite complex. Both had influential roles in economic studies, emerging after World War II and during the Great Depression era (BBC). It’s important to note that both of these economists had opposing views when it came to economic theories and policies. Briefly summed up, Keynes theories were in support for government involvement in the economy (EconedLink). In contrast, Hayek argued that the government should have a lesser role in economic decisions in order to achieve greater economic freedom (EconedLink). These two opposing arguments are what have primarily stirred the Keynes versus Hayek debate. Of course, both Keynes and Hayek’s theories

Unlike Keynes, Hayek, in his book The Road to Serfdom, points out that any form of government intervention is dangerous and leads to serfdom. He argued that central government planning leads to serfdom or servitude which destroys personal freedom. Society has tried to ensure continuous prosperity by centralized planning which leads to totalitarianism. For example, socialism was supposed to be a means of assuring equality through restrain and servitude whereas democracy seeks equality in liberty-personal freedom and economical freedom. On the other hand, planning which is coercive is the least method of regulation where as cooperation of free market is superior because it is the only method that can adjust our activities with each other without the intervention of the authority. Furthermore, he argued that central planning is undemocratic because it imposes the will of the minority upon the majority. In pursuing their centralized goals, they take money or properties of the majority thus, destroying individual freedom. In addition, centralized planning reduces the individual to merely a means to be used by the authority as well as, giving away individual’s economic liberty. Unlike centralized planning, an open society offers more personal and economical freedom even to the very poor. He concluded by saying “The guiding principle that a policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy remains as true today as it

This concept criticizes the market fundamentalism. Markets will always be controlled by norms, society, culture and morality. Polanyi means the idea of a self-regulating economy is a myth and the free market is a political creation. The state plays a huge role in managing markets such as money, land and labor. John M. Keynes agreed with Polanyi, it doesn’t exist some “invisible hand”. He argued for governmental regulation and that the state should be in the economy with the companies. The state should boost and help the economy when it’s bad and help the struggling

People's soul are made up of several parts, as will be shown along the way, each man's main concern and occupation in life should be to build harmony and unity. Politics is the way a person expresses how his or her order in life can be used for everyone, the image of their own inner order or disorder reflected in his social life. A person cannot live alone, because one is a social animal, one must act; politics becomes an important part of the mind. Politics are simply the means of bringing order into the world of men through laws that are the product of rational nature. It is the ultimate concern of the philosopher, the one of wisdom, to bring this order forward.

Critically examine the debate between Keynesian and classical economists on the efficiency of the market mechanism and the efficiency of government policy intervention. What lessons can be drawn from the 2007-2009 global financial and economic crisis

There exists an enduring scholarly disagreement as to whether the assumptions of a free market hold, imperative to this is the question of whether laissez-faire is self regulating. The neo- liberal school of thought, with advocates such as Hayek, take diametrically opposing viewpoints to academics such as Polanyi. The former wish to run the economy as a separate entity from society, the latter proposes the embedding of the economy within societal relations. This essay will focus on the opposing views of Hayek and Polanyi. Firstly, society’s role in the