ABSTRACT
Against much received wisdom, Roy Hatters1ey has argued not on1y that freedom and equa1ity are compatible but that the one is a route towards the other: that a more equa1 society would increase the sum total of freedom enjoyed by its citizens. He attacks the moral basis for inequality by quoting Hayek's own remark that 'inevitably some unworthy will succeed and some persons of worth fail' and by rejecting the argument of 'trickle-down economics' that the (possibly) unworthy rich perform some useful service for the (possibly) worthy poor. Like libertarians on the right he argues that the state should refrain from doing evil, but as a socia1ist he argues that it also has a duty to do some good - that it is the duty of the state to enab1e its citizens to take fuller advantage of their civil liberties. For Roy Hatters1ey, freedom of movement implies the price of a ticket as weIl as possession of a passport.
