preview

The Road To Serfdom Analysis

Decent Essays

Hayek is known for his thoughts and ideas about knowledge. He said that knowledge is unique to the time and day and is very individualized for each person. He also stated that we cannot make general rules about anything because the things that we are studying and/or trying to make rules about are always changing. Therefore, if make rules, as soon as we make them they could be false. In chapter 10 of Hayek’s book, The Road to Serfdom, he explains how and why the worst people get on top politically. Hayek says, “There are strong reasons for believing that what to us appear the worst features of the existing totalitarian systems are not accidently by-products, but phenomena which totalitarianism is certain sooner or later to produce”. Throughout …show more content…

He gives three main reasons to why such a large number of people with similar views are likely to be formed around the worst/most negative aspects of society rather than the best. The first reason is that the more education and intelligence an individual has, the more likely their beliefs and views are distinct and different from the usual. He also adds that the more education and intelligence they have, “the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values” (142). This means that if you want to find a high rate of consistency and similar views, you have to lower your morals, values, and intellectual norms. Here, Hayek is not trying to say that the majority of people have no morals or values, he is getting at the point that the biggest group of people whose morals are consistent and similar, have lower standards. When individuals run for office, they do not have to be liked by everyone, but they do have to have the majority of the society to win. Hayek refers to is as, “the lowest common denominator which unites are largest number of people” (142). Not everyone has high morals and values, but almost everyone has at least some kind of set values. If a candidate sets his or her values to the lowest bar, almost everyone can agree in some way with it. If the candidate with low moral standards wins the election, we now have government official with low moral standards and …show more content…

Hayek even says that is it easier to have, “hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task”. Many friendships and alliances are built on the hatred of the same person or similar people. Usually, these friendship and alliances are the most close knit together because they have a common plan. It is also better from their point of view to be in the alliance than outside of it. Therefore, if a candidate has a hatred of one person or a group of people, it is seen as advantageous to be in the alliance rather than out of it. Hayek adds, “it seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader” (143).
All of these negative factors contribute to how and why the worst get on top. From the outside looking in, it may be easy to say to yourself, ‘no way this is possible. I would never stand behind someone with low morals, I’m not gullible, and even if we had the same enemy, that wouldn’t mean that I would support him/her.’ Hayek gives the example of the Jewish in Germany. People formed a common hatred for the Jewish and this led to some very negative outcomes. Hitler led this and actually had people standing behind him for his cruel actions just because they had a common hatred for a group of

Get Access