Life experience: Friedrich August von Hayek was born in 1899 in an academic family in Vienna, Austria. His family has a strong academic atmosphere, which laid a solid foundation for his academic growth. During World War I, he devoted himself to war, and this experience prompted him to think deeply about social and economic issues. After the war, Hayek studied law and political science at the University of Vienna. Under the guidance of many well-known scholars, he systematically studied economic theory, and started his journey of exploration in the field of economics.

Academic Achievement: Hayek was an influential economist and political philosopher of the 20th century and an outstanding representative of classical liberalism. He deeply participated in major social economic theories such as the feasibility of socialist economic calculations and the business cycle of monetary interest. In terms of monetary theory and business cycle theory, he put forward unique insights, believing that changes in money supply are an important factor leading to economic fluctuations, which provides a new perspective for macroeconomic research. In 1974, Hayek won the Nobel Prize in Economics for his pioneering work in the theory of currency and economic fluctuations and his profound analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena. His academic status was highly recognized by the international academic community.

The impact of war: World War I and World War II brought huge trauma to the world, not only causing a large number of casualties and property losses, but also profoundly changed the global political and economic structure. After the October Revolution in Russia, the world's first socialist country was born, and socialist thoughts quickly emerged on a global scale. Many countries began to explore the path of socialism, which triggered extensive discussions and heated debates about different economic systems and political systems.

Ideological conflict: There are obvious ideological differences between democracy and socialism. Democracy emphasizes the participation of the people and the bottom-up decision-making process. Citizens express their wishes through elections and other means and participate in the management of state affairs. Socialism advocates public ownership of means of production and planned economy, and emphasizes the state's comprehensive planning and regulation of the economy. This top-down economic management model has certain conflicts with the democratic decision-making mechanism. In practice, different countries are making difficult explorations and choices between democracy and socialism based on their own historical, cultural and social backgrounds, and the collision and conflict of various concepts continue to intensify.

The cornerstone role of the free market economy: The free market economy is an important foundation for personal freedom and political freedom. Under the free market economic system, individuals can freely choose occupations, production and consumption, and participate in economic activities according to their own wishes and abilities. This economic freedom gives individuals the opportunity to pursue their own interests and realize their own value, and also provides material guarantees for political freedom. For example, in the early stages of capitalism development, the free market economy promoted the prosperity of industry and commerce, and the emerging bourgeoisie gained economic independence, which promoted political democratic reforms and won more political rights for citizens. If economic freedom is abandoned and the government conducts comprehensive planning and control of the economy, individual economic activities will be strictly restricted and they will not be able to freely exert creativity and enthusiasm, which will ultimately lead to the loss of personal and political freedom.

The harm of collectivist planned economy: collectivist planned economy will gradually erode freedom. Under the planned economic system, the government centrally formulates production, distribution and consumption plans, and the economic activities of enterprises and individuals must follow the government's instructions. This highly concentrated economic system lacks the regulatory role of the market mechanism and cannot flexibly adjust production and resource allocation according to market demand and price signals, which can easily lead to resource waste and inefficiency. At the same time, the planned economy restricts individual freedom of choice, and people's career choices, consumption methods, etc. are all bound by government plans, which ultimately deviates from people's original intention of pursuing freedom and equality and moves towards the path of slavery. For example, in some planned economies, due to the lack of market competition, the products produced by enterprises are of low quality and single variety, consumers cannot freely choose goods that meet their own needs, and their living standards are difficult to improve.

The Utopian nature of democratic socialism: Democratic socialism claims to pursue freedom and equality, but in Hayek's view, this is just a difficult utopia. Democratic socialism advocates the achievement of equal distribution of wealth through state intervention. However, in practice, this equal distribution often ignores individual efforts and contributions, and inhibits people's innovation and labor enthusiasm. At the same time, democratic socialism often requires strong government power to promote it during its implementation, which may lead to excessive expansion of government power and infringement of personal freedom. For example, some countries have increased tax and welfare expenditures when implementing democratic socialist policies. Although they have narrowed the gap between the rich and the poor to a certain extent, they have also led to increased fiscal burdens and insufficient momentum for economic development, and people's free choices are limited.

