Ideas Matter

Bill Maher and Poor Mississippi Rednecks

So Bill Maher sends Alexandra Pelosi down to the poorest state in the union to interview poor people. We watch the video. What do we get in the panel commentary? Very little of substance. The once self-described "libertarian' Bill Maher would do well to invite more libertarians onto his show. Break the bubble a little. Here's what he might have gotten out of a decent panelist:

The Allure of Marxism

Why are people still drawn to Marxism? Did you know it's still hot among the professoriate? I know, I know. Thoroughly discredited. But they eat that stuff up in the ivory tower. Brad Thompson's thesis is essentially that Marx was a great sloganeer. And he was. (I'd also argue that people have inherent dispositions to socialism.) My friend Michael Strong argues quite powerfully that -- due to academia's continuing fixation with Marx -- higher ed may be the "world's leading social problem."

He writes: 

The Economic Way of Thinking and Politics Without Romance

Okay, now that you've watched this video, ask yourself: what if you apply the economic way of thinking to political action? In other words, even though we don't need politicians to get the "good orders" we see around us, we nevertheless have to live with these characters. So what do actions, interactions and consequences have to do with the results we see in the public sphere (that we're so often troubled by)?

Rules of Power Politics - Machiavelli Meets Tullock

This video is not just an outline for aspiring politicians. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita actually describes, however indirectly, the architecture of power. I can't wait to read his book. It sounds to me like what you get when you marry Machiavelli with Buchanan and Tullock (public choice theory). So what do we mean by the architecture of power?

Where Communism Still Lives

Around the world, pockets of communists still cling to power. They're either smaller regimes run by a cadre of strongmen, or they have evolved into what has come to be known as "state capitalism." In this latter form, cronyism is considered a feature not a bug. The question for me is: will these pockets of communism linger? Or will they linger for a while, but eventually evolve into another form? And is state capitalism becoming the dominant form for the globe?

Thomas Jefferson's Small is Beautiful: Decentralization or Domination?

What if counties were as powerful as states? And what if the power of the federal government were pushed down to the states? This is essentially what Founding Father Thomas Jefferson proposed. And if you have any illusions about how "radical" this founder was, consider that Jefferson believed these 'ward republics' should have the most power. Why in the world would Jefferson advocate something so crazy? Boy if we'd only taken his advice.

A Crony's Tax Code

If you think we could soon have a flat tax, you're kidding yourself. Do you know how many parasites are nestled in the byzantine recesses of the U.S. tax code? Enough to make an army. That army would swarm out of the woodwork if we ever had a serious conversation about simplifying the internal revenue code. And guess who would be leading the charge: the IRS bureaucrat-H&R Block-tax lawyer complex. Don't believe me? Witness the parasites...

Judge Napolitano: What Happened to America?

This video may strike our international readers as being rather U.S.-centric. But it's for everyone, let me assure you. In Andrew Napolitano's goodbye address, he is speaking unashamedly in favor of the principles that helped found the United States. But he is also speaking in universals. You see, what Napolitano is saying above used to be our American secular religion.

The enemies of limited government have succeeded in suggesting people like Napolitano are on the fringe, that his ideas are quaint, and those who still espouse those ideas are crude troublemakers.

Was Milton Friedman Right? What A Difference Thirty Years Makes

What a difference thirty years makes.

Before we get into the evidence, we should mention that Frances Fox Piven seems to be conflating colonialism with capitalism. If, for example, property rights institutions provide a basis for any free enterprise system, it's difficult to see how commerce could have amounted to peasants losing their farms (unless, of course, by lose she means sold). When peasants have their land taken, it's always by governments or cronies colluding with governments to undermine property rights.

But back to the question--relatively speaking (because there is no perfectly free system on earth): Do the most economically free countries tend to produce more freedom and equality?

Economies in Transition: A Question of Institutions

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, some countries have done better than others. The question of whether capitalism has succeeded or failed in these countries is the degree to which the countries have actually embraced capitalism. In other words, institutions matter. And some countries adopted better rules than others. Adding to Professor Yakovlev's analysis, let's consider some of the evidence.