Editing Friedrich Hayek (section)

=== British politics ===
{{Neoliberalism sidebar|expanded=people}}
{{Liberalism sidebar|expanded=philosophers}}

In February 1975, [[Margaret Thatcher]] was elected leader of the [[Conservative Party (UK)|British Conservative Party]]. The [[Institute of Economic Affairs]] arranged a meeting between Hayek and Thatcher in London soon after.<ref>Richard Cockett, ''Thinking the Unthinkable. Think-Tanks and the Economic Counter-Revolution, 1931–1983'' (Fontana, 1995), pp. 174–76.</ref> During Thatcher's only visit to the [[Conservative Research Department]] in the summer of 1975, a speaker had prepared a paper on why the "middle way" was the pragmatic path the Conservative Party should take, avoiding the extremes of left and right. Before he had finished, Thatcher "reached into her briefcase and took out a book. It was Hayek's ''The Constitution of Liberty''. Interrupting our pragmatist, she held the book up for all of us to see. 'This', she said sternly, 'is what we believe', and banged Hayek down on the table".<ref>John Ranelagh, ''Thatcher's People: An Insider's Account of the Politics, the Power, and the Personalities'' (Fontana, 1992), p. ix.</ref>

Despite the media depictions of him as Thatcher's guru and power behind the throne, the communication between him and the Prime Minister was not very regular, they were in contact only once or twice a year.{{sfn|Ebenstein|2001|pp=291–92}} Besides Thatcher, Hayek also had a significant influence on [[Enoch Powell]], [[Keith Joseph]], [[Nigel Lawson]], [[Geoffrey Howe]] and [[John Biffen]].{{sfn|Ebenstein|2001|p=293}}

Hayek gained some controversy in 1978 by praising Thatcher's [[Opposition to immigration|anti-immigration]] policy proposal in an article which ignited numerous accusations of [[anti-Semitism]] and racism because of his reflections on the inability of assimilation of Eastern European Jews in the Vienna of his youth.{{sfn|Ebenstein|2001|p=293}} He defended himself by explaining that he made no racial judgements, only highlighted the problems of acculturation.{{sfn|Ebenstein|2001|p=294}}

In 1977, Hayek was critical of the [[Lib–Lab pact#1977|Lib–Lab pact]] in which the [[Liberal Party (UK)|British Liberal Party]] agreed to keep the [[Labour Party (UK)|British Labour]] government in office. Writing to ''The Times'', Hayek said: "May one who has devoted a large part of his life to the study of the history and the principles of liberalism point out that a party that keeps a socialist government in power has lost all title to the name 'Liberal'. Certainly no liberal can in future vote 'Liberal{{'"}}.<ref>"Letters to the Editor: Liberal pact with Labour", ''The Times'' (31 March 1977), p. 15.</ref> Hayek was criticised by Liberal politicians [[Gladwyn Jebb]] and [[Andrew Phillips, Baron Phillips of Sudbury|Andrew Phillips]], who both claimed that the purpose of the pact was to discourage socialist legislation.

Lord Gladwyn pointed out that the [[Free Democratic Party (Germany)|German Free Democrats]] were in coalition with the [[Social Democratic Party of Germany|German Social Democrats]].<ref>"Letters to the Editor: Liberal pact with Labour", ''The Times'' (2 April 1977), p. 15.</ref> Hayek was defended by Professor [[Antony Flew]], who stated that—unlike the British Labour Party—the German Social Democrats had since the late 1950s abandoned public ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange and had instead embraced the [[social market economy]].<ref>"Letters to the Editor: German socialist aims", ''The Times'' (13 April 1977), p. 13.</ref>

In 1978, Hayek came into conflict with Liberal Party leader [[David Steel]], who argued that liberty was possible only with "social justice and an equitable distribution of wealth and power, which in turn require a degree of active government intervention" and that the Conservative Party were more concerned with the connection between liberty and private enterprise than between liberty and democracy. Hayek argued that a limited democracy might be better than other forms of limited government at protecting liberty, but that an unlimited democracy was worse than other forms of unlimited government because "its government loses the power even to do what it thinks right if any group on which its majority depends thinks otherwise".

Hayek stated that if the Conservative leader had said "that free choice is to be exercised more in the market place than in the ballot box, she has merely uttered the truism that the first is indispensable for individual freedom while the second is not: free choice can at least exist under a dictatorship that can limit itself but not under the government of an unlimited democracy which cannot".<ref>"Letters to the Editor: The dangers to personal liberty", ''The Times'' (11 July 1978), p. 15.</ref>

Hayek supported Britain in the [[Falklands War]], writing that it would be justified to attack Argentinian territory instead of just defending the islands, which earned him a lot of criticism in Argentina, a country which he also visited several times. He was also displeased by the weak response of the United States to the [[Iran hostage crisis]], claiming that an ultimatum should be issued and Iran bombed if they do not comply. He supported Ronald Reagan's decision to keep high defence spending, believing that a strong US military is a guarantee of world peace and necessary to keep the Soviet Union under control.{{sfn|Ebenstein|2001|pp=300–01}} President [[Ronald Reagan|Reagan]] listed Hayek as among the two or three people who most influenced his philosophy and welcomed him to the White House as a special guest.<ref>Martin Anderson, "Revolution" (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988), p. 164</ref> Senator [[Barry Goldwater]] listed Hayek as his favourite political philosopher and congressman [[Jack Kemp]] named him an inspiration for his political career.{{sfn|Ebenstein|2001|pp=207–08}}