I’m reading a pretty good essay on Hayek and Oakeshott and the authors
mention Oakeshott’s term “teleocracy.” He uses that to describe
governments that imposed specific plans or goals on the societies they
governed and consciously marshaled social resources toward their
achievement. This contrasts with the “ends-independent” rules of a
spontaneous order, to use Hayek’s term, in which individuals and
households and firms are free to pursue their own purposes and plans
subject to those rules.
I wonder whether “teleocracy” isn’t a pretty good catch-all for the
varieties of fascism? Historical fascism had a set of purposes and
plans that were often particularly nasty and liberal fascism’s goals
seem more noble, yet both share the notion that the social order should
be structured toward particular ends and that citizens are but resources
in their achievement. “Barack will make you work” after all.
I’m on the road and don’t have LF with me, so perhaps you mentioned
Oakeshott and that term, but if not, I thought it was an interesting