Arguments regarding freedom and democracy
Critical analysis of Hayek’s and Dewey’s arguments regarding freedom
Hayek and Dewey brought out various arguments regarding freedom especially within the market. Market freedom implies that the market forces should be allowed to make suitable adjustments which facilitated equilibrium reaching without involvement of the government (O’Neill, 1998). Those who support market freedom put to light that the government does not have to involve itself in various operations towards market control because the supply and demand market forces have the capacity to appropriately adjust themselves to ensure that market operations reach the desired equilibrium levels. Hayek’s and Dewey’s arguments regarding freedom may be put to light as follows.
For instance, Hayek warned of tyranny danger regarding inevitable government control concerning central planning decision making. He puts to light that abandonment of freedom, liberalization, and individualism inevitably brings about fascist or socialist oppression as well as individual serfdom and tyranny. Most importantly, Hayek disputed the view which was generally held by British academics, expressing that fascism would be viewed as a reaction against socialism by capitalism (O’Neill, 1998). He instead put forward that socialism and fascism had universal roots within economic planning which is central in nature and state power over individuals. Hayek’s work regarding market serfdom stands out as most popular and influential expositions regarding market libertarianism. It remains influential and popular within contemporary discourse.
Hayek indicated that most western democracies like America and England have continuously deserted economic affairs freedom without which political and personal freedom has been unattainable (O’Neill, 1998). Society has misguidedly attempted ensuring that prosperity is realized through central planning which inescapably brings about totalitarianism. He supports free market existence by indicating that through free market existence, various activities are appropriately adjusted to one another without arbitrary or coercive authority intervention. Hayek thus indicates that government involvement is usually an inferior regulation method whereas free market cooperation is usually superior.
Dewey arguments regarding freedom may critically be analyzed as follows. For instance, he held strong views against free market. In his work, Dewey has expressed free market as unsuitable because is its inability to effectively handle aspects regarding market failure (O’Neill, 1998). His arguments therefore indicate the need for government participation in various undertakings regarding market control so as to offer appropriate solutions which may not be realized with laissez-faire economy. Laissez-faire economy in this case is one which does not allow for government intervention but undertakes control activities on its own towards equilibrium market realization.
In his work, Dewey highly criticized free market existence and put to light that free market was accompanied by many inconveniences hence declared it unsuitable (O’Neill, 1998). For instance, he used the example of occurrences whereby market failure occurs and market forces have no efficient capacity to restore the situation or turn the situation to normal. This is usually a period whereby the market highly requires external forces like government involvement to occur. It is apparent that Dewey supports government involvement due to its capacity to appropriately control various tools regarding monetary and fiscal policies to help in solving various market problems which come up due to market failure (O’Neill, 1998). Monetary policies are usually essential because they help in realization of suitable situations within the market which facilitate demand and supply levels capable of steering desirable stability and growth levels. Fiscal policy involves regulation of money supply to the economy by government with the aim of ensuring that moderate supply is maintained which has the capacity to steer suitable stability and growth levels. In cases whereby limited money supply is experienced within the society as well as undesirable stability and growth levels, the government influences money supply through central banks which put in to place various strategies to ensure that money accessibility by public through commercial banks is augmented (O’Neill, 1998). Individuals therefore have the capacity to access substantial money amounts and invest within various economic sectors. This ensures that the various undertakings bring about desirable growth levels. They also facilitate suitable stability levels which have the capacity to bring about desirable outcomes within the society. It is apparent that these government functions, according to Dewey, bring about suitable market conditions and help in doing away with undesirable occurrences like market failures.
From the various aspects brought to light above, it is apparent that government involvement is usually very essential in aspects regarding market control. Although Hayek strongly believes that market forces have the capacity to appropriately bring about stability and desired growth levels, it is apparent that some cases are likely to occur within the market making it difficult for the market to handle them effectively (O’Neill, 1998). This creates more problems within the market due to the fact that undesirable outcomes regarding extended instability and poor growth levels prevail. This have to be handled by external forces for it to be solved and this indicates clearly that government involvement has to apply for desirable market conditions to be realized.
Hayek’s argument that government involvement is usually an inferior regulation method whereas free market cooperation is usually superior is therefore proved unsuitable by the various occurrences which require external forces involvement within the market for them to be solved. Pure existence of laissez-faire markets would be problematic in cases whereby aspects regarding market failure occur (O’Neill, 1998). This is because the free market does not have efficient mechanisms which facilitate appropriate market failure control.
Government is very suitable when it comes to various market operations because of its suitable capacity to employ appropriate control measures which ensure that market irregularities are effectively controlled (O’Neill, 1998). This brings about desirable outcomes explained by stability and growth.
Critical analysis of Ginti’s, Bowels and Hayek’s arguments regarding democracy
Various arguments regarding democracy were expressed by Ginti, Bowels and Hayek and may critically be analyzed as follows. For instance, Hayek held that absolute collectivism headed for by various free nations is totally contrary with democracy, and that social planning may end up wiping out economic, political and individual freedom (Thomas, 1999). He brings to our attention that democracy is only attainable in cases whereby free market is allowed to prevail. This is due to the fact that centralized planning or government involvement tends to satisfy minority requirements and this is looked upon as undemocratic.
