Foreword 前言
by Václav Klaus 瓦茨拉夫·克劳斯
Those of us born in the twentieth century — the century of two destructive world wars and two equally ruinous periods of Nazism and Communism — particularly those of us born during the Second World War and who spent four decades under Communism, who tried at that time to understand what was going on, and who eventually had the courage to try to change it, had always been looking for a compass that would make possible some elementary orientation in life. On the one hand, we looked to social sciences for a theoretical description and explanation, to the works of important scholars, thinkers, and writers; on the other, we looked for consequential, consistent, inspiring, straightforward personalities, for role models whose lives were in line with their writings.
像我们这些出生于20世纪，一个有着两次世界大战和两段同样毁灭性的纳粹和共产主义统治时期的世纪，的人，尤其是那些生于二战并在共产主义下生活了四十年的人，那些当时试图理解社会在发生什么并最终有勇气尝试改变它的人，当时就一直在寻找一个能给生活一些基本方向的指南针。一方面，我们在社会科学中寻找那些重要的学者、思想家和作家给出的理论描述和解释；另一方面，我们寻找着言行一致并具备有影响力、始终如一、鼓舞人心又坦率的人格的行为榜样。
Friedrich August Hayek was absolutely crucial for many of us in both of these aspects.1 Born in 1899 in Vienna, the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was still under the rule of Emperor Franz Joseph I, Hayek took part in the First World War as a soldier on the Italian front. When he returned home to Vienna to complete his university studies, he found the empire lost, the borders in Europe redrawn, the country deeply shaken, and the economy in ruins (and experiencing a devastating hyperinflation). He started working in a government-run institution dealing with war debts under the auspices of another great Austrian economist, the one-generation-older Ludwig von Mises. Mises turned his attention to the Austrian School of Economics tradition and its powerful methodology (especially its theory of money and credit) and, with the formation of the Soviet Union and its central planning without markets and prices, to the suddenly highly relevant debate about the impossibility of economic calculation under socialism. Hayek developed and substantially enriched both topics in his writings in the following decades.
对我们很多人来说，弗里德里希·奥古斯特·哈耶克在这两方面都绝对至关重要。1哈耶克1899年出生于弗朗茨·约瑟夫一世统治下的奥匈帝国首都维也纳，长大后参加了第一次世界大战并被派往意大利前线。战后当他回到维也纳以完成大学学业时，他发现奥匈帝国解体了、欧洲的边境线重绘了、整个国家被深深地动摇了、经济也变成了废墟（并正发生着一场摧毁性的恶性通胀）。哈耶克开始在一家政府管理的机构里研究战争债务问题，指导他的是比他大一辈的另一位伟大的奥地利经济学家——路德维希·冯·米塞斯。米塞斯当时把注意力转向了两个方面，一是奥地利经济学派的传统和其强大的方法论（尤其是关于货币和信用的理论），另一个是突然出现的、与苏联的成立和它不需要市场与价格的中央计划高度相关的辩论，辩论的内容是社会主义下进行经济计算是否可能。在之后的岁月里，哈耶克通过著述发展并不断丰富了这两个方面的课题。
After moving to England and to the London School of Economics in 1931, in the era of the Great Depression, Hayek quite rapidly became the main opponent of John Maynard Keynes and his advocacy of massive state intervention as a necessary saviour of capitalism. Hayek sharply and uncompromisingly opposed the Keynesian doctrine, which he interpreted as the most dangerous vehicle because through it, the doors would be opened to full socialism. Many consider the dispute between Keynes and Hayek to be the main and most important controversy in the field of economics in the twentieth century.2 For many decades — in fact until the period of stagflation in the 1970 - Keynes seemed to be the winner, at the least in practice, in the field of economic policy.
哈耶克于大萧条期间的1931年搬去了英国并加入了伦敦政治经济学院。很快哈耶克就成了支持政府大规模干预以挽救资本主义的约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯的主要对手。哈耶克鲜明且毫不妥协地反对凯恩斯主义。他认为凯恩斯主义打开了通往全面社会主义的大门，因此非常危险。很多人认为哈耶克和凯恩斯之间的这场论战是20世纪经济学中最主要也最重要的争论。2之后很多年，直到1970年代的滞胀时期，凯恩斯似乎是胜利者，至少在经济政策实践中凯恩斯主义成为了主流。
The Austrian School of Economics traditionally underestimates, if not neglects macroeconomics (or at least its importance), and Hayek understood that he was not going to win the debate accepting the Keynesian macro-economic playground. He decided to attack the interventionist doctrine of Keynes by moving to microeconomics, to the defence of the irreplaceable role of markets and prices in the economy, and to demonstrating that interventionism makes the efficient functioning of markets impossible. His seminal articles “Economics and Knowledge”, and especially “The Use of Knowledge in Society”, are among the most important contributions to the field of economic science in the whole of the twentieth century. Hayek devoted his analysis to explaining the coordination of human action in a world in which knowledge is inevitably dispersed and he was able to prove that the solution is in the price system, not in central planning.
