Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute

MURRAY N. ROTHBARD VS. THE PHILOSPHERS: UNPUBLISHED WRITINGS
70 ON HAYEK, MISES, STRAUSS, AND POLYANI
our proper course is to employ general rules, but
to find these rules only in empirical, pragmatic,
one-step-at-a-time fashion—and we must follow
these rules except where emergencies present
themselves.
And a further point: Hayek rests his case for his principles
not on individual rights or welfare, but on “social” considerations:
society is better off if some people discover
things, etc. So that individual “liberty” is only a grant from
society.
This then, is the face that F.A. Hayek will present to the
world in his Constitution of Liberty. It is a face such that, if
I were a young man first getting interested in political questions,
and I should read this as the best product of the
“extreme Right,” I would become a roaring leftist in no
time, and so I believe would almost anyone. That is why I
consider this such a dangerous book and why I believe that
right-wingers should attack this book with great vigor when
it appears, instead of what I am sure they will do: applaud
it like so many trained seals. For (1) Hayek attacks laissezfaire
and attacks or ignores the true libertarians, thus setting
up the “even Hayek admits . . .” line; and (2) his argument
is based on a deprecation or dismissal of both reason
and justice, so that anyone interested in reason or justice
would tend to oppose the whole book. And because of
Hayek’s great prominence in the intellectual world, any failure
by extreme right-wingers to attack the book with the
implacable vigor it deserves will inordinately harm the rightwing
cause that we all hold dear.
Such are the partisan biases that stem from Hayek’s lack
of sound principle, and which vitiate, and more than offset,
the various good passages and sections in the economic sections
of the book.
Cordially,
Murray