Democracy in actual fact implies majority rule or representative democracy wherein representatives’ selection is done through the use of fair and free elections (Thomas, 1999). In this case complete suffrage exists. Hayek argues that for desirable outcomes regarding capitalism to be realized, democracy has to be done away with. Capitalism in this case is highlighted as system of an economy wherein distribution and production means are corporately or privately owned. Capitalism is usually very essential especially when it comes to development activities within a nation (Thomas, 1999). Through capitalism, suitable operations are carries out which promote desirable outcomes realization within the economy through stability or desirable growth levels attainment. In his work, Hayek indicates that the useful outcomes regarding capitalism are usually interfered with by democracy existence and therefore it should be done away with for desirable outcomes to be realized.
According to the various views he has brought to light, Hayek indicates that individuals ought to choose either democracy at the expense of capitalism, or capitalism at the expense of democracy since both may not be applicable at the same time (Thomas, 1999). He attempts to put to light that democracy highly supports government intervention within various operations in the market. GHe is generally against government involvement in the market because he argues that the market has capacity to effectively regulate itself. He supports free market existence by indicating that through free market existence, various activities are appropriately adjusted to one another without arbitrary or coercive authority intervention (Thomas, 1999). Hayek thus indicates that government involvement is usually an inferior regulation method whereas free market cooperation is usually superior. According to him, economies should undertake various operations independently without any government since supply and demand have the capacity to appropriately adjust themselves and bring about suitable outcomes. Suitable outcomes in this case imply desirable stability and growth levels.
Ginti and Bowles put forward various arguments regarding democracy as follows. For instance, they look upon democracy as unable to coexist with capitalism (Thomas, 1999). They put to light that democratic social order establishment has the capacity to bring about capitalist economy elimination. This brings about an ideal society creation according to Ginti and Bowles.It is apparent that from Ginti and Bowles work, democracy and capitalism are expressed as having
values which are completely different from each other (Thomas, 1999). For example, one holds on economic privilege pre-eminence which is usually influenced by property rights while the other is firm on the fact that democratic accountability and liberty priority are based on personal rights’ exercise. The disadvantage associated with contemporary capitalist societies may be explained by the fact that economic theory triumphs over political theory and this ought not be the case.
Democracy has been found to be interlinked with market-capitalism due to the fact that free market economy has been indicated as inefficient, and intervention by the government in terms of policies and regulatory laws is needed for the purpose of ensuring that working market economy is realized (Thomas, 1999). Owing to the fact that free market has no suitable capacity to appropriately regulate various undertakings, it is apparent that for suitable operations to be realized the government has to come in. Various arguments therefore indicate the need for government participation in various undertakings regarding market control so as to offer appropriate solutions which may not be realized with laissez-faire economy (Thomas, 1999). Laissez-faire economy in this case is one which does not allow for government intervention but undertakes control activities on its own towards equilibrium market realization.
It is apparent that support for government involvement is usually because of its capacity to aptly control various tools regarding monetary and fiscal policies to help in solving various market problems which come up due to market failure (Thomas, 1999). Monetary policies are generally fundamental when it comes to market operations because they help in attainment of suitable situations within the market which facilitate demand and supply levels capable of steering desirable stability and growth levels. Fiscal policy involves regulation of money supply to the economy by government with the aim of ensuring that moderate supply is maintained which has the capacity to steer suitable stability and growth levels (Thomas, 1999). In cases whereby limited money supply is experienced within the society as well as undesirable stability and growth levels, the government influences money supply through central banks which put in to place various strategies to ensure that money accessibility by public through commercial banks is augmented. Individuals therefore have the capacity to access substantial money amounts and invest within various economic sectors (Thomas, 1999). This ensures that the various undertakings bring about desirable growth levels. They also facilitate suitable stability levels which have the capacity to bring about desirable outcomes within the society. It is apparent that these government functions, according to Dewey, bring about suitable market conditions and help in doing away with undesirable occurrences like market failures.
The various aspects brought to light above indicate that Ginti, Bowels and Hayek held similar views regarding democracy in which case they explained democracy in terms of the influence it had on capitalism (Thomas, 1999). Through out their work, they have expressed various ideas which support the fact that capitalism has no capacity to exist in cases whereby democracy exists. For instance, Hayek held that absolute collectivism headed for by various free nations is totally contrary with democracy, and that social planning may end up wiping out economic, political and individual freedom. He has highlighted capitalism as system of an economy wherein distribution and production means are corporately or privately owned Capitalism in this case is highlighted as system of an economy wherein distribution and production means are corporately or privately owned. Capitalism is usually very essential especially when it comes to development activities within a nation (Thomas, 1999). Through capitalism, suitable operations are carries out which promote desirable outcomes realization within the economy through stability or desirable growth levels attainment. In his work, Hayek indicates that the useful outcomes regarding capitalism are usually interfered with by democracy existence and therefore it should be done away with for desirable outcomes to be realized.
Capitalism is usually very essential especially when it comes to development activities within a nation. Through capitalism, suitable operations are carries out which promote desirable outcomes realization within the economy through stability or desirable growth levels attainment . In his work, Hayek indicates that the useful outcomes regarding capitalism are usually interfered with by democracy existence and therefore it should be done away with for desirable outcomes to be realized.
Conclusion
It is apparent from the above aspects that government is usually very essential when it comes to market operations regulation. This is because it has the capacity to handle various aspects which seem impossible with the free market regulations. For example, it has the capacity to apply suitable tools which ensure that desirable stability and growth levels are attained.
Reference
O’Neill, J. (1998). The Market: Ethics, Knowledge, and Politics. London: Routledge.
Thomas, K. (1999). Racing to Regionalize: Democracy, capitalism, and Regional Political Economy. Boulder, CO Lynne Rienner.