A growing number of people misrepresent Hayek’s philosophy as synonymous with the neo-liberalism we see growing around us. This reading of Hayek is often used to argue against any form of social security or social welfare. In fact, he argued the opposite.

Today’s neo-liberalism is the reductio ad absurdum of the far more restrained Hayekian ideas we see in Road to Serfdom. Case in point: social security.

Two Types of Security

In Road to Serfdom, Hayek talks about two forms of social security: “first, a security against severe physical privation, the security of a given minimum of sustenance for all; and, secondly, the security of a given standard of life”.

Hayek does not believe that a given standard of life should be offered to everyone by default. However he does argue that security against severe hardship should be universal. That is, it should not be seen as a privilege, but as a legitimate object of desire.

There is no reason why in a society that has reached the general level of wealth which ours has attained, the first kind of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom…there can be no doubt that some minimum food, shelter, and clothing, sufficient to preserve health and the capacity to work, can be assured to everybody.

— F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

Insurance Against Risk

That’s just the beginning. It’s not just basic food and shelter that Hayek argues should be guaranteed to all citizens, but also insurance against “insurable risks” such as sickness and certain accidents:

Where we deal with genuinely insurable risks [sickness, accidents, etc.], the case for the state helping to organise a comprehensive system of social insurance is very strong… There is no incompatibility in principle between the state providing greater security in this way and the preservation of individual freedom.

— F. A. Hayek, The Road To Serfdom

Acts of God

On top of that, acts of God should be thrown into the mix, too.

To the same category belongs also the increase of security through the rendering of assistance to the victims of such “acts of God” as earthquakes and floods. Wherever communal action can mitigate disasters against which the individual can neither attempt to guard himself, nor make provision for the consequences, such communal action should undoubtedly be taken.

— F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

The Irony

Those who rely heavily on Thatcherism and Reaganism for their understanding of Free Market economics would do well to re-read The Road to Serfdom to understand that even Hayek himself (who influenced a large chunk of Thatcher’s own ideas) strongly argued for some form of universal social security.

Reading primary sources rather than summaries of summaries reveals a more nuanced philosophy than partisans on either side admit. The same applies to understanding traditions before dismantling them—we should know what we’re actually dealing with.