I haven't read the linked article yet, but I'll add DeLong on Buchanan
You have to be able to hold in your mind two things at once in order to understand economist James M. Buchanan:
(1) He was a total loon: ...
(2) [He was] a man who saw things that other economists did not and would not have without him: . . .
If I ever write a campus satire, it will definitely include a Professor G. Warren Nutter.
I was exposed to Public Choice Theory in law school, and it put my back all the way up. It's an argument that collective action through governmental means is inherently corrupt and counterproductive, based on very little to no empirical data. I didn't successfully push back very hard at the time, but it bothered the hell out of me.
"But did God use the right math" seems like the kind of question you can't ask if you hold the Nicene Creed.
True that. "I believe in 1, which is equal to 3." It's right in there.
I hate public choice theory, but apparently that "Democracy in Chains" book is in fact largely made up and highly misleading. Someone else can find the links, since I don't comment here anymore.
Halfordismo has similar problems.
I lied. I couldn't resist a link. Here's the review I read.
1: Economist vouches for total loon isn't that difficult to contemplate.
Parkinson's writing is entertaining and thought-provoking. Another book about systems, including social ones, that I like a lot is John Gall's Systemantics
Most of the criticisms and style of critical analysis that I like are criticisms of bureaucracy rather than government per se.
Government bureaucracies have different, often weaker limitations on their growth than do others. The other main way that governments differ from commercial bureaucracies IMO is that companies put some effort into making the most frequent interactions pretty easy. The maze becomes apparent when a good outcome is some nonstandardized action.
The US is not that serious about this, GSA and OPM notwithstanding. Highly baroque bureaucracy accessible in English exists in the EU
9 is really good, thanks. I found the Boston Review piece I linked in the OP hysterical in tone, but thought that the linked details were pretty interesting; they were definitely new to me. Maybe I should poke around and see what Buchanan actually wrote about the parable though.
As the review in 9 mentions, being able to identify weaknesses in government behavior, especially systematic ones, is a good thing overall.
I was going to find the links for 9 after making my first comment but took a nap instead. I'm objectively less moral than Halford.
Since the right people seem to be in this thread, what about William Riker's "heresthetics"? Is that crackpot in the end? I couldn't tell if his elaborate walkthroughs held water, but I haven't had the book in a while.
The Star Trek guy or they guy they made me read in graduate school?
14. First time I have heard of him. This makes him sound interesting as an American historian. But extrapolating general ideas from only 19th century US politics seems off-base.
Is that crackpot in the end?
There's a crackpot at the end of this book! Oh I am so scared. Please do not turn the page.
I had strong (negative) feelings on this theory in grad school. Now I just avoid everyone who advocates for it.
I have in my possession a long-unread copy of Liberalism Against Populism.
9 is not the half of it. Many here will be predisposed to think reviews by libertarians an unpalatable exercise in motivated reasoning. I share that worry. But after reading several, and the full sources from which NM quotes, I have been convinced that she has done a remarkably shoddy job, and in several cases twisted Buchanan's words to mean the opposite of what he intended. It is possible that some of her criticisms are correct, but I have lost faith that any particular quotation in that book is handled honestly and not tendentiously.
Expanded version of the link in 9.
Rational choice theory, as developed by the political science department at Rochester, and public choice theory are not the same thing. Lately, I have been trying to reread Shapiro and Green's Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory.
The other main way that governments differ from commercial bureaucracies IMO is that companies put some effort into making the most frequent interactions pretty easy. The maze becomes apparent when a good outcome is some nonstandardized action.
Filed a health care insurance claim lately?
I hate Buchanan and everyone who invokes him enough that I'm just going to assume I never heard of this book, rather than find out what's wrong with it.
17 made me so happy that it inspired me to post here, which I have not done in years, not that I imagine anyone would remember anyway. Bravo!
Oh my god, this information very nice !!
I merely wanted to provide you with a quick heads up!
Situs QQ 2018
Hope your new posts will bring more exciting for viewers.