Problems in the implementation of socialism: During the implementation of socialism, diversification of goals often gives way to integration. Since socialism emphasizes collective interests and national goals, in practice, individual freedom and rights may be sacrificed in order to achieve certain specific national goals. Moreover, the centralization of decision-making under the socialist economic system can easily lead to the concentration of power in the hands of a few people. If an effective supervision and checks and balance mechanism is lacking, it is easy to cause dictatorship and civil war. The political turmoil and power struggles that emerged in the development of some socialist countries in history have confirmed Hayek's view to a certain extent.

The connotation and advantages of individualism: Individualism respects the value and dignity of an individual and recognizes the supremacy of personal views and interests. It advocates the use of competitive forces as much as possible to coordinate human efforts, and believes that in the process of pursuing their own interests, individuals can achieve effective allocation of resources and maximize social welfare through the role of market mechanisms. For example, in a market economy, in order to pursue profits, enterprises will continuously improve production efficiency, reduce costs, innovate products and services, thereby promoting the economic development and technological progress of the entire society. At the same time, individualism emphasizes individual freedom and responsibility, and encourages people to exert their creativity and talents to realize their self-worth.

Characteristics and drawbacks of collectivism: collectivism emphasizes the careful organization of social workers for clear social goals. Under the collectivist system, individual behaviors and decisions must be subject to collective interests and goals. Although this system can concentrate its efforts to accomplish major tasks in certain specific situations, such as during war periods or during major infrastructure construction, it is easy to curb competition in the long run. Due to the lack of competitive incentive mechanisms, enterprises and individuals have insufficient motivation to innovate and low production efficiency. Moreover, collectivism is prone to becoming a state monopoly, and the government's overall control of the economy will lead to failure of the market mechanism and unreasonable resource allocation, which will ultimately harm the overall interests of society. For example, in some countries that implement a collectivist planned economy, state-owned enterprises dominate and lack market competition, resulting in poor product quality, high prices, and unprotected consumer rights.

Plan "Inevitable" Theory View: Some people believe that with the development of modern technology, the scale of production continues to expand, the economic structure becomes increasingly complex, and monopoly becomes inevitable. In order to prevent the chaos in social life, planning is a necessary means. For example, in some large-scale infrastructure construction projects, such as railways, bridges, etc., due to huge investment and long construction cycle, the government needs to carry out unified planning and coordination to ensure the smooth implementation of the projects.

The practical drawbacks of the plan: In fact, the market plays a role and relies on universal competition. While planning can focus on achieving specific goals, it will sacrifice choices and opportunity costs in other directions. When making plans, it is often difficult for the government to fully and accurately grasp market information, and it is prone to plan mistakes. Moreover, the planned economy limits the independent decision-making rights of enterprises and individuals and curbs the innovation vitality of the market. For example, under the planned economic system, the Soviet Union made comprehensive plans for the economy. Although it achieved rapid industrialization in the short term, in the long run, due to the lack of market competition, imbalance in the economic structure, and low production efficiency, the economic development eventually fell into trouble.

The conflict between the nature of democracy and socialism: Democracy is essentially an individualist system, which emphasizes individual freedom and equality, protects citizens' rights and opportunities to participate in politics through democratic procedures. Socialism conflicts with democracy, which emphasizes collective interests and the state's overall control of the economy, which may limit individual freedom and democratic rights. Under the socialist planned economic system, economic decision-making is centrally formulated by the government, and citizens lack the right to participate in economic affairs and decision-making power, which is contrary to the principle of democracy.

Dilemma of the Democratic Parliament in implementing the plan: There are many difficulties in implementing the plan. Since the planned economy requires comprehensive and meticulous planning and regulation of the economy, it requires a lot of professional knowledge and information. The decision-making process of the democratic parliament is often influenced by various interest groups, making it difficult to make scientific and reasonable decisions. Moreover, the implementation of the planned economy requires a high degree of centralization and unity, which is inconsistent with the decentralized decision-making mechanism of the democratic parliament. This contradiction can easily lead to dissatisfaction with the democratic system. When the people are disappointed that the democratic parliament cannot effectively implement the plan, they may seek other more authoritative forms of domination and may even move towards populist dictatorship. For example, in the economic reform process of some countries, when the democratic parliament implemented planned economic policies, the policy implementation was ineffective and economic development was hindered. The people had doubts about the democratic system and social instability factors increased.

