IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v40y2016i6p1743-1760..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liberalism and democracy — a comparative reading of Eucken and Hayek

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Nientiedt
  • Ekkehard A. Köhler

Abstract

The paper compares Friedrich Hayek’s classic analysis of ‘unlimited democracy’ to arguments put forward by Walter Eucken, the founder of German ordoliberalism. It is shown that Eucken’s criticism of democracy is directly related to his liberal conviction: similar to Hayek, Eucken anticipates the possibility of interest groups to engage in rent seeking through the democratic process. In view of Hayek’s distinction between the basic ideal of democracy and its institutional realisation, it is argued that Eucken’s criticism relates to the latter aspect. Furthermore, the paper maintains that a comprehensive liberalism as represented by Eucken and Hayek implies a constitutional concept of democracy.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Nientiedt & Ekkehard A. Köhler, 2016. "Liberalism and democracy — a comparative reading of Eucken and Hayek," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 40(6), pages 1743-1760.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:40:y:2016:i:6:p:1743-1760.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bev081
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Schnellenbach, 2023. "The concept of Ordnungspolitik: rule-based economic policymaking from the perspective of the Freiburg School," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(3), pages 283-300, June.
    2. Dold, Malte & Krieger, Tim, 2024. "Market democracy, rising populism, and contemporary ordoliberalism," Discussion Paper Series 2024-01, University of Freiburg, Wilfried Guth Endowed Chair for Constitutional Political Economy and Competition Policy.
    3. Niclas Berggren & Jerg Gutmann, 2020. "Securing personal freedom through institutions: the role of electoral democracy and judicial independence," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 165-186, April.
    4. Peter J. Boettke & M. Scott King, 2023. "James M. Buchanan on “the relatively absolute absolutes” and “truth judgments” in politics," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(3), pages 213-230, June.
    5. Lars P. Feld & Ekkehard A. Köhler & Daniel Nientiedt, 2015. "Ordoliberalism, Pragmatism and the Eurozone Crisis: How the German Tradition Shaped Economic Policy in Europe," CESifo Working Paper Series 5368, CESifo.
    6. Kolev Stefan & Goldschmidt Nils, 2018. "Neoliberalism as the Ideology of Depolitization? Eucken and Hayek Reconsidered: Comments on the books by Jakob Friedrich Scherer and Clemens Reichhold," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 69(1), pages 518-522, July.
    7. Feld, Lars P. & Köhler, Ekkehard A. & Nientiedt, Daniel, 2021. "Ordoliberalism and the social market economy," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 21/5, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    8. Stefan Kolev & Nils Goldschmidt & Jan-Otmar Hesse, 2020. "Debating liberalism: Walter Eucken, F. A. Hayek and the early history of the Mont Pèlerin Society," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(4), pages 433-463, December.
    9. Daniel Nientiedt, 2019. "Metaphysical justification for an economic constitution? Franz Böhm and the concept of natural law," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 114-129, March.
    10. Schnellenbach, Jan, 2021. "The concept of Ordnungspolitik: Rule-based economic policy-making from the perspective of the Freiburg School," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 21/7, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:40:y:2016:i:6:p:1743-1760.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.