Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Planned Economies, Free Markets and the Social Sciences: The Cold War Origins of the “Knowledge Society”

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cold War Social Science

Abstract

During the Cold War, the place of knowledge, planning, and social science expertise in modern societies emerged as the focus of a momentous debate. The debate, often carried out under the rubric of the “knowledge society,” was directly linked to a fundamental question: whether the capitalist “West” or the socialist “East” was best prepared to provide their citizens with economic prosperity and well-being. The debate raised questions about the nature of the social sciences themselves, about the scope and character of their knowledge, and about their roles in public affairs and society. This chapter examines how the Cold War confrontation shaped this debate, showing how the views put forward by major figures including Daniel Bell, members of the “New Left” (e.g. Alain Touraine, Herbert Marcuse, and Jürgen Habermas), and prominent (neo)liberals (e.g. Joseph Schumpeter, Friedrich Hayek, and Karl Popper) continue to shape the social and political imaginations today.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Christopher Simpson, ed., Universities and Empire. Money and Politics in the Social Sciences during the Cold War (New York: The New Press, 1998); Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters (New York: The New Press, 2000); Nils Gilman, Mandarins of the Future. Modernization Theory in Cold War America (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2003); Tim B. Müller, Krieger und Gelehrte: Herbert Marcuse und die Denksysteme im Kalten Krieg (Hamburg: Hamburger Edition, 2010); Elena Aronova, “The Congress for Cultural Freedom, Minerva, and the Quest for Instituting ‘Science Studies’ in the Age of Cold War,” Minerva 50 (2012), 307–337; Joy Rohde, Armed with Expertise. The Militarization of American Social Research during the Cold War (Ithaka and London: Cornell University Press, 2013). Mark Solovey, Shaky Foundations. The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2013); Fred Turner, The Democratic Surround (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013); Jamie Cohen-Cole, The Open Mind. Cold War Politics and the Sciences of Human Nature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014).

  2. 2.

    For the concept of political and social theories as “interventions,” see Quentin Skinner, “Interpretation and the understanding of speech acts,” in his Visions of Politics, vol. 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 103–127. On the social sciences in the Cold War, see: David C. Engerman, “Social Science in the Cold War,” Isis, 101 (2010), 393–400; Mark Solovey, “Cold War Social Science: Specter, Reality, or Useful Concept?” in Mark Solovey, Hamilton Cravens, eds., Cold War Social Science. Knowledge Production, Liberal Democracy, and Human Nature (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012), 1–22.

  3. 3.

    On the relevance of intellectual migration and transnational networks, see Johan Heilbron et al., “Toward a Transnational History of the Social Sciences,” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 44 (2008), 146–160; Ivan Boldyrev and Olessia Kirtchik, “On (im)permeabilities: Social and human sciences on both sides of the ‘Iron Curtain’,” History of the Human Sciences, 29 (2016), 3–12.

  4. 4.

    Max Weber, Economy and Society [orig. 1922] (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), 223.

  5. 5.

    Ibid., 225.

  6. 6.

    Ibid., 225.

  7. 7.

    See Adam Tooze, The Deluge. The Great War and the Remaking of Global Order, 1916–1931 (London: Allen Lane, 2014).

  8. 8.

    Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy [1942] (London-New York: Routledge, 1994), 410; ibid., 131–134.

  9. 9.

    Ibid., 186.

  10. 10.

    Ibid., 132.

  11. 11.

    Daniel Bell, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society [1973] (New York: Basic Books, 1999), 66.

  12. 12.

    On epistemic (resp. “rational”) authority: Miranda Fricker, “Rational Authority and Social Power,” in Alvin I. Goldman and Dennis Whitcomb, eds., Social Epistemology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 54–68; Benjamin McMyler, Testimony, Trust, and Authority (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).

  13. 13.

    Bell had borrowed the idea of the “end of ideology” from the French sociologist Raymond Aron, who had used it in his The Opium of the Intellectuals (1955), as noted in Gilman, Mandarins of the Future, 56. Sarah Miller Harris, The CIA and the Congress for Cultural Freedom in the Early Cold War (London-New York: Routledge, 2016), 138–147. For the transnational network of CCF-journals: Giles Scott-Smith and Charlotte A. Lerg, eds., Campaigning Culture and the Global Cold War. The Journals of the Congress for Cultural Freedom (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017).

  14. 14.

