July 09, 2003

More on De Long's mischaracterization of Hayek's views on democracy from Chirag Kasbekar:

You're being a little silly, and needless to say, unfair to Hayek ...

1. I agree with Greg Ransom that you miss Hayek�s point about �liberal� (that is, limited) democracy as opposed to �majoritarian/egalitarian� democracy � a la Dahl, etc. I don�t think you would find him ever criticizing democracy, but always �unlimited democracy� and �extreme democracy�.

See Gus diZerega, �"Equality, Self-Government, and Democracy" Western Political Quarterly, now The Political Research Quarterly, Summer, 1987. (http://www.dizerega.com/equal.htm)

This is a critique of Dahl that is remarkably close to Hayek�s own critique. Gus� critique has been acknowledged by Dahl�s own students as one of the best available. But Dahl has refused to respond to it.

In fact, it�s ironic that you cite slavery against Hayek. His main point is to argue that something like slavery can come about if democracy is not limited by liberalism.

This is Hayek�s point about democracy (The Constitution of Liberty, pp.107-108):

"Democracy is, above all, a process of forming opinion. Its chief advantage
lies not in its method of selecting those who govern but in the fact that,
because a great part of the population takes an active part in the formation
of opinion, a correspondingly wide range of persons is available from which
to select... It is in its dynamic, rather than in its static, aspects that
the value of democracy proves itself... The ideal of democracy rests on the
belief that the view which will direct government emerges from an
independent and spontaneous process. It requires, therefore, the existence
of a large sphere independent of majority control in which the opinions of
the individuals are formed."

Posted by Greg Ransom