Brad DeLong argues that Scott's Seeing Like A State (crudely summarized, a critique of high modernist social engineering) is really in the tradition of Hayek and should be honest about it, instead of casting aspersions on free markets. Henry from Crooked Timber draws out the differences:
[Scott] is much more interested than [the Austrians] are in the actual political processes through which markets come into being ... markets – even and perhaps especially Hayekian markets – don’t exist in an institutional vacuum – and the institutions on which they rely are going to shape the extent to which they succeed or fail in making use of local knowledge.So: what goes on behind the curtain that keeps the show running? And what eggs were broken to make this omelet?
Comment 
