Conflict of Visions: Constrained vs Unconstrained

 “From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently. Equality before the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict with each other; and we can achieve either one or the other, but not both at the same time”
― Friedrich August von Hayek, The Constitution Of Liberty

I like Tolstoy's idea again:

"The struggle between the old views and the new was long and stubbornly fought out... In the one case as in the other, on both sides the struggle provokes passion and stifles truth. On the one hand there is fear and regret for the loss of the whole edifice constructed through the ages, on the other is the passion for destruction."

I'm about 40% into Conflicts of Vision. I've only listened, and it's a tough listen. So I'm going to revisit in print form.

But the implication that conservatives are constrained and liberals are unconstrained seems absurd and a great use of selection bias. There are plenty of liberals considering unintended consequences. And conservatives get a giant pass for following tradition blindly. That's not constrained thinking. He is really just saying idealist are naive and or dumb which I'd agree. I was both when I was an idealist.

I think the distinction in visions is great.

That's my response until i revisit it.

Another quote:

"Whatever its mechanisms or details, social justice has been the dominant theme of the unconstrained vision... Like other forms of justice, it is conceived as a result rather than a process. But while the imperative of social justice pervades the unconstrained vision, it is virtually non-existent in the constrained vision. Social thinkers in the tradition of the constrained vision deal with issues of income distribution as a process, and consider its humane aspects as well as efficiency issues, but there is no implication that one income distribution result is more just than another. F. A. Hayek... [characterizes] social justice... as "absurd," a "mirage," "a hollow incantation," "a quasi-religious superstition," and a concept that "does not belong to the category of error but to that of nonsense."...

The concept of social justice thus represents the extremes of the conflict of visions- an idea of the highest importance in one vision and beneath contempt in the other."