    See Aronova, “The Congress for Cultural Freedom,” 307–337; Saunders, The Cultural Cold War. For the “postindustrial society” as a shared discourse of Western liberals and the New Left in the early and middle 1960s, see Howard Brick, “Optimism of the Mind. Imagining Postindustrial Society in the 1960s and 1970s,” American Quarterly, 44 (1992), 349.

  15. 15.

    Bell, Post-Industrial Society, 378. For the critique of the nonideological character of technology by the “New Left,” especially by Jürgen Habermas, see below.

  16. 16.

    Jeffry A. Frieden, Global Capitalism (New York: W. W. Norton, 2006), 297.

  17. 17.

    Bell, Post-Industrial Society, 157.

  18. 18.

    Ibid., 377.

  19. 19.

    Daniel Bell, “Notes on the Post-Industrial Society (II),” The Public Interest 6 (1967), 102f.

  20. 20.

    Bell, Post-Industrial Society, 374f.

  21. 21.

    Ibid., 375f, emphasis added.

  22. 22.

    Ibid., 362.

  23. 23.

    Ibid., 212.

  24. 24.

    Daniel Bell, “Notes on the Post-Industrial Society (I),” The Public Interest 6 (1967), 30.

  25. 25.

    Bell, Post-Industrial Society, 379.

  26. 26.

    Ibid., 386.

  27. 27.

    Ibid., 112ff.

  28. 28.

    Ibid., 99.

  29. 29.

    Donald R. Kelley, “The Soviet Debate on the Convergence of the American and Soviet Systems,” Polity 6/2 (1973), 175.

  30. 30.

    Radovan Richta, Civilization at the Crossroads [orig. 1966] (London-New York: Routledge, 2018) 28. I thank Christian Daye for bringing the importance of Radovan Richta and his group to my attention.

  31. 31.

    Richta, Civilization, 121.

  32. 32.

    For Bell on Richta and Soviet critique: Bell, Post-Industrial Society, xxv–xxviii and 106–112.

  33. 33.

    Richta, Civilization, 228. Vítězslav Sommer, “Scientists of the World, Unite! Radovan Richta’s Theory of Scientific and Technological Revolution,” in Elena Aronova, Simone Turchetti, eds., Science Studies during the Cold War and Beyond (Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2016), 177–204. See also Vítězslav Sommer’s chapter in this book.

  34. 34.

    Daniel Bell, The End of Ideology, 2nd ed. (New York: Collier Books, 1962), 402f.

  35. 35.

    Bell, End of Ideology, 402. As we will see below, Hayek, who had close ties to conservative politicians in Germany, was able to influence important political decisions in Germany and Europe, despite Bell’s assertion.

  36. 36.

    Brick, Optimism of the Mind, argues (360) that the “postindustrial theory” was motivated “in large part by a critique of economic ideology (monadic individualism, rationalistic psychology, and the assumption of natural order in society), [since] the ‘new social sciences’ of sociology, anthropology and psychology achieved sufficient professional standing in the American academy by midcentury to foster a new concept of ‘society’ as something outside of or beyond economic relations as such.”

  37. 37.

    Daniel Bell, The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (New York: Basic Books, 1976/1978), 84.

  38. 38.

    Bell, Post-Industrial Society, 366f.

  39. 39.

    Daniel Geary, “‘Becoming International Again’: C. Wright Mills and the Emergence of a Global New Left, 1956–1962,” The Journal of American History, 95 (2008), 713; cf. George Katsiaficas, The Imagination of the New Left (Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1987).

  40. 40.

    For Bell’s critique of theories, “seeing the students as the model for the revolution of the future,” see Bell, Post-Industrial Society, 152, and on the “New Left,” see Daniel Bell, “Colombia and the New Left,” in Daniel Bell and Irving Kristol, eds., Confrontation. The Student Rebellion and the Universities (New York-London: Basic Books, 1969), 67–107; Bell, Post-Industrial Society, xx–xxi. Marcuse referred repeatedly to Bell’s early study “Automation and Major Technological Change” (1958), which discussed the changing composition of the American work force: Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man [1964] (Boston: Beacon, 2006), 30f. and 41.

  41. 41.

