Journal on Policy & Complex Systems Volume 4, Number 1, Spring 2018 | Page 165

Journal on Policy and Complex Systems

never used the term convergence . “ The conflict between planning and freedom cannot but become more serious ,” he wrote , “ as the similarity of standards and values among those submitted to a unitary plan diminishes ” ( Hayek , 1994 , pp . 221 – 222 ).

There is a paradox in Hayek ’ s position that has become more apparent over time . The free trade that Hayek promoted also allows economies to thrive that threaten the system of

human values that created a world order . The free liberal trade regime has produced a shift in global economic power that enables the enemies of liberty to obtain resources that place democratic regimes and values at risk , and has enabled the enemies of democracy and freedom to grow strong enough to exploit the liberal order that enriched them and to threaten the heartland and cradle of freedom . To contain that risk and protect those values , the strong global institutions that he decried seem inescapable .

human freedom .

Where do these two icons of contemporary economic thought divide most substantively ? It is where they draw the line between economy as a mechanism that can be decoded and controlled as contrasted with the

notion that the economy self-organizes according to its own rules of complexity . Keynes was optimistic that cultural refinement and technical prowess are mutually reinforcing . For Hayek , it is not machinery or refined attitudes , but individual freedom that is the ultimate gift of civilization and that this requires independence , self-reliance , and local responsibility , regardless of whether the economic problem is , or ever will be , solved .

If Economics had Followed Hayek

The concerns set forth in the

preceding section became even more central to Hayek as his thinking matured . His later work raised

the planning authority and that the main lines of the future economic development of Great Britain

might be determined by a non-British majority ” ( Hayek , 1944 , pp . 222 – 223 ).

7 “ An

international authority which effectively limits the powers of the state over the individual will be one of the best safeguards of peace ,” wrote Hayek . “ The International Rule of Law must become a safeguard as much against the tyranny of the state over the individual as against the tyranny of the new superstrate over the national communities ” ( Hayek , 1944 , p . 236 ). Obviously , a China that has grown rich through foreign trade and investment by exploiting the resources under authoritarian governance of pariah regimes will not accept the guiding principle of individual freedom as the foundation of global order .

164