The capitalists who love dictatorships of or for capitalists
This post from Corey Robin provides yet another example of a business libertarian avatar of capitalism supporting an outright fascist dictator.
Hayek loved Pinochet more than Paul Robeson ever loved Joseph Stalin.
What's remarkable about this is not that it occurred, since the story of Milton Friedman's affair with Pinochet is well known. What is remarkable is that Hayek's most penetrating analysis for lots of people is Hayek's belief that the reason we can't have the "command economy" (i.e. the welfare state) is because the best results come from allowing the market's cacophony to sing, with its essential sense of the "unplanned." Hayek said it was a conceit to think our government could organize industrial policy to pick winners or losers.
This sort of analysis has many adherents, including Nassim Nicholas Teleb's "The Black Swan."*
Yet, there is Hayek gushing forth with praise for "transitional" dictatorships of the capitalist and military class, as if he was Karl Marx and Lenin waxing about the transitional dictatorship of the proletariat, and being very specific in supporting Pinochet in Chile and Salazar in Portgual.
This, again, is not unusual. Bill Buckley openly loved Salazar and especially Franco in Spain, yet Buckley never had to endure the attacks still made on I.F. Stone for supposedly loving the North Vietnamese government, which was simply a lie made "truthy" by constant repeating (nearly the same can be said about Stone's "support" for Castro, which was tepid in the beginning, and then outright critical of Castro by 1962).
And we know the Dulles brothers played as much if not more "footsy" with Nazi and Fascist leaders in Germany and Italy before, during and after WWII, as well as the Japanese warlords before and after WWII, than Alger Hiss played with the Russians--yet, the Dulles brothers are venerated, and Hiss assigned to the dustbin of history or infamy. I am not defending Hiss here, but making a simple point about the inconsistency of language we use and conclusions we are told to draw about the way in which the intellectuals and political elite divide up their loyalties to dictators and which get the protection of corporate media and "History" and which are attacked.
Oh well. Hayek is nicely exposed by Corey Robin as another business libertarian who loves his dictators. And it further develops Robin's thesis of the consistency of those on the so-called political Right in defending the economically privileged few against the masses.
And this year, those folks tend to be supporting Romney...See this delicious NY Times article about the way the current American rich folks have completely left any sense of how regular Americans think...
* I read most of Teleb's fairly entertaining book. The book started off very strongly, but then faded due to its repetition and ultimate smugness in making the point that since we can't predict the unpredictable, it makes no sense to ever expect the predictable--as if just because we are not perfect, we should not even try for the reasonably effective.