Liberalism VS Socialism AND Conservatism [What Would Hayek Say?]

Left, right, liberal, socialist, progressive, conservative - these concepts are ubiquitous in contemporary political debate. They are categories that help us organize our own thoughts about politics, ethics, history, and even human nature itself. But what do they really mean?
In this week's "What Would Hayek Say?" we take a look at Hayek's famous essay "Why I Am Not a Conservative" and outline his views on liberalism, socialism, and conservatism. We examine some of the limitations of the left-right political spectrum and the triangular spectrum that Hayek proposed as an alternative, which helps us better understand what some of the similarities are between socialism and conservatism and how Hayek's liberalism differs from both of those philosophies.
Interestingly, it is precisely Hayek's liberalism that is under attack by sections of both the left and right today. We conclude with looking at some of liberalism's own limitations - which is an essential exercise for anyone who wishes to preserve liberalism.
***
Scott B. Nelson is Research and Strategy Advisor at the Austrian Economics Center and Hayek Institut in Vienna, Austria. He blogs at vienna-symposium.com.
***
Please don't forget to like and subscribe!
***
Check out our website for more great content: www.austriancenter.com/
Stay up to date by signing up for our newsletter: www.austriancenter.com/newsle...
Follow us on Twitter: / austriancenter
Follow us on Facebook: / austrianeconomicscenter
Follow us on Instagram: austriancen...

[@logicking3765]

I would argue conservatism is not the fear of new ideas. As a matter of fact, conservatives embrace changes, but it is the "rate"/"speed" of change where conservatives differ from the progressives. Evolution is at the center of conservatism, and they understand the need to change. However, they prefer the Darwinism of ideas, which means ideas have to be tested and not enforced onto the public. The public then decides which ideas are to stay and go. In order for an idea to be tested repeatedly by the public, it takes time and it's a slow and ongoing process, thus conservatives always get a bad reputation of rejecting "new ideas", but in fact, they deem the danger to society by enforcing new ideas to be too great and prefer a slower and more natural approach.
Of course, you also have people who don't even understand what conservatism is and they just label themselves conservatives.

[@cryptoyor]

Excellent video, thanks a lot 👏

[@poolofstuff]

Why do I get the feeling that modern, American everyday usage of the words liberal and conservative are completely different than pretty much anything you've mentioned in this video?

[@alecbisson1102]

Because if the powerful encourage you to use incorrect terms it will be harder to organize against them.

[@BrianMarshall1]

I read this as a liberal about 20 years ago and found it really eye opening to see politics and more than left or right, especially since we try to attach so much meaning onto it. Today many would call me a progressive or a socialist or even an anarchist even though I feel like the labels have changed far more than I have. I re-read Why I'm Not a Conservative recently. Even though I find it interesting and compelling I feel like it's missing something. Like left and right is portrayed on the political spectrum as being about economics, rhetorically it's mostly about culture, but originally it was about who rules, the people or the crown? I have a hard time seeing conservatism as the "break" anymore.

[@manaca7040]

👏👏👏 What would be a great starting point for getting in touch with Hayek s ideas?

[@heesoolee8357]

one more fan here! Thanks for your videos

[@johnwilhelm385]

I'm with Hayek....in American terms, "Classical Liberal.". Hayek is Awesome!

[@economiapolitica7046]

Excellent channel, one more subscriber. I have a playlist about Austrian economy and economic crises that are very good.

[@MarpLG]

are u familiar with Vedic system of varnas?? In which you have different layers of possible ruling class. Optimal scenario is that Ksatryias(kings,administrators) are executive power based on decisions of Brahmanas(priests,intellectuals) who are objective and unmotivated by selfish means(kinda good anarchists).Then you have vaisyas(merchants) who take care of life neccesities ,trading and economy..and sudras(workers) who are doing what manual labor is needed due to instruction from above... Now, basic scenario of spoiling society is that brahmanas become selfish and proud of they elevated position so they will manipulate kings who will eventualy realize it and stop folllowing brahmanas which leads unleashing their heavy(natural) conquering mentality which results in many wars(monarchy).But that is not good for economy so merchants will intrigue to take down monarchy which leads to free trade and democracy.,but that is ultimatly exploitative of men power due to greed for more wealth and prosperity. So now sudras are becoming mad and start protesting which leads to some kind of degraded ism like communism or artifical dictatorship(usually by some monist who "enlightened" working class).

[@MarpLG]

@@AustrianCenterAEC vedabase.io/en/library/sb/1/9/26/ u can read more here if you are interested