Some of the greatest political literature of the 20th century was written during years of violence, war, and upheaval between 1934 to 1946. During such times, the world of ideas leaves the parlor games and comes to affect the fate of millions. These are moments that divide the serious scholars from the pretenders.
During a crisis, from a career point of view, it is always better to stay silent. To speak out risks everything. It requires more than courage. It requires a willingness to put it all on the line to see one’s ideas realized in the real world. It’s also when intellectuals can have their greatest impact on the world. And yet, few do it. Few stand up when they are most needed.
One of my favorite thinkers from this entire period is F.A. Hayek, a monetary economist at the University of Vienna who left (as many did) to take residence in London at the London School of Economics. There he quickly established himself as the alternative to John Maynard Keynes, whose new theories contradicted the whole of classical economics.
Keynes was riding high as the guru of fascistic experiments the world over, even to the point of writing an introduction to the German edition of his book in 1936 when the Nazis were firmly in power. He celebrated the regime and its potential.
In contrast, Hayek represented old-world liberalism. Before his move to London, Hayek had been hard at work on theoretical problems involving capital structures, interest rate signaling issues, pricing as an information tool, the unworkability of socialism, and other such matters. His work in this area ultimately won him the Nobel Prize in 1974.
In the midst of the Second World War, Hayek was alarmed to see England take the direction of economic central planning, different in degree but not in kind to what was happening in Europe and the United States. The new system that had emerged from the Great Depression combined government and the largest corporate sectors into a single unit managed from the top.
His core critique was that no planners could possess the knowledge necessary to make these systems work in any way that would benefit the whole. The answer to social problems was not to assign the job of planning to intellectuals with resources and power, as was being done all over the world. Their plans would necessarily override the planning of individuals and families.
You must be logged in to post a comment.