Hayek, *The Road to Serfdom* - 17th session

November 2, 2020 (Mon), 17th session

The Road to Serfdom Reading Discussion, 17th Online Meeting:

Rok

Sha, Kangyoung, Mori, Damjae

Not long ago, I was fortunate enough to attend a seminar by Professor Kyungkuk Min. The topic was “Liberalism and Democracy: Can They Coexist?” As I listened to the seminar, my mind felt refreshed, as though a tangled thread that had long resisted unraveling had finally come loose. The section we read for this session was filled with points that were highly important in relation to that theme, which made this reading meeting all the more enjoyable. I would like to take this opportunity to once again express my gratitude to Professor Min.

P110 Expansion of the Scope of State Activity and the Shrinking Possibility of Agreement

This explains that the inefficiency of parliament is not so much a problem of its members as something inherent and unavoidable from the start. People may desire the achievement of goals in the manner of military action, but such things cannot happen in reality unless it is literally a military operation.

Yet in the end, when a majority continues to want such results, a situation arises in which the belief spreads that the government may ignore democratic procedures in order to get things done. Hitler did not need to destroy democracy; he only needed support for the belief that only Hitler could get things done.

Mori remarked that the mistakes of the current government may very well lead to Gyeonggi Governor Jaemyung Lee becoming his party’s presidential candidate and even winning the election, because he is appealing to the public with an image of strong executive ability. Although this book was written 80 years ago, it was striking how precisely it explains the direction in which Korean society today seems to be moving.

P115 The Illusion of Democratic Control

Democratic government functioned successfully only when it limited its functions to areas in which majority agreement could be formed through free discussion. It says that if democracy comes to be dominated by collectivist doctrine, democracy will destroy itself.

P117 The Ultimate Value Is Not Democracy but Freedom

Democracy is essentially a means. It is entirely possible that a democratic government, ruled by a highly homogeneous and doctrinaire majority, may be just as oppressive as the worst dictatorship. Democratic control can restrain power from being exercised arbitrarily. But that does not necessarily follow simply because democratic control exists.

Mori explained that “democracy” and “the separation of powers” are not ends in themselves, but mechanisms for protecting “liberalism.” If “democracy” itself is made the end, it will always culminate in “fascism.”

Chapter 6. Planning and the Rule of Law

P121 The Rule of Law

The rule of law means that the government is bound in all its actions by rules fixed and announced beforehand. Individuals are then able, with considerable certainty, to “predict” the coercive power of the government.

“The rule of law” vs. “arbitrary government”

Under “the rule of law,” the government confines its work to establishing rules that determine the conditions under which available resources may be used. What ends they are to be used for is up to individuals.

Under “arbitrary government,” the government directs that the means of production be used for specific ends.

Proper rules are a kind of “means of production” that help people predict the actions of others whose cooperation is necessary.

Professor Kyungkuk Min’s lecture materials

Personally, the image that came to mind through this conceptual framework, and through encountering “the rule of law” again in The Road to Serfdom, was the following. I also thought this image could be helpful as a visual aid when trying to persuade a majority of people.

I think liberals are currently fighting on two fronts at once. One is freedom dependent on authority; the other is democracy dependent on the collective. The reason we must fight them is that both ultimately lead to “arbitrary government,” and thus to an unsustainable society with neither freedom nor democracy.

For me, the movement from the first quadrant to the fourth quadrant was what I saw under the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye administrations. And I think the current Moon Jae-in government exerts a strong pull from the third quadrant to the fourth quadrant. My disappointment with the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye governments led me to support the forces advocating the third quadrant, which at least appeared closer to the second quadrant, and I had hoped for a gradual move toward the second quadrant, but I am disappointed to see something quite different. I also thought there must be quite a few people like me.

However, it took me quite a long time before I could visualize things in this way, and it was not easy.

At present, for most people, the struggle between “democracy + collective” and “freedom + authority” appears as though it were simply a struggle of “democracy vs. authority,” so I think many people, without much thought, simply believe they should support “democracy” and do so.

As mentioned several times before, “democracy” cannot itself be the end (because it would self-destruct) and must instead be treated as a means for preserving “freedom.” Toward the end of the discussion, I offered the opinion that if we could communicate more easily to the majority the image that we must move toward the second quadrant (freedom + democracy), using a diagonal picture on a two-dimensional plane rather than a single vertical line (democracy vs. authority), it might be far more effective than lengthy verbal explanations.

I nodded once again at Mori’s explanation that even if the claims of liberals who advocate anarchism are not in themselves logically contradictory, if rapid social change lowers each individual’s ability to “predict,” that would create another set of problems.

In his book, Jordan Peterson says that life is walking a narrow and treacherous path between “chaos and order.” If chaos = freedom and order = planning, then perhaps a good society is one that walks the narrow path along that diagonal line. With that thought, I conclude this reflection on the reading meeting. (The true meaning of “chaos” here can only be understood by reading the book.)

Anyone who would like to participate in the online reading group every Monday evening is invited to join the open chat room at the link below.

https://open.kakao.com/o/gX3OIqtb

---

Original title: 하이에크 <노예의 길>-17차

Author: Ja-yu-ju-ui Ip-mun Dok-seo To-ron Mo-im

Date: 2020-11-02

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=reading01&pn=8&idx=23215