Hayek attacked rights language only when tied to centralized economic planning.

Evidence

His target was specifically the expansive “Declaration of Rights” published by the author and public intellectual H. G. Wells in 1939, a list of eleven articles including the right to education, food, health care, and employment. Hayek did not object so much to the material provisions. His own proposal included ele­ments of a basic social safety net and even countercyclical state spending. As libertarians ­later lamented, The Road to Serfdom called for “the security of a minimum income” and “a comprehensive system of social insurance.” What galled Hayek was Wells’s combination of the language of rights with a program of centralized economic decision making. For Hayek, rights talk could not work alongside state direction of production and ­labor. — Quinn Slobodian, Globalists, 410

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the specific target of Hayek’s skepticism in Road to Serfdom: not material welfare provisions, but rights language combined with central planning.
• XREF: Connects to the broader historiography distinguishing classical liberalism from neoliberalism that Slobodian develops across the book. — connects to: Hayek rejected social and economic rights as incoherent and unenforceable — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 145; Hayek framed social rights demands as atavistic tribal regressions threatening civilization — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 30

Broader Connections

• Hayek rejected social and economic rights as incoherent and unenforceable #corroborates (0.85) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 145
• Hayek framed social rights demands as atavistic tribal regressions threatening civilization #contradicts (0.80) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 30