When Buckley read Hayek’s Constitution of Liberty he called it a “terribly difficult book.” Not complicated but “the writing style is execrable.” He wanted to ask God “why does their side get economists who write like Keynes, and our side get them who write like Hayek?”
- It's from a letter to Roger Milliken, the SC based textiles magnate and key funder of National Review and other conservative organizations
- Heh! But Hayek had nothing on Ayn Rand, the author WFB deemed **most** execrable!!!
- Do you know about the tense back and forth between Buckley and Hayek over NR printing something suggesting a recently deceased European cheated at cards? It got testy.
- Ha! No! Tell me more!
- In 1961, NR's obit/The Week section repeated an accusation that Dag Hammarskjöld cheated at cards. WFB didn't write it but E-o-C he stood by it. Hayek objected in the strongest terms: "overstep the boundaries of common decency...inexcusable allegations does more harm than good"
- He did not "“wish in future to be in any way association with the National Review or to receive any further issues.” Buckley said it was ironic, there must be more to it. Notes Hayek's "coolness" to NR. Despite their support for them, he's never contributed or written a letter.
- Hayek responded that there was nothing playful about the original allegation.“It is not my habit to write to newspaper editors and I have no general grudge against your paper." Felt it was his duty to tell a pro-liberty journal when it was damaging the cause.
- And added that since he was getting a courtesy subscription to NR, he wanted that to end. "I certainly also subscribe to journals for the sole purpose of keeping informed and whether I shall do so in future with regard to National Review is my private concern.”
- WFB sent him a snarky letter back "you impugn the taste, integrity, and balance of a board of editors who, so far as I am aware, have never disgraced themselves or the cause they have served so admirably." And it's a public issue whether you endorse NR.
- And then he told Hayek he was going to circulate their correspondence, which I think he did. Generally the comments were that the editorial was bad and Hayek overreacted. Kirk suggested it was to do with the division in the Mont Pelerin Society.rsation
I, too, have a hard time with Hayek's verbose and stilted writing style. I am still unable to get through "The Road to Serfdom" (although I have read many works by Ludwig von Mises, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Rothbard, Nock, and others). I remember early on in that book, I was astounded to come across a run-on sentence that literally took up a third of the page!
ReplyDeleteI agree with this too. The Road to Serfdom just didn't do it for me. Rothbard is much better. Albert Jay Nock did more for me in "Our Enemy, the State." I could list a whole lot more too.
Delete