    C. Wright Mills, “Letter to the New Left,” Studies on the Left 1 (1961), 63–72. In his Letter, Mills dismissed Bell’s proclamation of the “end of ideology” also as ideology of “NATO intellectuals” associated with the anti-communist Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF) (cf. Geary, Becoming International Again, 710–736). For Bell’s critical assessment of Mills’s work: Bell, End of Ideology, 47–74. Oliver Neun, Daniel Bell und der Kreis der ‘New York Intellectuals’ (Wiesbaden: Springer, 2012), 305–317.

  42. 42.

    Richta, Civilization, 37ff.

  43. 43.

    Jürgen Habermas, “Technology and Science as ‘ideology’ [1968],” in: Toward a Rational Society. Student Protest, Science, and Politics (Boston: Beacon, 1987), 104.

  44. 44.

    Instead of social classes, one finds today “underprivileged groups,” but “[t]heir disfranchisement and pauperization no longer coincide with exploitation, because the system does not live off their labor.” (Habermas, Technology and Science as “ideology,” 110, emphasis in original).

  45. 45.

    “Alienation” is an original Marxian concept that became prominent in the 1930s with the discovery and first publication of Marx early writings (Frühschriften).

  46. 46.

    Alain Touraine, The Post-Industrial Society (New York: Random House, 1971), 9. Touraine diagnosed the rise of administrative and technocratic employees already in 1959, as discussed in Ingrid Gilcher-Holtey, ‘Die Phantasie an die Macht’. Mai 68 in Frankreich (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 1995), 66ff.

  47. 47.

    Ibid., 8. For the influence of Socialism ou barbarie on the French student movement, see Gabriel Cohn-Bendit and Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Obsolete Communism. The Left-Wing Alternative (London: Penguin, 1969), 18f.; Gilcher-Holtey, Die Phantasie an die Macht, 44–104.

  48. 48.

    Cornelius Castoriadis, “The Anticipated Revolution [1968],” in his Political and Social Writings, vol. 3 1961–1979 (Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), 127. In this context, see also the influential work of Michel Foucault written in the 1960s and 1970s on the relationship between knowledge and power in institutions run by experts, such as psychiatric hospitals, schools, clinics, and prisons: History of Madness [1961] (London-New York: Routledge, 2006); Discipline and Punish. The Birth of the Prison [1975] (New York: Random House, 1975); The History of Sexuality, vol. 1 [1976] (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978).

  49. 49.

    André Gorz, “Technology, Technicians and Class Struggle [1971],” in André Gorz, ed., The Division of Labour (Hassocks: Harvester Press, 1976), 181.

  50. 50.

    Michael S. Christofferson, French Intellectuals Against the Left (New York: Berghahn, 2004), 27–88.

  51. 51.

    “[S]pontaneity is the chief enemy of all bureaucrats,” in Cohn-Bendit, Obsolete Communism, 154.

  52. 52.

    On how science and knowledge, aimed at controlling nature in order to free humans from nature’s necessities, turns into controlling humans in an “administered world,” see Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, Dialectic of Enlightenment [1944] (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2002). For the “dialectic of culture and administration,” see Theodor W. Adorno, “Culture and Administration [1959],” in The Culture Industry (London-New York: Routledge, 2001), 107–131.

  53. 53.

    “Art, even as something tolerated in the administered world, embodies what does not allow itself to be managed and what total management suppresses.” From Theodor W. Adorno, Aesthetic Theory [1970] (London-New York: Continuum, 2002), 234; Horkheimer and Adorno, Dialectic of Enlightenment, 94–136; Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man, 80ff. For the influence of the Frankfurt School on attempts to develop with the help of advanced art an open-minded “democratic personality,” see Turner, Democratic Surround; Cohen-Cole, Open Mind.

  54. 54.

    Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization (Boston: Beacon, 1955/1966), 187, emphasis added. A similar idea informs the widely discussed “liberalism of fear” developed in the 1980s by the political philosopher Judith N. Shklar: “Systematic fear is the condition that makes freedom impossible, and it is aroused by the expectation of institutionalized cruelty as by nothing else,” in her Liberalism and the moral life, ed. by Nancy L. Rosenblum. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 29. On the revaluation of bodily expressions and emotions in the epistemology of the Frankfurt School, see Markus Arnold, Die Erfahrung der Philosophen (Wien-Berlin: Turia & Kant, 2010), 388–414.

  55. 55.

    On the “form of technology” (i.e. its instrumental reasoning) as the basis of the most powerful ideology in modern societies and which lead to “men’s self-objectification,” see Habermas, Technology and Science as ‘ideology’, 112f.; Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man.