奥地利经济学派传统上低估了，如果不是忽略的话，宏观经济学（至少低估了它的重要性）。因此哈耶克明白如果选择凯恩斯的宏观经济学战场，他是赢不了的。于是哈耶克决定从微观经济学的角度，通过捍卫市场和价格在经济中不可替代的地位和论证干预主义使市场不可能有效运行来进攻凯恩斯的干预主义。他的两篇开创性的文章，“经济和知识”与尤其重要的“知识在社会中运用”，都是20世纪经济科学领域最重要的成果。哈耶克集中分析解释了指导人类行为的知识不可避免是分散的，并论证了解决办法是价格体系而非中央计划。
Hayek went further. His next move was to go beyond the boundaries of economic science. During the tragic Second World War, he saw not only Nazism in Germany (and his native Austria), and communism in Russia and the whole Soviet Union, but also the similar centralization of decision-making, government planning, and administrating of the economy, the similar suppression of civil rights, and the similar introduction of all kinds of controls in all countries engaged in war. He considered this development a new tendency that had to be challenged. He did so in 1944 by publishing a non-academic book, The Road to Serfdom (dedicated to “the Socialists of all Parties”), which has become the most important text for all freedom-loving people since. I have to confess that it was almost a bible for those of us who lived for decades under Communism. Hayek turned our attention to the slippery road that descends from a limited, and at first sight almost “innocent” government interventionism, to an illiberal and unfree system. Liberty was for Hayek the essential value of Western civilization without which other values cannot be realized.
哈耶克并未止步于此。他的下一步走出了经济科学领域。在悲惨的二战期间，他不仅看到了德国（和他的故乡奥地利）的纳粹主义和苏俄的共产主义，还看到了战争期间所有参战国都出现了类似的决策中央化、政府计划、经济监管、压制公民权利和各种管控措施。他觉得有必要挑战这种变化趋势。于是在1944年他出版了一本非学术著作——《通往奴役之路》（献给“所有党派的社会主义者”）。该书从此成为了所有热爱自由的人们的重要文献。我必须承认对我们这些在共产主义下生活了几十年的人来说，它几乎就是圣经。哈耶克让我们注意到了一条从有限、初看几乎“无害”的政府干预主义一步步滑向专制、不自由社会的道路。在哈耶克看来，自由是西方文明的核心价值，没了自由其它价值都无法实现。
The Road to Serfdom became a bestseller (especially after its Reader’s Digest version) and for Hayek opened the door to non-academic readers. He did not stop there. He continued his mission with an important organizational activity, founding the Mont-Pélèrin Society in 1947. The society gathered together a very influential group of classical liberals and other well-known opponents of interventionism and social-democratism. For almost seven decades since, the society has been meeting regularly and is responsible for the revival of liberalism in the second half of the twentieth century.
《通往奴役之路》（特别是《读者文摘》出版的缩减版）成为了畅销书。而对于哈耶克来说这打开了通向非学术读者的大门。他并未止步，而是通过重要的组织上的活动——于1947年成立了朝圣山学社来继续他的使命。学社聚集了一批非常有影响力的古典自由主义者和其他干预主义和社会民主主义的知名反对者。在之后的约七十年里，学社定期会面并推动了20世纪后半叶古典自由主义的复兴。
Frustrated at seeing the growing impact of Keynesianism in the 1950s and 1960s, Hayek more or less left theoretical economics and moved to more general (and less rigorous) fields — to political philosophy, law, the methodology of science, and even psychology. His topics were diverse, but their content remained very focused: freedom, its enemies, free markets, and the ambitions of constructivism. This change of topics can be easily discerned from the titles of his books and articles from that period: The Abuse of Reason; The Sensory Order; Individualism: True and False; The Theory of Complex Phenomena; Evolution of Systems; The Atavism of Social Justice; The Counter Revolution of Science; Law, Legislation and Liberty; etc.