The importance and principle of the rule of law: The rule of law is an important principle that distinguishes democratic and free governments from authoritarian governments. Laws should be formulated in advance, with clarity and stability, restrain government behavior, and protect individuals' freedom to pursue private interests. In a society ruled by law, everyone is equal before the law, and no one can surpass the law. For example, in a market economy, law protects the property rights, contractual freedom and other rights of enterprises and individuals, provides a fair and just environment for market transactions, and promotes economic prosperity and development.

The deviation between collectivist planned economy and the rule of law: collectivist planned economy runs contrary to the rule of law. The planned economy requires the government to adjust policies and plans at any time according to changing economic conditions, which makes the law lack stability and universality. When implementing plans, the government often adopts different policies for different companies and individuals based on its own goals and judgments, undermining the principle of equality in the law. Moreover, under the planned economy, the government's power is highly concentrated and the lack of effective supervision and checks and balances mechanisms are likely to lead to abuse of power and become autocratic. For example, in some planned economies, in order to achieve planned goals, governments may arbitrarily requisition the property of enterprises and individuals, infringing on the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, and the law cannot effectively bind such behavior.

The planned economy deprives people of the right to choose through economic control. Under the planned economic system, the government fully controls production, distribution and consumption. Individuals cannot decide their own marginal needs. Personal consumption needs, career choices, etc. are decided by the planner. For example, during the planned economy period, people's work is often distributed uniformly by the government, and individuals cannot choose their careers based on their interests and abilities, and consumption is also restricted by the rationing system and cannot freely choose goods and services.

The impact of non-economic incentives: the large-scale use of "non-economic incentives" instead of "monetary motivations", which means that those who receive the rewards lose the right to choose on their own. Non-economic incentives, such as honors, status, etc., are often allocated by the government or superior organizations according to their own standards and goals. In order to obtain these incentives, those who receive remuneration have to act according to the requirements of the government or organization and lose the right to choose independently. For example, in some planned economies, in order to obtain honorary titles or promotion opportunities, corporate employees often ignore market demand and economic benefits, and only focus on completing task indicators issued by superiors.

Different levels of economic security: Economic security has different levels such as maintaining material minimum needs and ensuring a certain standard of living. Maintaining a material minimum need is to ensure that people can meet basic survival needs, such as food, housing, medical care, etc. Ensuring a certain standard of living is to further improve people's quality of life on the basis of meeting basic survival needs and provide better resources such as education, culture, and entertainment. The impact of economic security on individual freedom at different levels is also different. Moderate economic security can provide a basis for individual freedom, while excessive economic security may lead to individual dependence on the government and weaken individuals' sense of freedom and responsibility.

The relationship between freedom and security: Those who give up basic freedom for a little temporary security are neither worthy of freedom nor guarantee. Hayek believes that freedom is the basic value of mankind and a prerequisite for realizing personal development and social progress. Excessive reliance on economic security provided by the government will cause people to lose the motivation to pursue freedom and innovation, and ultimately lead to social stagnation and regression. For example, while some welfare countries provide high benefits, some people rely on welfare to live and lack enthusiasm for work and innovative spirit.

The impact of centralization on social goals: centralization makes social goals point to a single system, and the values ​​and goals of the collective are transformed into individual values ​​and goals. Under the centralized system, the government imposes collective values ​​and goals on individuals through propaganda, education and other means, and individual thoughts and behaviors are strictly controlled. For example, in Nazi Germany, Hitler instilled values ​​such as extreme nationalism and racism into the people by promoting Nazi ideas, making the people's thoughts and behaviors completely obey the goals of the Nazi regime.

