'Liberals' Aren't Liberal
Have you read Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom? It is the little book that became a surprise bestseller and inspired Reagan and Thatcher. In it, Hayek demonstrated that allowing the government to acquire increased control over the economy would inevitably lead to the loss of liberty.
Over at The Federalist, Robert Tracinski, without mentioning Hayek, makes Hayek’s argument in a few hundred well-chosen words.
…the power to control our economic lives contains within it the power to control everything else.
Why does [a liberal] presume that the government has the right to force the Hitching Post in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho, to perform gay weddings? Because it is a business rather than a non-profit organization. In the worldview of the so-called liberal, to engage in commerce is to deliver yourself bound hand-and-foot to the state.
[snip]
All aspects of human life find an expression in commerce, so if you regulate that, you regulate everything. Which they are now happily proceeding to do.
That’s why it has been such a long time since I’ve encountered a “liberal” who is still liberal in any meaningful sense.
Tracinski is correct to put quotation marks around “liberal.” Today’s “liberals” aren’t liberal; they are really progressives. Progressives reject the Constitution and the limited government of the Founders.
What inspired Marx was his apocalyptic vision of a violent revolution that would sweep away the social order he hated. His muddled “scientific” economics was his rationale for the revolution that was his real passion. The progressives decided that Marx was wrong that revolution was the way forward, at least in countries where people have the vote. They decided that the better way was little by little – progressively. As much as Bill Ayers loved the idea of a bloody revolution, he ended up working to overthrow the system he despises as a professor of education.

The progressives have always understood that a government with the power to intervene in the economy is the most important prize. That is why Nancy Pelosi was willing to sacrifice colleagues whose votes had given her the speaker’s gavel in order to impose Obamacare on America.
If you haven’t yet read Hayek’s book, perhaps Tracinski’s essay will inspire you to do so. The good news is that the book is as readable and well-written as the essay.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The Death of the Center-Left in America
- ‘Make Peace, You Fools! What Else Can You Do?’
- When Nuclear Regulation Goes Awry
- The Danger of Nothing
- A New Pope With Courage
- Not in Kansas Any More
- Democrats Dying on the Most Desolate Hills
- If She’s an Astronaut … I’m a Jet Fighter Pilot
- Is the Jihadist Trojan Horse Winning?
- Who Has the Best American Autobiography?
Blog Posts
- Mexican ammo wranglers
- Rep. Jamie 'Maryland Man' Raskin also threatens Trump supporters
- The eight narrative fallacies that drive American politics
- Summertime reality twisted into climate exasperation
- Life discovered on a distant planet?
- The answer is not blowing in the wind
- Letitia James: it's either/or
- Harvard elitism meets Donald Trump
- The GEC is finally more than mostly dead
- We're not the same
- Hillary ‘the Russia Hoaxer’ Clinton wants to imprison people for ‘propaganda’
- Rep. Jamie Raskin threatens foreign leaders who cooperate with President Trump, 'when we come back to power — and we will'
- Maybe we need more living versions of “Hillbilly Funerals”
- A female fencer's courage is partly rewarded
- Democrats' Cloward-Piven default