  56. 56.

    Jürgen Habermas, Theory of Communicative Action, vol. 2 [1981] (Boston: Beacon, 1987), 322. For his critique of “the contradictions of welfare-state intervention,” see ibid., 361ff.

  57. 57.

    Ibid., 322.

  58. 58.

    Ibid., 330.

  59. 59.

    Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge and Human Interests [1968] (Boston: Beacon, 1971), 71.

  60. 60.

    Habermas, Theory of Communicative Action, vol. 2, 326–331.

  61. 61.

    Jürgen Habermas, Between Fact and Norms [1992] (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), 107–131 and 287–328.

  62. 62.

    Cohn-Bendit, Obsolete Communism, 109. For the university as a “privileged center of opposition to technocracy and the forces associated with it,” see Touraine, Post-Industrial Society, 12ff. Therefore, the call for university reform became a key topic in the political program of the New Left. For the United States, see Tom Hayden, The Port Huron Statement [1962] (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 2005), 165ff.; for Germany, Jürgen Habermas, Protestbewegung und Hochschulreform [1969] (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 2008); for France, Cohn-Bendit, Obsolete Communism, 23ff.

  63. 63.

    Fred Turner, From Counterculture to Cyberculture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006).

  64. 64.

    Influential was the analysis of Stalinist “bureaucracy” in Leo Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed [1937] (New York: Pathfinder Press, 2004), 45ff. For a critique of the communist “bureaucracy” by East European Dissidents, see Milovan Djilas, The New Class. An Analysis of the Communist System (London: Thames & Hudson, 1957); György Konrád and Iván Szelényi, Die Intelligenz auf dem Weg zur Klassenmacht (Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp, 1978).

  65. 65.

    Wu Yiching, The Cultural Revolution at the Margins (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014), 46–83; Joel Andreas, Rise of the Red Engineers. The Cultural Revolution and the Origins of China’s New Class (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2009). For Maoism in the United States and Western Europe, see Julian Bourg, From Revolution to Ethics. May 1968 and Contemporary French Thought (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2007), 51–60; Julia Lovell, Maoism. A Global History (London: Bodley Head, 2019), 266–305.

  66. 66.

    Dejan Jović, Yugoslavia. A State that Withered Away (West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2009). I thank Matthias Duller for bringing this book to my attention.

  67. 67.

    Letter to Hayek, 28 May 1944 (Popper Archive 305.13.) cited by Mark A. Notturno, Hayek and Popper: On rationality, economism, and democracy (London: Routledge, 2015), 8. Popper discussed Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom approvingly in Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945] (One Volume Edition) (Princeton-Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2013), 603f.

  68. 68.

    Letter to Hayek, 15 March 1944 (Popper Archive 305.13), cited by Notturno, Hayek and Popper, 8.

  69. 69.

    Stephen Kresge and Leif Wenar, eds., Hayek on Hayek: An Autobiographical Dialogue (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 43.

  70. 70.

    For Hayek’s biography, see Kresge and Wenar, eds., Hayek on Hayek.

  71. 71.

    Malachi H. Hacohen, Karl Popper. The Formative Years, 1902–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 456ff.; Bruce Caldwell, Hayek’s Challenge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 258f.; Alan Ryan’s introduction in Popper, The Open Society, xix; Daniel St. Jones, Masters of the Universe. Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012), 37–49.

  72. 72.

    Philip Mirowski and Dieter Plehwe, eds., The Road from Mont Pèlerin (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009); Philip Plickert, Wandlungen des Neoliberalismus. Eine Studie zur Entwicklung und Ausstrahlung der ‘Mont Pèlerin Society’ (Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius, 2008). For the importance of transnational academic networks that brought together Western economists who were members of the Mont Pèlerin Society with Eastern European planning experts during and after the Cold War, see Johanna Bockman and Gil Eyal: “Eastern Europe as a Laboratory for Economic Knowledge: The Transnational Roots of Neoliberalism,” American Journal of Sociology 108 (2002), 310–352.

  73. 73.

    Karl Popper, The Poverty of Historicism (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1961), 21f. and 147–159; Karl Popper, “Models, Instruments, and Truth,” in his The Myth of the Framework (London: Routledge, 1994), 154–184.

  74. 74.

