Replies

This is what Hayek says:
In the United States, where it has become almost impossible to use "liberal" in the sense in which I have used it, the term "libertarian" has been used instead. It may be the answer; but for my part I find it singularly unattractive. For my taste it carries too much the flavor of a manufactured term and of a substitute. What I should want is a word which describes the party of life, the party that favors free growth and spontaneous evolution.
Does "libertarianism" favor this "free growth and spontaneous evolution" of Hayek's?

Yes, it does. And Hayek says so just above -- " It may be the answer, but --".
Read much, kid?

----------------------------

-- "Whiggism is historically the correct name for the ideas in which I believe."

The "whiggism" of Hayek doesn't seem to be "libertarianism" of today. Even then, the definition of whiggism posted earlier seems to conflict with libertarianism.

"Seems"? What's the conflict?

----------------------------

Thus, - Hayek was a libertarian, but disliked the term.

not necessarily. And, even if he was, that doesn't mean that liberatarianism = whiggism. just wondering, is the libertarianism of today different than that of Hayek's time?

KC seems to think so. Maybe he can elaborate.

Yes, it does. And Hayek says so just above -- " It may be the answer, but --". Read much, kid?

if modern libertarianism is the same as hayek's whiggism, then by all means hayek is a liberterian; but if modern libertarianism is different than hayeks whiggism, then i don't think hayek would be a libertarian. That's what i'm wondering. And yes, i try to read a little.

"Seems"? What's the conflict?

"seems" because i'm unsure if it does or doesn't. i'm still deciding. As for the conflict: are whigs, those who supported the parliament, those who supported the american rev., the latter day equivalents of today's libertarians?