The Paradox of Freedom (7) - Austrian Thought and the Crisis of Liberalism

Image credit.

Continued from here.

18.2 Conclusion II - Implications and Perspectives for Further Research

In order to resuscitate a politically active liberalism of classical pedigree, it seems advisable to pursue a number of research projects suggested by our above findings, including at least three promising new fields of research[1]:

(1) a theory, still to be developed, of the spontaneous order of politics and the state (SO₂),

(2) a re-examination of Austrian theories and policy proposals in the light of biases resulting from the absence of a theory of the spontaneous order of politics and the state (SO₂),

(3) investigations into (a) the possibility and the implications of a reversal of the presumption against government, i.e. an affirmative concept of the liberal state, and (b) the natural and desirable political environment of a liberal society, so as to provide a standard against which abuses of politics and the state can be constructively critiqued.

This new area of research may receive vital impulses from special inquiries into the following questions:

• What is the historical (and contemporary political) role of political protagonists who are (a) conscious of the conditions of liberty and (b) intent on advancing them in the development of freedom?

• At what point, under which conditions and in what sense does freedom become self-sustaining, i.e. prevalent without significant partisan support?

• Can methods and insights from research into SO₁ be useful in developing a theory of SO₂?

• What is the relationship between conscious design and spontaneous order?

• Can the SO₂ of politics and the state be shown to incorporate self-generating structures resembling something like “the invisible hand” operating in the political world? What might such insights imply for the contemporary state and the future of liberty, and what do they suggest in terms of visions for institutional design?

• Does the future of liberalism lie in partisan politics, or are there more effective ways to further the concerns of liberty?

• What would a theory of minimal or robust criteria for freedom be able to tell us about the resilience of civil society? Which requirements of liberty are more critical than others?

• Is it possible to develop a metric to compare differential strengths of freedom diachronically and synchronically?

• How do freedom and unfreedom interact, reinforce, and alter each other? Is there a place for a theory that identifies circumstances under which freedom and conditions adverse to freedom act as a composite supportive of liberty in the long-run?

---

[1] Similarly, Professor Vanberg identifies a lack of focus on a positive liberal account of politics, see his: Vanberg, V. (2014), Liberalismus und Demokratie: Zu einer vernachlässigten Seite der liberalen Denktraditio: Freiburger Diskussionspapiere zur Ordnungsökonomik, 2014.