    Popper, Models, Instruments, and Truth, 181; cf. Friedrich Hayek’s Economics and Knowledge [1936], in his The Market and Other Orders (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014), 57–77. For differences between Hayek’s and Popper’s epistemological reasoning, see John Gray, Hayek on Liberty, 3rd ed. (London: Routledge, 1998), 110–115; Caldwell, Hayek’s Challenge, 311f.; Jack Birner, “Popper and Hayek on Reason and Tradition,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 44 (2014), 263–281.

  75. 75.

    Friedrich Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty [1960] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), 144.

  76. 76.

    Popper, Poverty of Historicism, 136, where Popper then points his readers to Hayek’s Scientism and the Study of Society (1955), “where methodological individualism is discussed in detail.”

  77. 77.

    Popper, Open Society, xliv.

  78. 78.

    The individual’s knowledge of particular circumstances and conditions cannot “by its nature […] enter into statistics and therefore cannot be conveyed to any central authority in statistical form.” (Friedrich Hayek, “The Use of Knowledge in Society [1945],” in Hayek, The Market and Other Orders, 98).

  79. 79.

    Friedrich Hayek, Studies on the Abuse and Decline of Reason [1952] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 163.

  80. 80.

    Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom [1944] (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), 206.

  81. 81.

    Friedrich Hayek, “Competition as a Discovery Procedure [1968],” in Hayek, The Market and Other Orders, 304–313; “The Meaning of Competition [1948],” in Hayek, The Market and Other Orders, 105–116; Friedrich Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty [1973–79] (London: Routledge, 2013), 404–433.

  82. 82.

    Hayek, Road to Serfdom, 85–90. For Hayek’s advocacy of interventions (“planning”) by a “legal framework”: Friedrich Hayek, “The Nature and History of the Problem,” in Friedrich Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning (London: Routledge, 1935), 22. “To judge actions by rules, not by particular results, is the step which has made the Open Society possible,” from Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, 204. For Popper’s similar advocacy of interventions by a “legal framework,” that is, “institutional” or “indirect” intervention, see Popper, Open Society, 339f.

  83. 83.

    Friedrich Hayek, “The Errors of Constructivism [1970],” in: Hayek, The Market and Other Orders, 345, emphasis added.

  84. 84.

    On “the emergence of [social] order as the result of adaptive evolution,” see Hayek, Constitution of Liberty, 107–132.

  85. 85.

    Gray, Hayek on Liberty, 14. Mary Jo Nye, Michael Polanyi and His Generation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), 176ff. Polanyi was like Popper also a member of the Mont Pèlerin Society.

  86. 86.

    Hayek, Constitution of Liberty, 76.

  87. 87.

    Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, 354 and 435–440; ibid., 462–485. On “totalitarian democracy” and “plebiscitary dictatorship,” see ibid., 348. On Hayek and the German “constitutional” school of Neoliberalism: Quinn Slobodian, Globalists. The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018), 182–217; David J. Gerber, “Constitutionalizing the Economy: German Neo-Liberalism, Competition Law and the ‘New’ Europe,” American Journal of Comparative Law, 42 (1994), 25–84; Jones, Masters of the Universe, 121–126. For the strong state as guardian of private law: Pierre Dardot and Christian Laval, The New Way of the World. On Neo-Liberal Society (London: Verso, 2013), 121–143. On limiting the sovereignty: Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, 375ff.; Popper, Open Society, 115ff.

  88. 88.

    Cited in Andrew Farrant, Edward McPhail, and Sebastian Berger, “Preventing the ‘Abuses’ of Democracy: Hayek, the ‘Military Usurper’ and Transitional Dictatorship in Chile?” American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 71 (2012), 521.

  89. 89.

    Ludwig Erhard, long-time West German Minister for Economic Affairs (1949–1964) under chancellor Konrad Adenauer, whom Erhard succeeded as German chancellor (1964–1966).

  90. 90.

    For the influence of the MPS in Germany: Ralf Ptak, “Neoliberalism in Germany. Revisiting the Ordoliberal Foundations of the Social Market Economy,” in Mirowski and Plehwe, Road from Mont Pèlerin, 98–138; Plickert, Wandlungen des Neoliberalismus, 253–283.

  91. 91.

    Ludwig Erhard’s “free market” and competition-oriented economic policies marked a break with Germany’s traditional cartel-friendly policies: Werner Adelshauser, Deutsche Wirtschaftsgeschichte (München: C. H. Beck, 2011), 87–105 and 173–177.

