Hayek grounded negative rights in utilitarian market efficiency, not natural law.

Evidence

Hayek defended the language of individual rights, but only insofar as ­those rights ­were negative: the freedom to move one’s ­labor and capital where one saw fit. The rationale was based less on natu­ral law than on utilitarianism: individual choices guided by competition would solve the riddle of the complexity of the market and ensure the best pos­si­ble division of ­labor and allocation of resources. — Quinn Slobodian, Globalists, 411

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines Hayek’s conceptually distinct basis for rights: utilitarian rather than natural-law, which marks a key difference from earlier liberal framings.
• XREF: connects to: Hayek justified private property as instrumental, not as a natural right. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 174; Hayek justified markets by dispersed knowledge, not happiness maximization — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 2195; Hayek rejected utility maximization in favor of knowledge dispersion as the market’s justification — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 1926 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Hayek justified private property as instrumental, not as a natural right. #corroborates (0.92) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 174
• Hayek justified markets by dispersed knowledge, not happiness maximization #qualifies (0.75) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 2195
• Hayek rejected utility maximization in favor of knowledge dispersion as the market’s justification #expands (0.72) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 1926
• The economic order is a human creation and therefore changeable, not natural law #contradicts (0.70) — Clara E. Mattei, Escape from Capitalism, 41