Easy guidance of mass thought: Mass thought is easy to be promoted and guided by the upper class, collectivism starts with reason, but ultimately destroys rationality. In collectivist society, governments or ruling groups often hold the dominance of public opinion propaganda and shape the thoughts and values ​​of the masses through propaganda and education. Because the masses lack independent thinking and judgment ability, they are easily influenced by propaganda, which leads to collectivism going to extremes and undermines rationality and scientific spirit. For example, in some historical events, the masses, under the influence of inflammatory propaganda, blindly participated in violent activities and disrupted social order, which violated the principles of rationality and morality.

The impact of collectivism on social morality and knowledge level: collectivism reduces social morality and knowledge level. Under the collectivist system, individual behaviors and decisions are often constrained and influenced by the collective, and lack independent thinking and innovative spirit. The masses lack creativity and independence and are easily incited because they are accustomed to obeying the will of the collective and lack the ability to independently judge things. For example, in some collectivist societies, due to the lack of incentive mechanisms for competition and innovation, people's knowledge level and moral quality are difficult to improve, and social development is slow.

The relationship between socialism and centralization: Socialism is prone to centralization in practice, using people's jealousy of the rich and hatred of the enemy to gain support. In the process of development, in order to consolidate its dominance, some socialist regimes often create social contradictions and oppositions, and blame social problems on specific groups, such as the rich or external enemies, thereby inspiring people's hatred and gaining support from the people. This practice not only undermines social harmony and stability, but also goes against the original intention of socialism. For example, in the history of some countries, socialist regimes have incited people's hatred of the rich through propaganda class struggle, resulting in social unrest.

Factors of the formation of Nazism: The formation of Nazism is related to factors such as the failure of nationalism and the lack of strong bourgeoisie. After World War I, Germany faced serious economic crisis and social unrest, and nationalist sentiment was high, but the German nationalist movement failed under international pressure, which made the German people lose confidence in the traditional political and economic system. At the same time, Germany lacked a strong bourgeoisie to promote economic development and social change, providing a soil for the rise of Nazism. Nazism emphasizes the people's community, promotes extreme nationalism and racism, advocates that there are only obligations but no rights, and pursues power politics, posing a huge threat to world peace.

Practical transformation of socialism and centralization: Socialism is theoretically international, advocating the breaking of the boundaries between the state and the nation and realizing the common liberation of mankind. But in practice, socialism is easily transformed into centralism due to various factors. In the process of development, some socialist countries have adopted a highly centralized political and economic system in order to achieve rapid industrialization and national strength, resulting in excessive concentration of power and infringement of citizens' freedoms and rights. For example, during the process of socialist construction, the Soviet Union gradually formed a highly centralized political and economic system. Although it achieved rapid economic development within a certain period of time, it also brought about a series of social problems.

The relationship between material conditions restoration and confidence: The recovery of material conditions requires confidence, and it is difficult for people to obey situations that they do not understand. In the process of social and economic development, when people are full of confidence in the future, they will participate more actively in economic activities and promote economic development. On the contrary, if people lack confidence in government policies and the development prospects of society, investment and consumption will be reduced and economic recovery and development will be hindered. For example, during the economic crisis, the government sends positive signals to the society by implementing positive economic policies and enhancing people's confidence, thereby promoting economic recovery.

Pursuing material development and maintaining a balance between moral confidence: While pursuing material development, we must maintain morality and confidence, and avoid falling into a situation where we blindly pursue material things and ignore freedom and ideals. Material development is an important foundation for social progress, but if we only pursue material interests and ignore moral and spiritual pursuits, society will become indifferent and utilitarian. For example, in modern society, some people ignore moral and legal constraints in the process of pursuing wealth, resulting in the corruption of social atmosphere, and people's sense of happiness does not increase with the improvement of material life.

The impact of planned economy at home and internationally: The planned economy is harmful to the economy at home, it limits the vitality and innovation capabilities of the market, resulting in unreasonable resource allocation and inefficient economic efficiency. Internationally, the planned economy is prone to causing friction. Since the planned economic systems of different countries often differ, conflicts of interest and contradictions are prone to occur in international trade and economic cooperation. For example, some countries that implement planned economies are often subject to trade restrictions and sanctions from other countries in foreign trade because their economic systems conflict with international market rules.

