Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “O caminho da servidão” as Want to Read:
O caminho da servidão
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

O caminho da servidão

4.18  ·  Rating details ·  17,428 ratings  ·  1,084 reviews
A tese central de Hayek é que todas as formas de coletivismo, seja o nazismo ou o socialismo, levam inevitavelmente à tirania e à supressão das liberdades, conforme já se evidenciava à época pelos exemplos da Alemanha Nazista, da União Soviética, e dos demais países do bloco comunista. O autor argumenta que, em um sistema de planejamento central da economia, a alocação de ...more
Kindle Edition, 232 pages
Published August 1st 2017 by LVM Editora (first published September 18th 1944)
More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about O caminho da servidão, please sign up.
Popular Answered Questions
Robin Card It was originally published in London, hence the Anglo-centric nature of the book and the frequent reference to British peers.
This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30
Average rating 4.18  · 
Rating details
 ·  17,428 ratings  ·  1,084 reviews

More filters
Sort order
Start your review of O caminho da servidão
This book captures the frustration of classical liberals (as opposed to modern liberals) when they see collectivist policies enacted despite the overwhelming evidence that socialism brings about disastrous results.

Having grown up and lived in Austria during World War I and later moving to Great Britain, Hayek was particularly frustrated when he saw Britain and the United States making the same mistakes of the Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Hayek argues that collectivism eventually leads to
6.0 stars. On my list of "All Time Favorite" Books. One of the most important books ever written and most concise, brilliant, scathing and impressive argument against the "planned economy" that has been, or likely ever will be, written. Hayek, while always being respectful to the adherents of the idea that state control over resources and goals is the right approach, nevertheless absolutely destroys each and every argument and rationale alluded to by such people.

His general thesis that
Nov 28, 2017 rated it did not like it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: skimmed
I tried to read this several times, beginning back when I almost convinced myself I might be able to understand (read: respect) what Republicans were thinking. I'm sorry to say that is over, at least for now. If we can lie, cheat, and steal our way to power, what difference does it make what is just?

I made some notes before I gave up. Putting them here in case I ever get back to this in time to challenge Paul Ryan personally.

This book has gone through so many editions, it is worth noting which
Sep 16, 2010 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Recommends it for: capitalists and socialists
The Road to Serfdom is not an anti-government book, it's definitely not a libertarian or pro-laissez-faire capitalism or even a pro-democracy book. It's purely and simply an anti-socialism book. And, just to be clear, to Hayek, socialism primarily means central-planning. It's chapter after chapter of reasons why socialism, despite it's apparently noble goals, both will not work in the practical sense, and how it tends to lead to totalitarianism.

Hayek's arguments are level-headed and logical. He
The historical analysis upon which this book depends amounts to nothing more than extremely poor scholarship masquerading as thoughtful contrarianism. Hayek's conflation of Nazism with Socialism merely because they have similar names in German is an example of stupidity on the level of mistaking the PATRIOT Act for patriotism or the Ministry of Peace for peacefulness. This distracting error is unfortunately the foundation of the entirety of his argument. His theory of authoritarianism consists ...more
Jason Holt
Jan 30, 2011 rated it did not like it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: neoliberal
There is an old cartoon (found here) which summarizes the logic of this work rather perfectly. Essentially, the government gets involved in your life, they dictate how you live, then they kill you.

The notions in this text are trifling at best.

Hayek never confronts the fact that a lack of some centralized body somewhere making decisions for you does not mean an end to governance. Clearly, businesses govern. They also plan. To take this power away from a centralized and (at least ostensibly)
I could be wrong, but surely not even the greatest fans of Hayek could believe this is a particularly nuanced book. The central thesis is that everyone that disagrees with Hayek is either a totalitarian or someone who is inadvertently leading society down the road towards totalitarianism. This doesn’t only include Marxists and Fascists – who Hayek equates as identical – nor even members of the Labour party in Britain who might be considered ‘fellow travellers’, but even many of the younger ...more
Howard Olsen
Sep 02, 2007 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Finally got around to reading this libertarian/conservative classic. It's short, but deep, combining economics, politics, sociology, and a short history of Socialist thought, to create the greatest critique of the collectivist impulse that you can read. Hayek's message is blunt: despite the freedom and liberality that is western man's birthright, there is an inevitable clamor for order and equality that arises from the intellligensia and the wealthy. This clamor leads to the demand-often in the ...more
Introduced by Chicago don Milty Friedman, who assures us that “the free market is the only mechanism that has ever been discovered for achieving participatory democracy” (xi). Preach it, Brother Milt!

So-called 'collectivism' had been burying purported 'individualism,' apparently, in Padre Fred’s 1944 analysis, but was unexpectedly checked by the time of Frere Milt’s semicentennial celebratory gala binge. Fra Milt is pleased to report that Father Fred was dead wrong in his predictions that
Mike (the Paladin)
Review written in 2010

The temptation here will be to try and say too much. This is a short book, though it is thickly packed. I won't try to relate here what the author relates in the book. I will try to say a few words about the book and recommend it.