  92. 92.

    Slobodian, Globalists, 202–217. See also: Gerber, Constitutionalizing the Economy; David J. Gerber, Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 334–391.

  93. 93.

    For the impact of Hayek’s theories on the reform of the “General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),” which led to the creation of the “World Trade Organization (WTO)” in 1995: Slobodian, Globalists, 240–258 and 273–286, “The reform of the GATT would become, in part, a laboratory for Hayekian system design at the scale of the world,“ ibid., 240.

  94. 94.

    Popper, Open Society, 712f.

  95. 95.

    Ibid., 337; Hayek on economic freedom: Hayek, Road to Serfdom, 133.

  96. 96.

    Popper, Open Society, 384f.; ibid., 713. For Popper’s Social democratic leanings: Hacohen, Karl Popper.

  97. 97.

    Popper, Open Society, 151.

  98. 98.

    Popper in the first 1945 edition of the Open Society, vol. 2, 123; in later editions, he reformulated as follows: “State intervention should be limited to what is really necessary for the protection of freedom.” See Popper, Open Society, 338; cf. ibid., 665.

  99. 99.

    For Popper’s conflict with Adorno and Habermas, see Theodor W. Adorno, et al., eds., The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology (London: Heinemann, 1976).

  100. 100.

    Popper, Open Society, 149.

  101. 101.

    Ibid., 49; Karl Popper, Conjectures and Refutations [1963] (London: Routledge, 2007), 497f.

  102. 102.

    Popper, Poverty of Historicism, 158; ibid., 64–70; Popper, Open Society, 152f.

  103. 103.

    Popper’s principle “minimize suffering” is framed in contrast to the traditional utilitarian principle which Popper described as “‘[m]aximize happiness’, [… which] seems to be apt to produce a benevolent dictatorship”: Popper, Open Society, 548f.; ibid., 602f.

  104. 104.

    Popper, Open Society, 442.

  105. 105.

    Ibid., 338.

  106. 106.

    Popper, Open Society, 391f.; ibid., 339f.

  107. 107.

    Popper in Herbert Marcuse and Karl Popper, Revolution or Reform. A Confrontation (Chicago: New University Press, 1976), 55.

  108. 108.

    Popper, Open Society, 368; ibid., 360f.

References

  • Adelshauser, Werner. 2011. Deutsche Wirtschaftsgeschichte. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adorno, Theodor W. 2001. Culture and Administration [1959]. In Theodor W. Adorno. The Culture Industry, 107–131. London–New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adorno, Theodor W. 2002. Aesthetic Theory [1970]. London–New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adorno, Theodor W., Hans Albert, Ralf Dahrendorf, Jürgen Habermas, Harald Pilot and Karl R. Popper (eds.). 1976. The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreas, Joel. 2009. Rise of the Red Engineers: The Cultural Revolution and the Origins of China’s New Class. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, Markus. 2010. Die Erfahrung der Philosophen. Wien-Berlin: Turia & Kant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aron, Raymond. 1962. The Opium of the Intellectuals [1955]. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronova, Elena. 2012. The Congress for Cultural Freedom, Minerva, and the Quest for Instituting ‘Science Studies’ in the Age of Cold War. Minerva 50: 307–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-012-9206-6.

