Chapter 4: Despotic or Dynamic? Hayek on Democracy and Expertise

F. A. Hayek delivers one of his most famous claims in the title of a postscript: “Why I Am Not a Conservative.” For him, there is much at stake in distinguishing his arguments in The Constitution of Liberty (1960) from conservatism, the side of “those who habitually resist change” with a “fondness for authority” out of a “timid distrust of the new as such.”¹ Against the so-called timidity of the conservative, Hayek presents his liberalism as a doctrine of courage that enabled cultural evolution. One point of divergence concerned the merits of democracy:

Scholars have since underscored Hayek’s claims about the compatibility of liberalism and democracy, coupling his scattered endorsements of popular institutions with his sustained defense of the rule of law.³ Others use his arguments for dispersed, local knowledge to highlight the epistemic benefits of democratic institutions and defend democracy from its detractors.⁴ In much of the literature, scholars approach Hayek as he describes himself – as an advocate for popular rule in support of his constitution for a free society.⁵