This is the same book that was released in England in 1944, but it is a new edition and thus has a new intro by the author. If you can get this edition I recommend it for the intro. This book was written during (near the end of)WWII and thus will
1/2 star not simply for Hayek's preachy, condescending tone, but because this book was the catalyst for the gutting of the State by the flying monkeys of the Chicago School under Milton Friedman. From Pinochet's Chile to Thatcher's Britain to post-Soviet Russia, Hayek's callous version of individualism and "competition" gave a veneer of legitmacy to an explosion of untramelled human greed in which millions of people lost any security of income or employment whilst a few within the charmed circle ...more
Apr 12, 2007 rated it did not like it  ·  review of another edition
Hayek creates a facile equation of fascism and communism, and argues that any political or economic system that is not laissez-faire capitalism is tyranny. Hayek's seemingly deliberate misreadings of history left me unconvinced, and very uneasy with the libertarian movement, if this is to be taken as a representative text.
This is one of the foundation books for my personal philosophy. Along with his other works, the thought of Friedrich von Hayek is basic to my own individualist world view. In this book Hayek contends that liberty is fragile, easily harmed but seldom extinguished in one fell swoop. Instead, over the years “the unforeseen but inevitable consequences of socialist planning create a state of affairs in which, if the policy is to be pursued, totalitarian forces will get the upper hand.” He asserts ...more
Oct 03, 2011 rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: theory, democracy
Hayek is a huge figure in economics and of immense influence on neoliberalism, and reading this I was struck by just how deeply and completely neoliberalism goes as a theoretical framework. I know many would not agree with that (though many would), but Thatcher claimed him as her own and that is enough for me. There are also those conversations in the Mount Pelerin Society with Milton Friedman. It fascinates me that this resonance is true not just of the ideas, but also in the way language is ...more
Edit: August 2018

My politics has changed somewhat in the couple of years since I wrote the review below. I was somewhat of an anarchist at that time and my position on state control and centralization were pretty much aligned with the book's argument except it came from a socialist perspective. I've changed my position drastically on how centralized or state controlled a socialist state should be but left the review unchanged since it doesn't fundamentally alter my position on the book.

C. Scott
Aug 29, 2014 rated it did not like it  ·  review of another edition
Ah, finished at last. This was a bit of a hate-read for me, but I was surprised that I didn't hate it with quite the intensity I expected.

I was able to appreciate Hayek's arguments against full-scale government planning as predicting a lot of what went wrong with the Soviet Union. Still, I am unmoved by his slippery slope argument that any socialist policies inevitably lead to totalitarian government. Give me a break.

Also, this notion that Nazi Germany came about because of socialist policies
There is something a little awe-inspiring about reading a book and realizing how much of your personal philosophy and intellectual heritage you owe to it. I got the same feeling the first time I read Two Treatises of Government. When I consider the impact this book has had on my life and work, it amazes me it took me this long to read it.
This should be required reading alongside 1984. It conveys the problems of socialism and yet eerily resembles a conversation we could be having today.
“We are today living out the dim echo—like light from a fading star—of a debate conducted seventy years ago by men (John Meynard Keynes and Friedrich Hayek) born for the most part in the late nineteenth century. To be sure, the economic terms in which we are encouraged to think are not conventionally associated with these far-off political disagreements. And yet without an understanding of the latter, it is as though we speak a language we do not fully comprehend.”
- Tony Judt ‘What is Living and
Douglas Wilson
Jun 24, 2009 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: politics
What a fine book. What a timely book. Those who want to understand Obamonomics need to read this. Those who have read it already should probably read it again. The political world is divided into two main groups -- those who think controlling everything from the center is a good idea and those who do not. Each side of that divide has its variations, but those are the basic options. Those on the fascist side (control) have the hard totalitarians and the soft totalitarians, but that is basically a ...more
David M
(going to make an exception to my only-radicals rule. It's always important to know your enemies. It comes recommended by Perry Anderson.)
Jul 29, 2011 rated it did not like it  ·  review of another edition
The Road to Serfdom is a book that has divided the post-war divided world. In developed countries that practice capitalism, Hayek's book created a stir although his influence was a shadow of the effect Keynes had on countries. No body said 'I'm an Hayekian now'. Hayek barely finds a place in my economics textbook. This book told me why he was never respected in his life.

