Hayek, in contrast, set himself against Mill’s belief that, until people were capable of being guided by conviction or persuasion, ‘there is nothing for them but implicit obedience to an Akbar or Charlemagne, if they are so fortunate to find one’. In Hayek’s view, the assumption that people must be morally autonomous before they can be free reversed the order of priority between morality and freedom; only in a free society could people act on their own moral convictions, he argued. … What they objected to most in social democratic colonialism was not the colonialism but the social democracy. Mill was responsible for the idea of social justice, Hayek argued, and and his influence had consequently 'done a great deal of harm, In Mises's estimation, Mill was 'the great advocate of socialism' in comparison with whom 'all other socialist writers - even Marx, Engels, and Lassalle - are scarcely of any importance.'

Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, loc. 246