Not surprisingly, I enjoyed reading the entries, particularly Karun Philip’s entry on The Matrix and Hayek. I especially like the way he discusses the process orientation and evolutionary perspective that Hayek brings to economics and politics:
Hayek is considered warily in libertarian circles because he admits that we must not only consider the “equilibrium-perfect” idea of total market freedom, but also acknowledge where we are now. He recommends law be about banning individuals from coercing and defrauding each other, and that law enforced with coercion if necessary, but with presumption of innocence and due process of law. The word “coercion” is very broad for Hayek and is not limited to “inititiation of force” as most libertarians use it. The purpose of democracy is to discuss what constitutes coercion, especially when a new situation (like the Internet, for instance) emerges. Over time the accepted meaning of “coercion” may evolve and we may end up with only “inititiation of force” (or not) but that is an outcome to be evolutionarily (and democratically) determined. I find this more realistic and practical than reducing morality to a simple rule of an absence of inititation of force.