Ideas Matter

Think Tanks, Video and Experimentation

State Policy Network has just come out with their second in a video series on the Constitution and its erosion. The production values in this piece are pretty darn good. Indeed, this piece is much better than most of what think tanks turn out. If I had any critique, it would be that the talking heads disrupt the flow of a pretty good narrative. In any case, the view count of this piece suggests it's not getting the eyeballs it deserves. 

FAIL: Government as Externality

You mean vote-seeking politicians rarely "internalize externalities"? This is a shocking claim. I mean, I would have thought politicians were all paladins marching on white horseback to save us from greedy polluters and profiteers.

I guess we have to ask: what does it mean if the world is composed of greedy polluters and profiteers?

No Cronies 2: Meme Picking up Steam

Finally. Public choice economics makes it into the public consciousness. Of course, it took a couple of major scandals and a major recession to find a suitable name -- a name that was always there: crony capitalism. Readers of this blog may be a little weary of the theme. "I get it, I get it," you may be thinking.

But perhaps you or your neighbors don't appreciate the full extent of the problem or the nature of the beast. If that is the case, I hope you'll peruse these great resource for understanding these issues in greater depth. For this is a systemic problem -- one that is eating our Republic like a cancer.

Two Movements: The Tea Party vs. Occupy Wall Street (A Third?)

I'm suspicious of dichotomies. This video is purportedly taken from Richard Epstein's new book. And while I, of course, agree with the basic tenets of classical liberalism I have to ask: is classical liberalism really one pole and progressivism the other pole? It might seem that way to some, but the assertion that classical liberalism represents a pole seems somewhat dubious. I am also a little suspicious of the idea that there is no middle ground between conservatism and modern liberalism. Because I'd argue that classical liberalism is the middle ground. Let me explain.

Walter Williams and James Buchanan: "A Nation of Thieves"

Have we become a nation of thieves? If it's legal to steal, why not? Frederic Bastiat in his great pamphlet, The Law (pdf), warned against the state's legitimating theft, which he called "legal plunder." In this conversation between Nobel laureate James Buchanan and Professor Walter Williams taken at George Mason University, the two assume we've reached that stage in our Republic. State transfers among interest groups are widespread. The system of legal plunder is firmly in place.

Buchanan and Williams want to know how you change the incentives of the existing system -- that is, how do you curb political incentives to execute transfers (legal plunder) and get politicians to do more things in the "public interest" than based on their narrow desire to get re-elected?

The End of Due Process? (WTF edition)

I can't believe what I'm seeing. Do I understand correctly that the United States Senate just voted to scrap due process? It's one thing to erode the Constitution slowly over time. It's quite another simply to vote it away as if it never existed at all. I feel like I'm living in a dystopian dream from which I cannot awaken.

The U.S. is not a Democracy

The U.S. is not a democracy? Not exactly. It's a constitutional republic. 

American Founder James Madison thought that direct democracy in ancient Greece was unstable. He said: 

Are Rights Natural?

Are philosophical debates among academic libertarians a waste of time? Perhaps. But I'm going to waste some time today because I'm torn on the question of natural rights.

First, I realize that natural rights are a useful construct -- a banner to raise -- under which libery-lovers can unite. Second, I realize that to deny natural rights, one who claims to be a classical liberal risks getting kicked out of the club. But is Aeon Skoble arguing in a circle here?

I think he is. It looks like he's attempting to prove the existence of natural rights by offering a definition of natural rights, though without proof. 

There are other problems with Skoble's rights talk:

• The "essence" of classical liberalism is not natural rights. I would submit that David Hume, Adam Smith, Thomas Hobbes and John Stuart Mill could be construed as either consequentialists or contractarians about rights. Are they not also classical liberals who embodied the classical liberal tradition?
• Skoble, perhaps fairly, fails to address the metaethical question about the existence of rights. He talks about the existence spleens, which opens the door to questions about the existence of rights (ontological questions).
• Societies and economies change through two forces: power and persuasion. Even if rights existed and we could worship them, we'd need the worshippers to act as change agents. So commitment to rights only gives one a persuasive edge if others believe in them. (In other words, what if someone doesn't? Is he going to hell?)
• Skoble's commitments seem somewhat at odds with this video.
• At best, rights talk is a means of evangelism -- sort of like commitment to the existence of God (and this gives them a pragmatic quality, I realize).

Are we better off being honest with ourselves that rights are a social construction like currency, contracts and counties? I don't know. It does lack a certain luster to put forth rights as something other than inborn essences -- like agreements. But as a trained philosopher, myself, I find it difficult to commit to the natural existence of something that is a mere contrivance.

Codifying and enforcing rights brings about social order. Societies that build in a rule of non-harm tend to flourish more than those who justify predatory policies. Equality before the law offers people the dignity and respect we're all looking for. And individual rights are a good thing. Most of human history is an ugly tale of what life is like without them. So rights are good. They exist in some limited sense. But they are not natural and they are nothing like spleens or magical essences.

 

The State is Force

The state is force. That's a better title for this video, in my view. People sometimes get locked in dualities like capitalism versus socialism. But as Friedman suggests, fascism -- crony capitalism by whatever degree -- is always waiting in the wings. We should start to think of any question about the role of government as a question about the extent to which we are prepared to accept the use of force against us. And we should be prepared for a world in which powerful special interests are able to bid for state power as long as it works in their favor. It's the winners and losers state.

Paul Romer and the Power of an Idea

If you're a faithful reader, you'll be familiar with our discussion of Paul Romer's charter cities -- as well as Romer's TED talk, which boils the idea down to its essence. Otherwise, check out the video above... Okay, good. So if you've watched the video or read our blog for a while, you've heard about the idea of charter cities by now. But is it going to happen?