Currently reading F. A. Hayek's book " The Road to Serfdom" published in 1944 He makes an excellent case for how the West's liberal governments slowly morphed from the basic priniciples of Liberalism into something more akin to governments in the socialist camp. He wrote this classic book during WW II when England was at was with the National Socialist State of Hitlerian Germany. He critque of socialism's flaws are outstanding. But are his throughts reflected by today's so called conservatives who continuously call for more DEREGULATION and Laisse fair government? Not really. In fact, Hayek sounds MOST like what I would call a SOCIAL PRAGMATIST, rather than any kind of modern American libertarian or conservative thinker the likes of which we read here. One example? I post the following in response to those of you who think that all we need do is obey the dicates of the Constitution ver batem. In other words, when a society is facing having to make a decision about a law or regulation it must create, it can only follow some underlying theme about how liberalism ought to respond. What is that underlying theme of Hayek's liberalism? Note how the above acknowledges that no document can address EVERY contingency that a nation might face? By extention he is telling us that yes, indeed regulations will be necessary, and yes indeed, those regulations will change as society finds they MUST change. So those of you who think the bluepront for how our society must be is entirely written in the US constiution are NOT adhering to the dogma of the REAL LIBERAL economists who some of you CLAIM to represent. Hayek drives another the nail into the coffin of that common misunderstanding that many of tdoay's lovers of freedom and self proclaining conservative thinkers have today. As to government not having a role in forming an effective economy, as so many here insist must be the case? Again, today's self proclaiming laissez faire capitalist dogma IS NOT supported by Hayek. So much for the theory that Hayek was calling for an end to government interference in the business and economic affairs of society, folks. Clearly he understood, as most pragmatist liberals understand today, that government must take a role in the business and economic affairs of the society from whence it is formed. If there any among us here who would like to TRULY DISCUSS what LIBERALISM really means, I invite you to explore this book with me here on this board. Let us breath together and perhaps we can arrive at some modus vivendi for our nation, and put aside the dogmatic ALL OR NOTHING thinking that pervades most of the discussions that happen in this place. I am invitign some of us to THINK LIKE SCHOLARS, rather than to bitch at each other like partisans. Any takers? This book, which is often referred to as the modern conservatives' BIBLE, needs an indepth consideration. It is much deeper and much more thoughtfuul and subtle than what apparently many of you imagine it to be. Much like as with Adam Smith, it it NOT the stuff of simpletons' thinking.