Callahan and Murphy

By -
The Irish Mafia take over the book review section of The Freeman.

Comments

  1. TokyoTom9:50 AM

    Gene, I'm obviously in the intellectual hinterlands, so I thank you for bringing Clark's book to my attention. I had not realized that the next big book to Guns, Germs and Steel was finally here.

    I see Clark links directly to a bunch of reviews at his home page -
    www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark - including Jason Kuznicki's review at Cato Journal, which I think articulates a number of important mistakes.

    While I can't critize the book myself without reading it, I would say that it seems to me that what produced the Industrial Revolution was continual scientific progress and intellectual enlightenment, which was driven in part by long-term competition and fuelled by trade (and leaked knowledge) between relatively close European societies. Sure there was gradual cultural evolution, but I certainly don't accept that "breeding" in a genetic sense has anything to do with the IR starting in Europe while still foundering in various backwaters.

    Culture and institutions make all the difference, as we can see in Japan and the difference between North and South Korea, and with the success of Chinese merchant communities around the world.

    Where societies are still struggling is clear not generally the result of any type of "breeding" flaw, but the result of kleptocratic governance by a few at the expense of others - frequently of a different tribe, in societies that have long agrarian cultures. Western imperialism and colonization is in some regions at least, responsible for the collapse of sophisticated societies (including their property rights mechanisms), and the introduction of Western technology and market demands has much contributed to the further breakdown of traditional/community property and to an ongoing tragedy of the commons.

    While we are starting to see progress in many nations, if we want to see less poverty (and destruction of resources), then we need the developed nations to cooperate in ending kleptocracy and clarifying/defending property.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John T. Kennedy9:43 PM

    From Bob's piece:

    For example, one reason that lunch prices are lower than dinner prices is that diners linger over their meals longer at night, tying up the valuable table.

    Why are dinner prices higher for chinese take-out?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In ancapistan, if you have no property, you have no rights

By -
Ancaps often declare, "All rights are property rights." I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of running into libertarians online who insisted that libertarianism supports "the freedom of movement," and realized that this principle actually entails that people without property have no rights at all, let alone any right to "freedom of movement." Of course, immediately, any ancap readers still left here are going to say, "Wait a second! Everyone owns his own body! And so everyone at least has the right to not have his body interfered with." Well, that is true... except that in ancapistan, one has no right to any place to put that body, except if one owns property, or has the permission of at least one property owner to place that body on her land. So, if one is landless and penniless, one had sure better hope that there are kindly disposed property owners aligned in a corridor from wherever one happens to be to wherever the...
Read more

St. Paul and I Agree...

By -
Taxation is not theft: "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." -- Romans 13 The key idea implicit here, and the one that turned me on the subject of whether or not taxation is theft, is that "every soul" owes obedience to the "governing authorities." Now, if that is a debt I truly owe , then, when those authorities levy the taxes they need to do the job of governing, I owe them those taxes, and attempts to collect them certainly do not constitute acts of theft. And obviously it doesn't matter at all, from this point of view, whether or not I "signed" any sort of "social contract." (In fact, the history of political thought since the Reformation can be read as an attempt to find a secular rep...
Read more

Libertarianism and Violence, II

By -
I decided to move some discussion from this post up to the top level here. Specifically, Watoosh wrote: "Well, if violence is defined as initiation of force (which, of course, presupposes certain property rights), then I think Rockwell is correct..." Well, if we define cats as elephants, then many people keep elephants in their house. More seriously, firstly, violence is not usually defined that way. It's defined as, you know, violence, so that, say, someone may respond violently or non-violently to someone who aggresses against them. Otherwise, it would make no sense to say, for instance, "He punched me, but I did not stoop to violence in response." And, secondly, the libertarian usage of "initiation of force" is very offbeat. If I wander onto someone's meadow, most people would not say I had "initiated force" -- I mean, sure, I used "force" against the earth to push off walking, but that's not force directed against...
Read more