With all respect to Hayek and his intellect, this book falls short of being the ultimate attack on socialism it set out to be.
Laila Kanon
Apr 09, 2019 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: read-non-fiction
This is not an easy thesis to digest but I more or less understood the main arguments and I agree with the author analysis. What so sobering in reflection of the arguments in this book is the realization as to how little we learn from history that socialism is only good in theory but in practice it bring nothing but misery to humanity and it would takes decades to recover from it, if any. Democracy isn't perfect but only in this system of governance that humanity able to thrive and
Amy Sturgis
Hayek's The Road to Serfdom was both prophetic and influential in its day, and its message is as timely now as it ever was. He offers a compelling warning that the collectivism required for centralized planning is incompatible with democracy and the individualism on which it's built. In so doing, he provides key insights into economic concepts rarely discussed or understood today in mainstream conversations, such as how the price system works as a means of conveying information, how the rule of ...more
Chris Wells
Dec 16, 2007 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
If "compassionate conservatism" means anything, than it surely means something like this. Hayek's thought no longer qualifies as hardcore libertarian because he believed in government welfare programs, albeit limited ones, as supplementary to the free market system for those unable to participate in it. Central planning was what he was really against, and he has a very convincing argument against putting economic planning in the hands of any government, no matter how benevolent it may seem to be ...more
George Mazurek)
Jun 18, 2017 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
A must read for every liberal, socialist or communist ;-)
Mar 31, 2011 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Hayek, an Austrian who moved to Britain in the 1930s, sounded as clear a set of warnings for Britain and America in 1944 against the dangers of creeping socialism as Alexis de Tocqueville had done for France and America 100 years previously. Hayek saw the danger for Britain contained in the Fabian socialism of H.G. Wells et al. based on how the welfare programs begun in Germany under Bismarck led to the disaster of "National Socialism" under Hitler.

De Toqueville had seen the same trends in
Bryana Joy
Jun 12, 2012 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
It took me many months to finish reading Hayek’s classic work on economics and totalitarianism. It certainly isn’t for the faint of heart, but I consider it well worth the effort. Writing during World War II, Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek explores the sinister ramifications of centralized “planning” in the economic sphere and delves into the nature of socialism. He explains why socialized systems are dishonest and totalitarian in nature and warns of a creeping acceptance of collectivist ...more
Apr 17, 2009 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: 2009
Hayek's analysis of socialism is insightful, prophetic, and chilling. It is a difficult book to read, but very rewarding. It is clear that we take for granted the freedoms we were given by our founding fathers and abdicating them to the socialist planners will lead to dire consequences. We must all wake up before the socialists in our midst lead us to totalitarianism--something that may be difficult to imagine, but most certainly in our future if we continue upon our current path.
Joseph Stieb
Jul 23, 2019 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
While I am not a Hayekian in the conventional sense, and there are obviously big problems with this book, I was surprised by how readable and engaging this work is. It is also clearly one of those books that people talk crap about but haven't read in most cases. Read this because of my burgeoning interest in responses to/ideas about totalitarianism.

The core argument here is this: centralized economic planning creates a tendency toward the accumulation of more and more power, a process which
Lisa (Harmonybites)
I recently saw an edition of this book citing Glen Beck on the back cover and claiming it was an inspiration for the Tea Party. I couldn't help wincing at what the reaction of many potential readers would be to that. For Hayek, a Nobel-Prize winning economist, doesn't deserve to be dismissed with a sneer by those on the other side of the political divide. Hayek dedicated the book to "socialists of all parties" and said in the 1957 Preface to the American edition that was meant "in no spirit of ...more
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next »
topics  posts  views  last activity   
We Are Libertaria...: The Road To Serfdom this Weekend! 4 8 Apr 28, 2019 05:14AM  
Snippets That Ins...: Who Do We Think We Are? 1 8 Jul 17, 2016 07:42AM  
Goodreads Librari...: Incorrect Page Count for ISBN 0226320618 2 18 Oct 13, 2013 04:36PM  

Readers also enjoyed

  • Capitalism and Freedom
  • Human Action: A Treatise on Economics
  • Free to Choose: A Personal Statement
  • Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics
  • The Law
  • The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money
  • An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations
  • A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
  • The Anti-capitalistic Mentality
  • Liberalism: The Classical Tradition
  • Defending the Undefendable
  • Democracy: The God That Failed
  • Anarchy, State, and Utopia
  • Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy
  • For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto
  • Intellectuals and Society
  • The Ethics of Liberty
  • Libertarianism: A Primer
See similar books…
Friedrich August von Hayek CH was an Austrian and British economist and philosopher known for his defense of classical liberalism and free-market capitalism against socialist and collectivist thought. He is considered by some to be one of the most important economists and political philosophers of the twentieth century. Hayek's account of how changing prices communicate signals which enable ...more
“Probably it is true enough that the great majority are rarely capable of thinking independently, that on most questions they accept views which they find ready-made, and that they will be equally content if born or coaxed into one set of beliefs or another. In any society freedom of thought will probably be of direct significance only for a small minority. But this does not mean that anyone is competent, or ought to have power, to select those to whom this freedom is to be reserved. It certainly does not justify the presumption of any group of people to claim the right to determine what people ought to think or believe.” 59 likes
“It is true that the virtues which are less esteemed and practiced now--independence, self-reliance, and the willingness to bear risks, the readiness to back one's own conviction against a majority, and the willingness to voluntary cooperation with one's neighbors--are essentially those on which the of an individualist society rests. Collectivism has nothing to put in their place, and in so far as it already has destroyed then it has left a void filled by nothing but the demand for obedience and the compulsion of the individual to what is collectively decided to be good.” 49 likes
More quotes…