看到凯恩斯主义在1950和60年代越来越有影响力，哈耶克感到沮丧，从而多多少少离开了理论经济学界，转向了更普遍（也更不严格）的领域——政治哲学、法律、科学方法论、甚至心理学。虽然他的课题多种多样，但内容依然很集中：自由、自由的敌人、自由市场、建构主义的野心。从他这段时期的书名和文章名就很容易看出这种课题上的转变：《理性的滥用》(The Abuse of Reason)、《感觉的秩序》(The Sensory Order)、《个人主义：真与假》(Individualism: True and False)、《复杂现象的理论》(The Theory of Complex Phenomena)、《系统的进化》(Evolution of Systems)、《社会正义的返祖性质》(The Atavism of Social Justice)、《科学的反革命》(The Counter Revolution of Science)、《法律、立法与自由》(Law, Legislation and Liberty)，等等。
Hayek spent most of the 1950s in the United States, a significant part of it at the University of Chicago (though to his frustration, due to the non-scientific character of The Road to Serfdom his time at Chicago wasn’t in the prestigious Department of Economics). At the beginning of the 1960s, Hayek returned to Europe, to the University of Freiburg, and spent the last third of his active life in Europe where he really belonged.
1950年代哈耶克基本都待在美国，主要在芝加哥大学（虽然因为《通往奴役之路》的非学术性，他并不是在芝大著名的经济系工作，这让他感到沮丧）。1960年代初，哈耶克返回欧洲，去了弗莱堡大学，并在欧洲度过了他生命的最后三分之一。欧洲才是他真正的归宿。
In 1974, when he had stopped formally writing on economic topics, he got the Nobel Prize in Economic Science, which was an important justification and of great satisfaction to him. In his Nobel Prize speech, “The Pretence of Knowledge,” he summarized his views about the difference between physical sciences and social sciences (including economics), and criticized attempts to use the methods of physical sciences in other fields. He called this attempt “scientism,” not science.
哈耶克于1974年，那时他已经正式停止经济话题的写作了，获得了诺贝尔经济学奖。这是对他重要的正名，也给他带来了很大的满足。在他的获奖演说——《知识的僭妄》中，他总结了他眼中自然科学和社会科学（包括经济学）的不同之处，并批评了把自然科学方法运用到其他领域的尝试。他认为这种尝试是“科学主义”，而不是科学。
In the last decades of his long life (he died in 1992, at the age of 93), Friedrich Hayek was involved in preparing, in a normative way, the outline of The Constitution of Liberty, (published in 1960), in which he tried to formulate the legislative preconditions for liberty (without trying to “sell” it to any political party). He became an advocate of evolutionism and “spontaneous order” (as opposed to constructivism). The contrast between “constructive rationalism” and “the evolutionary way of thinking” was absolutely crucial for him. He tried to show the impossibility of rationalist constructivism. To understand his emphasis on the difference between human action and human design is to understand Hayek.
在他漫长岁月的最后几十年（他1992年以93岁高龄逝世），弗里德里希·哈耶克都在以一种规范的方式陆续准备着《自由宪章》（1960年出版）的纲要。书中他尝试精确描述自由在立法上需要的先决条件（不过他并不打算把这“卖”给任何政党）。他开始拥护进化主义和“自发秩序”（建构主义的反面）。“理性建构主义”和“进化的思考方式”之间的对比对他非常重要。他试图显示“理性建构主义”是不可能的。理解了他对人类行为和人类设计之间区别的强调也就理解了哈耶克。
Hayek was one of the most significant intellectuals of the twentieth century, but though he was extremely important for people in Western countries, he was not sufficiently appreciated and recognized there. I remember being in “his” Austria in November 1989, one day before the Velvet Revolution in my country, and hearing at the University of Linz that “Hayek is dead in Austria.” I reacted by saying that we would bring him back to life in Prague again. I dare argue that Hayek was more important for us in the East than for people in the West. Westerners did see a real danger in Communism, but did not see that they were beginning the path down their own Hayekian “slippery road.” They often considered his views overplayed and exaggerated. For us, Hayek was our guru, our teacher, our lighthouse, our compass in the depressing era of Communism. It was easier for Hayek to capture our hearts.