  • Bell, Daniel. 1962. The End of Ideology. 2nd ed. New York: Collier Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1967a. Notes on the Post-Industrial Society (I). The Public Interest 6, 24–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1967b. Notes on the Post-Industrial Society (II). The Public Interest 6, 102–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1969. Colombia and the New Left. In Confrontation: The Student Rebellion and the Universities, ed. by Daniel Bell and Irving Kristol, 67–107. New York and London: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1976/1978. The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1999. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society [1973]. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birner, Jack. 2014. Popper and Hayek on Reason and Tradition. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 44: 263–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bockman, Johanna, and Gil Eyal. 2002. Eastern Europe as a Laboratory for Economic Knowledge: The Transnational Roots of Neoliberalism. American Journal of Sociology 108: 310–352. https://doi.org/10.1086/344411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boldyrev, Ivan, and Olessia Kirtchik. 2016. On (im)permeabilities: Social and human sciences on both sides of the ‘Iron Curtain’. History of the Human Sciences 29, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695116666748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourg, Julian. 2007. From Revolution to Ethics: May 1968 and Contemporary French Thought. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brick, Howard. 1992. Optimism of the Mind: Imagining Postindustrial Society in the 1960s and 1970s. American Quarterly 44: 348–380. https://doi.org/10.2307/2712981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, Bruce. 2004. Hayek’s Challenge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castoriadis, Cornelius. 1993. The Anticipated Revolution [1968]. In Cornelius Castoriadis. Political and Social Writings, vol. 3 1961–1979, 124–156. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christofferson, Michael S. 2004. French Intellectuals Against the Left. New York: Berghahn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Cole, Jamie. 2014. The Open Mind. Cold War Politics and the Sciences of Human Nature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohn-Bendit, Gabriel, and Daniel Cohn-Bendit. 1969. Obsolete Communism: The Left-Wing Alternative. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dardot, Pierre, and Christian Laval. 2013. The New Way of the World: On Neo-Liberal Society. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djilas, Milovan. 1957. The New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System. London: Thames & Hudson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engerman, David C. 2010. Social Science in the Cold War. Isis 101: 393–400. https://doi.org/10.1086/653106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrant, Andrew, Edward McPhail and Sebastian Berger. 2012. Preventing the ‘Abuses’ of Democracy: Hayek, the ‘Military Usurper’ and Transitional Dictatorship in Chile? American Journal of Economics and Sociology 71: 513–538. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23245188.

  • Foucault, Michel. 2006. History of Madness [1961]. London–New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1975. Discipline and Punish. The Birth of the Prison [1975]. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1978. The History of Sexuality, vol. 1 [1976]. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fricker, Miranda. 2011. Rational Authority and Social Power. In Social Epistemology, ed. Alvin I. Goldman and Dennis Whitcomb, 54–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frieden, Jeffry A. 2006. Global Capitalism: Its Fall and Rise in the Twentieth Century. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geary, Daniel. 2008. ‘Becoming International Again’: C. Wright Mills and the Emergence of a Global New Left, 1956–1962. The Journal of American History 95: 710–736. https://doi.org/10.2307/27694377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, David J. 1994. Constitutionalizing the Economy: German Neo-Liberalism, Competition Law and the ‘New’ Europe. American Journal of Comparative Law 42: 25–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/840727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, David J. 1998. Law and Competition in Twentieth Century Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilcher-Holtey, Ingrid. 1995. ‘Die Phantasie an die Macht’: Mai 68 in Frankreich. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilman, Nils. 2003. Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in Cold War America. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorz, André. 1976. Technology, Technicians and Class Struggle [1971]. In The Division of Labour, ed. André Gorz, 159–189. Hassocks: Harvester Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, John. 1998. Hayek on Liberty, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Knowledge and Human Interests [1968]. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1987a. Technology and Science as ‘ideology’ [1968]. In Jürgen Habermas. Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest, Science, and Politics, 81–122. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1987b. Theory of Communicative Action [1981]. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Fact and Norms [1992]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 2008. Protestbewegung und Hochschulreform [1969]. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacohen, Malachi H. 2000. Karl Popper: The Formative Years, 1902–1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Sarah Miller. 2016. The CIA and the Congress for Cultural Freedom in the Early Cold War. London–New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayden, Tom. 2005. The Port Huron Statement [1962]. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 1935. The Nature and History of the Problem. In Collectivist Economic Planning, ed. by Friedrich Hayek, 1–40. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 1955. Scientism and the Study of Society. In Friedrich Hayek. The Counter-Revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason, 11–102. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 2007. The Road to Serfdom [1944]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 2010. Studies on the Abuse and Decline of Reason [1952]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 2011. The Constitution of Liberty [1960]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 2013. Law, Legislation and Liberty [1973–79]. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich. 2014. The Market and Other Orders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbron, Johan, Nicolas Guilhot, and Laurent Jeanpierre. 2008. Toward a Transnational History of the Social Sciences. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 44: 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbs.20302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horkheimer, Max, and Theodor W. Adorno. 2002. Dialectic of Enlightenment [1944]. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Daniel St. 2012. Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jović, Dejan. 2009. Yugoslavia: A State that Withered Away. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsiaficas, George. 1987. The Imagination of the New Left. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, Donald R. 1973. The Soviet Debate on the Convergence of the American and Soviet Systems. Polity 6/2: 174–196. https://doi.org/10.2307/3234006.

