IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v49y2025i2p221-233..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hayek and Schmitt on the ‘depoliticization’ of the economy

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Nientiedt

Abstract

Both Friedrich Hayek and Carl Schmitt criticize the role played by economic interest groups in modern democracies. This paper points out that their descriptions of how such groups attempt to obtain favourable treatment from the state (‘rent seeking’) are highly similar. The paper then discusses their proposed solutions. Schmitt’s solution, referred to as ‘depoliticization’, involves the establishment of an authoritarian state together with a corporatist economic system. Hayek, by contrast, argues in favour of constitutionally limiting the ability of politicians to grant privileges to economic groups. The paper further asks whether, as claimed in the literature, Hayek’s solution is similar to Schmitt’s in that both attempt to shield the free market economy from democratic oversight. It is reasoned that Hayek’s solution is not undemocratic (unless one defines democracy as pure majoritarianism), while Schmitt’s solution is not conducive to free markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Nientiedt, 2025. "Hayek and Schmitt on the ‘depoliticization’ of the economy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 49(2), pages 221-233.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:49:y:2025:i:2:p:221-233.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/beae048
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:49:y:2025:i:2:p:221-233.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.