Recently rereading some classic works, I find that the ideas of Hayek, this great economist, are deeper than I imagined. When he took the Nobel Prize in Economics podium in 1974, no one expected that four years later something would happen that sent shockwaves through academia—he publicly invited everyone who questioned him to debate in Paris, and yet not a single person responded. Behind the seemingly calm silence lies a deeper truth: refuting Hayek was not a defeat of him personally, but a defeat by reality itself.

The intellectual legacy he left behind is razor-sharp; every viewpoint slices through the dark sides of power, institutions, and human nature like a scalpel. For example, he said that money is humanity’s greatest invention because it is open to the poor, whereas power never is. Just think about it—poor people can participate in competition through labor, talent, and transactions, but power has always had barriers, connections, and circles. What truly corrodes civilization is not the gap between rich and poor, but the moment power begins to monopolize and replace the market in distributing wealth.

Hayek also pointed out a phenomenon: why certain problems can never be solved. Because the people who solve the problems are often the same people who create them. The logic of bureaucratic systems is ruthless—it needs problems to persist to prove its own necessity. The larger the organization, the more it likes to manufacture procedures and tedious complexity, because they need to “look busy” and “look important.” Many social maladies are not actually difficult to cure; rather, those who hold the tools simply have no motivation to treat them.

He also distinguished two entirely different social forms: one is a world in which the wealthy seize power, where wealth is generated by the market and may then influence power; the other is a world in which only those who have seized power can get rich—meaning one must first obtain power in order to obtain wealth. Hayek believed the latter is the deepest tragedy in civilization. Looking back at history, the decline of nations almost always begins at this turning point—when society shifts from “wealth created by the market” to “wealth created by power.”

When it comes to freedom, his definition is equally thought-provoking. The core of freedom is not “do whatever you want,” but rather that you do not have to bow to the arbitrary will of any person. If one only needs to obey the law and does not have to obey anyone, then that person is truly free. This leads to the distinction between the rule of law and rule by man: the rule of law allows individuals to anticipate the future and plan their lives; rule by man makes society rely on emotions, power, and relationships. Once laws can be changed at will, freedom is already effectively dead and gone.

What impressed me most was his observation about population migration: if human beings continue to migrate freely, the direction of the flow of people is the direction of civilization. It sounds cruel but it is honest—don’t listen to propaganda, don’t look at slogans; just see where people are going, and you can tell where is better. In history, every large-scale migration quietly reveals who wins or loses in the contest of institutions and the direction in which civilization is headed.

There is also one saying that is especially worth reflecting on: those who are willing to give up freedom in exchange for security ultimately get neither freedom nor security. Fear often makes people willing to hand over their autonomy in exchange for a kind of “protected illusion.” But once power expands under the name of “protection,” security turns into a slogan, and freedom is never returned.

Finally, this may be the coldest and deepest truth in Hayek’s thought: the road to hell is often paved with good intentions, and what turns the human world into hell is precisely the kind of ideas that try to turn it into paradise. The most brutal systems in history have never begun with evil; they begin with “for your good” and “for everyone’s happiness.” By the time people wake up, paradise has never arrived—chains are already locked in place. The real danger is not evil itself, but absolute power packaged as “good.”

Popper once said, “What I learned from Hayek is more than from all other living thinkers.” In March 1992, at the age of 92, Hayek passed away. He spent his lifetime proving a simple yet profound proposition: human prosperity comes from liberalism, not collectivism. In his writings, he states that markets are not designed; they are spontaneous orders formed in history, and individual freedom is the only truly genuine source of human prosperity.

When the Soviet Union collapsed spectacularly, people suddenly realized—Hayek was not predicting the future; he was revealing in advance the inevitable outcome. Some lament that if only 5% of the world truly understood Hayek, humanity could avoid many tragedies. He was the grave-digger of utopia, and the last night watchman of free civilization.

Today, as the world undergoes tremendous change, we face the same choice: will a bad order make a comeback, or will a good order bloom into civilization? The answer is not certain; it depends entirely on how we treat and understand Hayek—ideas that can transcend time. For every person who loves freedom, is worried about the nation, and cares about their own fate, his works are undoubtedly worth revisiting again and again. The more people come to understand Hayek, the more assurance freedom gains.