  • Konrád, György, and Iván Szelényi. 1978. Die Intelligenz auf dem Weg zur Klassenmacht. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kresge, Stephen, and Leif Wenar (eds.). 1994. Hayek on Hayek: An Autobiographical Dialogue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovell, Julia. 2019. Maoism: A Global History. London: Bodley Head.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, Herbert. 1955/1966. Eros and Civilization. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, Herbert. 2006. One-Dimensional Man [1964]. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, Herbert, and Karl Popper. 1976. Revolution or Reform: A Confrontation. Chicago: New University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMyler, Benjamin. 2011. Testimony, Trust, and Authority. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C. Wright. 1961. Letter to the New Left. Studies on the Left 1: 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirowski, Philip, and Dieter Plehwe (eds.). 2009. The Road from Mont Pèlerin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, Tim B. 2010. Krieger und Gelehrte: Herbert Marcuse und die Denksysteme im Kalten Krieg. Hamburg: Hamburger Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neun, Oliver. 2012. Daniel Bell und der Kreis der ‘New York Intellectuals’. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Notturno, Mark A. 2015. Hayek and Popper: On rationality, economism, and democracy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, Mary Jo. 2011. Michael Polanyi and His Generation: Origins of the Social Construction of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Plickert, Philip. 2008. Wandlungen des Neoliberalismus: Eine Studie zur Entwicklung und Ausstrahlung der ‘Mont Pèlerin Society’. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl. 2013. The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945] (One Volume Edition). Princeton-Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl. 1961. The Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl. 2007. Conjectures and Refutations [1963]. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl. 1994. Models, Instruments, and Truth. In Karl Popper. The Myth of the Framework, 154–184. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ptak, Ralf. 2009. Neoliberalism in Germany: Revisiting the Ordoliberal Foundations of the Social Market Economy. In The Road from Mont Pèlerin, ed. by Philip Mirowski, and Dieter Plehwe, 98–138. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Richta, Radovan. 2018. Civilization at the Crossroads [1966]. London–New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, Joy. 2013. Armed with Expertise: The Militarization of American Social Research during the Cold War. Ithaka and London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, Frances Stonor. 2000. The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1994. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy [1942]. London–New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott-Smith, Giles, and Charlotte A. Lerg, Eds. 2017. Campaigning Culture and the Global Cold War: The Journals of the Congress for Cultural Freedom. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shklar, Judith N. 1989. Liberalism and the moral life, ed. by Nancy L. Rosenblum. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solovey, Mark. 2012. Cold War Social Science: Specter, Reality, or Useful Concept? In Cold War Social Science: Knowledge Production, Liberal Democracy, and Human Nature, ed. Mark Solovey and Hamilton Cravens, 1–22. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Solovey, Mark. 2013. Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, Christopher (ed.). 1998. Universities and Empire: Money and Politics in the Social Sciences during the Cold War. New York: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Quentin. 2002. Interpretation and the understanding of speech acts. In Quentin Skinner. Visions of Politics, vol. 1, 103–127. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slobodian, Quinn. 2018. Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, Vítězslav. 2016. Scientists of the World, Unite! Radovan Richta’s Theory of Scientific and Technological Revolution. In Science Studies during the Cold War and Beyond, ed. by Elena Aronova and Simone Turchetti, 177–204. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tooze, Adam. 2014. The Deluge: The Great War and the Remaking of Global Order, 1916–1931. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touraine, Alain. 1971. The Post-Industrial Society. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trotsky, Leo. 2004. The Revolution Betrayed [1937]. New York: Pathfinder Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, Fred. 2006. From Counterculture to Cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the Rise of Digital Utopianism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, Fred. 2013. The Democratic Surround: Multimedia and American Liberalism from World War II to the Psychedelic Sixties. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society [1922]. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yiching, Wu. 2014. The Cultural Revolution at the Margins. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cultural Studies, University of Art and Design Linz, Linz, Austria

    Markus Arnold

Authors
  1. Markus Arnold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Arnold .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Mark Solovey

  2. Science, Technology and Society Unit, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria

    Christian Dayé

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Arnold, M. (2021). Planned Economies, Free Markets and the Social Sciences: The Cold War Origins of the “Knowledge Society”. In: Solovey, M., Dayé, C. (eds) Cold War Social Science. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70246-5_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70246-5_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-70245-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-70246-5

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation