In politics people’s strength of opinion often
goes untempered by their ignorance of the topic in a way they wouldn’t dream of
in most other subjects.
“The greatest
argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average
voter.”
-unknown
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who
points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have
done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who
errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error
and shortcoming”
-Theodore Roosevelt
Political labels oversimplify and encourage
tribalism, bristlingly proud identities, attachment and conformity.
Avoid tribalistic affiliation; aim to be
neutral, floating and to decide issue-by-issue. The merit of the argument is
all that matters.
Modern society doesn’t mean majoritarianism.
“Your
representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he
betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion”
We get the politicians we deserve, sampled
from ourselves, flaws and all. (We want better? ‘Educate our masters’ –Disraeli)
Due to the subjectivity of individuals’ values
and the corresponding utility functions, when clashes of interests occur they
are settled by an equilibrium which minimises disruption from all relevant
groups, rather than from some shared universal moral objectivism.
“We won’t
understand human conduct until we grasp that societies are collections of
individuals seeking their own self interest”
-Richard Alexander,
paraphrased
“It
is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we
expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address
ourselves, not to their humanity, but to their self-love, and never talk to
them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.”
The unique shading and composition of our subjective
values
are products of the indoctrination of upbringing, past emotional experiences
and cultural environment, rendering them often inert to cognitive argument/debate.
You can’t please everyone.
Something is only worth what someone else is willing
to pay for it.
Wages and effort aren’t linear; collectivism
alters motivations, responsibility and introduces disincentives to production.
“Do you think
that the person taking care of the pigs is going to stay up all night watching
the Soviets’ sow have the Soviets’ pigs? The answer is no.”
-Earl Butz,
allegedly
“Man will become
better when you show him what he is like”
-Chekov
Balancing market forces and central government
is an optimisation problem; views should merely be based on evidence, with
government deciding which values to
maximise.
Greed can be good; it is a driving force in
innovation and increasing productivity, ultimately benefitting everyone. Productivity
is a dispassionate optimisation problem.
Communism assumes the homogeneity of values,
interests and benevolence; anyone still with hope for communism has clearly never
lived in a shared house.
“Not to be a
radical at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of
want of head.”
-Georges
Clemenceau, paraphrased
Even the poorest have never had such good quality of life
(p11). Don’t confuse relative
and absolute
poverty.
Fairness is a fictitious,
subjective and self-serving notion. If the world’s (thirdworld) poor staked a
claim to our wealth on grounds of fairness
would we concede it to them?
‘Fairness’ is an egotistical
mechanism - the politics of envy narrated through the socially acceptable lens of
a victim mentality, somewhere between entitlement, anger and jealousy.
How do we reward adults for their efforts with
money - creating inequality - without condemning some children to the
negativities of this inequality?
At what point will we ever be comfortable that
things are equal enough?
No comments:
Post a Comment