哈耶克是20世纪最重要的知识分子之一。虽然他对西方国家的人非常重要，那里的人却对他没有足够的认识和感谢。我记得1989年十一月，就在我的国家（捷克斯洛伐克）发生天鹅绒革命的前一天，我正在“他的”奥地利境内的林茨大学，听到了“哈耶克在奥地利去世了”。我当时的反应是我们会在布拉格让他重生。我敢说哈耶克对我们东方人比西方人更重要。西方人确实注意到了共产主义的真实威胁，但没有看到他们自己也开始走上哈耶克所说的滑向奴役的道路。西方人常觉得哈耶克的观点过分夸张了。而对我们来说，在那压抑的共产主义年代，哈耶克就是我们的精神领袖、导师、灯塔和指南针。哈耶克更容易俘获我们的心。
After the fall of Communism, in the optimistic era when the “end of history” doctrines (à la Fukuyama) dominated, Hayek was considered vindicated — yet ironically, his writings were increasingly forgotten, as though they were no longer relevant. He was heralded as a “proved-to-be-right prophet” (which was slightly illogical because he never believed that his views and proposals could win in the real world), but his ideas (and his warnings) seemed to belong to a different time. With the “advantage” of our Communist past, however, some of us knew that Hayek’s writings are by no means less relevant than they were before.
共产主义衰落后，在那段“历史的终结”学说（福山的说法）占据主流的乐观时期，人们认为哈耶克被证明是正确的。但讽刺的是，他的著作却越来越被遗忘，仿佛它们已经无关紧要了。哈耶克被宣告为一个“已被证明是正确的预言者”（这其实有些讽刺，因为哈耶克从未相信他的观点和提议能在现实世界胜出），但他的观点（和警告）似乎已经属于另一个时代了。因为我们有着曾经生活于共产主义这一“优势”，所以我们知道相比以往，哈耶克的著作绝对没有变得无关紧要。
Two decades after Hayek ́s death history is on the move again. State interventionism is back and growing, the Reagan-Thatcher era long forgotten, as is the Communist era. State paternalism, regulation and control, social and environmental blocking of the functioning of markets, constructivism and dirigism are here again and, especially in Europe, are stronger than ever. We must get back to Hayek’s teachings. We must once again take his books into our hands and try to spread his thoughts all over the world, because now they are as relevant as in the past.
哈耶克死后二十年，历史又开始变动。政府干预主义回来了并日趋严重。里根-撒切尔时代和共产主义时代都被长久地遗忘了。政府父爱主义、规制和管控、社会和环境上对市场运行的阻碍、建构主义和政府干预主义又回来了并且比以往任何时候都强大——特别是在欧洲。我们必须回到哈耶克的教诲。我们必须重拾他的著作并尝试在全世界传播他的思想，因为现在它们就像以往那样与现实息息相关。
This book is a good start. It starts us on the path of reintroducing Friedrich Hayek to new audiences who, even though they may not realize it, need his insights and teachings nearly as much as we did in the twentieth century. Much of the Western world is well down the “slippery road” Hayek warned about in his writings. Only by understanding the tragic trajectory that might unfold will they fully understand how urgent it is that we avoid the pit-falls of the past. This book is a great resource for all who value liberty, but even more importantly, it is essential reading for all of those who are unaware of the many dangers that can befall a society that ignores the lessons of the past.
本书是一个很好的起点。它让我们开始重新向新读者介绍弗里德里希·哈耶克。这些读者可能都没有意识到他们其实和我们在20世纪时一样地需要哈耶克的洞见和教诲。西方世界的很大一部分已经在哈耶克著作中警告的滑向奴役的道路上滑了很远。只有理解了未来他们面前可能展开一条怎样的悲剧道路，他们才能完全理解避开过去曾有过的陷阱是多么的迫切。本书对所有珍视自由的人都是个优秀的资源，但更重要的是，对那些仍未察觉社会可能因忽视过去的教训而面临大量危险的人，阅读本书非常必要。
Václav Klaus 瓦茨拉夫·克劳斯
Václav Klaus is the Former President of the Czech Republic (2003-2013), currently President of the Václav Klaus Institute, Distinguished Senior Fellow of the CATO Institute, and Professor of Economics at the Prague School of Economics.
瓦茨拉夫·克劳斯是捷克共和国前总统，现任瓦茨拉夫·克劳斯研究所主席、卡托研究所杰出高级研究员、布拉格经济大学经济学教授。
1 See my “Hayek, the End of Communism, and Me,” CATO Policy Report XXXV (5), 2013 <http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/3345>. This was originally the speech “Hayek and My Life,” delivered at a conference at the University of Richmond in April 2013.
2 For example, Nicholas Wapshott (2011), Keynes–Hayek, W.W. Norton.