Hayek's The Constitution of Liberty - Institute of Economic Affairs

h ay e k ’ s t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f l i b e r t y
s a f e g ua r d i n g p r o g r e s s
of land. These considerations make the provision of such amenities
‘an appropriate field for collective effort.’ Voluntary efforts in
this field are desirable, but Hayek does not object to government
using its compulsory powers to acquire the land needed for such
amenities, ‘so long as the community approves this, in full awareness
of the cost, and realizes that this is one aim competing with
others and not a unique objective overriding all other needs’ (375;
cf. 374–5).
Education and research policy
Hayek’s discussion of education is divided roughly into two
parts. The first considers education as it might be typified by
the elementary school. The second part discusses education as
typ ically provided by the research university, whose aim is not
only to disseminate knowledge by instruction, but also to advance
knowledge by path-breaking research. The community has an
interest in supporting both kinds of education, but for different
reasons. Also, both kinds are relevant to progress and to freedom,
but in different ways.
While parents have the primary responsibility for the education
of their children, the ‘other members of the community have
a genuine stake’ in their welfare. First, the community benefits
when knowledge is disseminated widely and used effectively. The
spread of useful knowledge increases material opportunities for
large numbers of people. Second, if a community is governed by
democratic institutions, these are not likely to work well if there
is widespread illiteracy. Finally, the community has a stake in
‘maintaining certain standards of values,’ especially when immigrant
populations must be assimilated: ‘all education must be and
ought to be guided by definite values.’ A general education can
be an effective way to spread common values and thereby ensure
‘a peaceful common existence.’ Hayek warns, however, that the
attempt to inculcate values is ‘the source of real dangers in any
system of public education.’ A government policy of providing
a common cultural background for all citizens ‘can lead to frictions
in multinational states.’ Even in ethnically homogeneous
states, there is a danger that government will exert ‘a high degree
of control of the contents of education’ or impose some particular
theory of education that claims to be scientific.
General education aims more at preserving civilisation than
at novelty. It advances material wealth, but within an established
order whose traditions and values it affirms. General education
must be compulsory up to a point and government must fund
it. This does not mean, however, that general education must
be provided in state-run schools. Here the danger of imposing a
single set of values or a single theory of education would be great.
While the community has an interest in maintaining common
values, its overriding interest lies in preserving freedom; and
it best achieves this by sponsoring a wide variety of educational
arrangements. Hayek points to voucher systems as a way for
government to defray the costs of general education without
monopolising instruction (378–81).
University education, by contrast, is not intended to conserve
established ways or to be immediately useful. The community’s
interest in supporting university education lies chiefly in the longterm
contribution it makes to overall progress or to ‘the growth
of civilization.’ Universities spur progress mainly through the
advancement of new knowledge or ‘the conception and pursuit of
new ideas,’ and this ‘will always be the work of the relatively few.’
176
177