The development direction of the international planned economy: The international planned economy should focus on getting rich through labor rather than simply resource allocation. Against the backdrop of globalization, the economic ties between countries are becoming increasingly close, and the international planned economy needs to pay more attention to fairness and efficiency, and to enhance labor productivity and achieve common development by encouraging countries to give full play to their comparative advantages. For example, in international economic cooperation, countries can improve labor productivity through technical exchanges, talent training and other means, and achieve mutual benefit and win-win results, rather than simply relying on resource allocation to achieve economic development.

Rational definition of government power: Beware of the threat of excessive expansion of government power to personal freedom, and reasonably define the role of government in economic and social affairs. In modern society, the government needs to play an active role in ensuring social fairness and justice and providing public services, but at the same time, it must also avoid abuse of power and respect market mechanisms and personal freedom. For example, in the fields of public services such as infrastructure construction, education, and medical care, the government should increase investment and management efforts to ensure the fair distribution and effective utilization of resources. However, at the micro-economic level, such as the production and operation decisions of enterprises, product pricing, etc., the market should give full play to the regulatory role, reduce unnecessary administrative intervention, allow the market to play a decisive role in resource allocation, and stimulate the vitality and creativity of market entities.

The importance of market mechanism: attach importance to the fundamental role of market mechanisms in resource allocation and maintain economic freedom and competitive vitality. The market mechanism can achieve effective allocation of resources and improve economic efficiency through price mechanisms, supply and demand mechanisms and competition mechanisms. In order to maximize profits in market competition, enterprises will continuously improve technology, reduce costs, improve product quality and service levels, thereby promoting the economic development and technological progress of the entire society. For example, in the field of technology, Internet companies are constantly innovating business models and technology applications in a free competitive market environment. For example, the rise of e-commerce platforms has changed people's shopping methods, and the development of social media has reshaped people's social models. These innovations have greatly improved society's production efficiency and quality of life.

The balance between personal freedom and social responsibility: Personal freedom is the source of driving force for social progress, but while individuals pursue freedom, they should also bear corresponding social responsibilities. In modern society, individual behavior not only affects themselves, but also affects others and society. Therefore, on the basis of protecting personal freedom, we need to guide personal behavior through legal, moral and other means to make it in line with the public interests of society. For example, in terms of environmental protection, everyone has the right to freely choose their lifestyle and consumption behavior, but at the same time, they should also be aware of their responsibilities to the environment, reduce waste, green travel, etc., and jointly contribute to the protection of the ecological environment.

Limitations of Hayek's view: Hayek's criticism of socialism has a certain one-sided nature. He ignored the positive role of socialism in ensuring social fairness and promoting common prosperity. In practice, socialist countries have been committed to narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor through reasonable institutional design and policy regulation, and have provided extensive guarantees for the people in terms of education, medical care, employment, etc. For example, under the socialist system, China has implemented a large-scale poverty alleviation strategy to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, creating a miracle in the history of human poverty reduction, and fully reflecting the huge advantages of the socialist system in safeguarding people's livelihood and promoting social fairness. In addition, Hayek overemphasizes the perfection of the free market economy and ignores the shortcomings of the market itself, such as market failure and externalities, which require appropriate government intervention and adjustment.

Confrontation of views from different schools: Different scholars and schools of thought have different views on the relationship between freedom, equality, planning and market. Keynesianism emphasizes the government's intervention role during economic crisis, and regulates the economy through fiscal and monetary policies to achieve the purpose of full employment and stabilization of the economy. Neoliberalism inherited and developed Hayek's ideas, advocated the free market economy more, and opposed the government's excessive intervention in the economy. From the perspective of production relations, Marxist economics analyzes the internal contradictions of the capitalist economy, and believes that the basic contradiction of capitalism is the contradiction between the socialization of production and the capitalist private possession of means of production. This contradiction led to the cyclical outbreak of the economic crisis, and advocates the realization of public ownership of means of production through social changes to resolve the internal contradictions of capitalism. These clashes of views from different schools have promoted the development and improvement of economic theory and provided diversified theoretical basis for the formulation of economic policies in various countries.