Sabl’s piece here: ‘Liberalism Beyond Markets
My amended summary:
‘A realist liberal account of liberal institutions aims to recognize the fundamental complexity of individual human experience, the diversity of human thought, and the incompatibility of human dreams/aspirations.
The authority of liberal institutions and the laws they make into the present and future is de facto, a la Hume, and is negotiable, and must serve the self-interest of those choosing whether or not to follow such laws and decide upon their utility in the present with an eye to the past and the future.
Furthermore, Hayekian logic should not exclusively be applied to markets, but also: Democracy, rule of law, the Welfare State, and the practices of toleration [and] free-speech. Such ‘institutions’ have normative characteristics, which are described in reasonable detail (the 6 available if you click through).
Any individual, or groups of individuals may come to guide these institutions for a time, for their ends (instrumentally), but, a la Hayek, all parties will mutually benefit because these institutions in their own spheres, like the market in its own, appropriately reflect the fundamental complexity of individual human experience, the diversity of human thought, and the incompatibility of human dreams/aspirations.’
See the original response: A Response To Andrew Sabl’s ‘Liberalism Beyond Markets’
On that note, Mark Pennington’s Robust Political Economy: Classical Liberalism and the Future of Public Policy comes recommended.
Duke professor Bruce Caldwell talks about his then new book on Hayek, an intellectual biography.