2 Comments
⭠ Return to thread
Oct 25Liked by Lynne Kiesling

Lynne, i like the three rules be because i have collided with them many times in the british civil service. And where the hegemonic assumption is always to centralise for reasons of consistency. So Prostel’s ideas make some sense to me because i can relate them to my experience and what i see happening in my own country. That does not make me a fully signed up Hayekian, although his ideas are valuable along side others.

My issue with Postrel is whether she sees the lead up to the financial crash as a full vindication of the value of her ideas or would she modify them in the face of this experience. Hayek may well have left the financial system crash to avoid stasis. Bernanke did what he did…. As The expert. Whether we are in a better place i am not so sure, but i am less of an expert!

Keep writing as i always look out for your different take on society, Lawrence

Expand full comment
author

Thank you Lawrence! From a Hayekian perspective the financial crisis was a consequence of, among other things, epistemic hubris, the conceit that government policy makers can guide such a complex system as an economy of 300 million people (let alone a global one of 6 billion, or however many we are now). Epistemic hubris is the signature conceit of technocracy.

Expand full comment
Error