Comparing Rawls and Hayek Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Comparing Rawls and Hayek - Essay Example Hayek highlights that freedom entailed acting on an individual’s own free will and not on the will or command of others or situations. He covers all the types of freedom that he experienced in the First World War that is political freedom, personal freedom and economic freedom. On the other hand, John Rawls was a philosopher who originated from America and fought or participated in the Second World War. He was responsible for developing the theory of justice which was a concept of ethical, rationality, law, equity and fairness (Bellamy). Rawls argues that justice is fairness and the same justice is responsible for the existence of liberty within the society. Rawls believes that for social institutions to be operational or function properly, justice is necessary in forming the foundations, defining the base and also veiling the position of ignorance within the society. Hayek and Rawls both supported liberalism in their different writings and speech. They talked in unison that p eople were free to exercise their ideas without barriers as long as their idea were not ill motivated or malicious in any way and that the state was there to support them and ensure that their rights, that is of freedom of speech, were practiced and equally enjoyed by all individuals from different classes, ages, ethnical backgrounds and races. Hayek and Rawls both agreed that the government was created for the citizens, by the citizens and to serve the citizens and rebuffed other notion of the other way round that the citizens were meant to serve the government. They were both liberal as they preached the principles of justice, freedom and equality to the public as they both advocated for basic rights such like education, food, shelter, medication and clothing to all citizens. Both Hayek and Rawls were using the society as their main source of reference in their various thoughts and intransient differences, thereby making the citizens the centre of their struggles for freedom and j ustice. This is as per what they experienced in world war one and world war two respectively. The various ideas they tried to put in action were all directed towards the unification of their different ideologies, in favor of the citizens, on how things are done or should be carried out within the society (Hayek 78). Both Hayek and Rawls place emphasis on Rawls theory of the veil of ignorance intended to make us blind to our unique differences as human beings. They both campaign on the interests of democracy as they try to shun the inhabitants of a strong and peacefully democracy. They both argue that in the interest of democracy, ideologies should be placed together to accommodate the different thoughts and lifestyles of individuals coming from different backgrounds and possessing different ideologies in the society. This is because the society consists if unique human beings with unique qualities, backgrounds, class and preferences. However, Rawls and Hayek do not come to an agreem ent thus do not resolve their arguments in order to find solutions and how solutions are reached in different situations. In fact, they completely clash and each has their own viewpoint of the solution to their matching theories and ideologies. Rawls argues that agreements on particular matters can be reached whereas Hayek does not believe that this can happen. Hayek believes that the