I love your reframing “We should prefer a government that does the things that no one else can do better.”
I’m heartily sick of these ‘run a country like a business’ arguments which are just a flimsy cover for greed and ‘might is right’. With Trump and the Techno Billionaires, they’ve even abandoned that tissue-thin defence.
We’ve seen in the UK what the limitations of capitalism and markets when it comes to operating the state. They just end up stealing the assets and gouging the citizens, who are essentially a captive market.
You describe the meaning of "shareholder", but shouldn't the goal of the State be also to enable its "citizens" to live well? Shareholders sell shares (and citizens leave the State) when things don't work out for them.
I think the parallel between Country and Corporation is much stronger than what you articulate here.
- "shouldn't the goal of the State be also to enable its "citizens" to live well?" - yes - and that's what I'm talking about later on when I refer to "more than bare life".
- "Shareholders sell shares and citizens leave the State" - But these are not really similar things (unless you have a wardrobe of fake passports - and if you do, best not admit it on Substack). I can buy and sell shares with the push of a button. Moving country is a much bigger pain in the ass. $130 trillion of equities were traded globally in 2023 vs $115 trillion of global market cap. In contrast, 184m people live outside their country of nationality. Which sounds a lot until you realise that is about 2% of the global population. Capital is far more mobile than people.
"How I found freedom in an unfree world" by Harry Browne is The book.
Capital moves faster than people, of course, but that's not really the point. The fact that there are artificial constraints in having people move across states is exactly the reason why States can afford (barely, most of them) to do a lousy job while still surviving.
"artificial constraints in having people move across states" - That is an interesting comment in the current climate. It seems that the last time migration was this unpopular was 100 years ago. And I'm not really sure how "artificial" those constraints are. If all national migration laws were abolished tomorrow, I suspect that 90% of the world's population would still stay put.
Just scanning the book, it seems to be a mix of Robert Nozick and Tony Robbins. It also seems that the most authoritarian state he lived in was Tennessee so his experience of "unfreedom" may be a bit limited. As you have gathered, I am not a libertarian.
Funny enough, "Anarchy, State and Utopia" was written one year later than "How I found freedom in an unfree world"!
Only two points: do you really believe that just 800m people would migrate if all migration laws were abolished tomorrow?!? Like.... Really?!?
And how are those constraints not artificial? Last time I study physics at uni (admittedly, it was circa 2000 and I don't have a good memory) I could not find the Law of Forbidden Migration in any of those books.
(Forget Libertarianism, the new frontier is Anarco-Capitalism 😆)
"16% of adults worldwide -- which projects to over 900 million people -- said they would like to leave their own country permanently, if they could"
So migrating is hard. You have to give up all your local family and communal networks and most of your financial assets are probably physically in your home country and you probably have to learn a new language. It took me a good 5 years to find my feet after I arrived in Australia - and that had no (major) language differences to the UK that I came from. "Character-building" tho.
Altho props to America, she has done a great job of making herself a less desirable location for migrants over the last 13 years.
When I heard of Anarcho-Capitalism, I thought the name sounded really cool. Then I read some ACs and realized they were dickheads.
Nice Matt. So important to articulate the context of today's events. The category error is rife, and I've generally suspected not an error at all, but on purpose. Your last wondering about greed is the truth I suspect. They just want to seize the assets of the state, without delivering its purposes, instead delivering their own. And I'm looking at Musk and his lackeys here. A, mostly, bllodless coup we are in
I don't want to tar all libertarians with the same brush - as I think they can offer some cogent defenses of the need to individual space. But I am out of patience with the techbros.
I love your reframing “We should prefer a government that does the things that no one else can do better.”
I’m heartily sick of these ‘run a country like a business’ arguments which are just a flimsy cover for greed and ‘might is right’. With Trump and the Techno Billionaires, they’ve even abandoned that tissue-thin defence.
We’ve seen in the UK what the limitations of capitalism and markets when it comes to operating the state. They just end up stealing the assets and gouging the citizens, who are essentially a captive market.
You describe the meaning of "shareholder", but shouldn't the goal of the State be also to enable its "citizens" to live well? Shareholders sell shares (and citizens leave the State) when things don't work out for them.
I think the parallel between Country and Corporation is much stronger than what you articulate here.
There's a lot to unpick here TMC:
- "shouldn't the goal of the State be also to enable its "citizens" to live well?" - yes - and that's what I'm talking about later on when I refer to "more than bare life".
- The classic book that talks about what people can do when organizations fail to work for them is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit,_Voice,_and_Loyalty
- "Shareholders sell shares and citizens leave the State" - But these are not really similar things (unless you have a wardrobe of fake passports - and if you do, best not admit it on Substack). I can buy and sell shares with the push of a button. Moving country is a much bigger pain in the ass. $130 trillion of equities were traded globally in 2023 vs $115 trillion of global market cap. In contrast, 184m people live outside their country of nationality. Which sounds a lot until you realise that is about 2% of the global population. Capital is far more mobile than people.
- If you want a spicy take on how states do resemble corporations then I would recommend Elizabeth Anderson's Lecture on "Private Government": https://moralpsych.weebly.com/uploads/1/8/2/7/18272031/anderson_elizabeth-private_government__how_employers_rule_our_lives__and_why_we_don%E2%80%99t_talk_about_it_-princeton_university_press__2017_.pdf
"How I found freedom in an unfree world" by Harry Browne is The book.
Capital moves faster than people, of course, but that's not really the point. The fact that there are artificial constraints in having people move across states is exactly the reason why States can afford (barely, most of them) to do a lousy job while still surviving.
"artificial constraints in having people move across states" - That is an interesting comment in the current climate. It seems that the last time migration was this unpopular was 100 years ago. And I'm not really sure how "artificial" those constraints are. If all national migration laws were abolished tomorrow, I suspect that 90% of the world's population would still stay put.
Just scanning the book, it seems to be a mix of Robert Nozick and Tony Robbins. It also seems that the most authoritarian state he lived in was Tennessee so his experience of "unfreedom" may be a bit limited. As you have gathered, I am not a libertarian.
Funny enough, "Anarchy, State and Utopia" was written one year later than "How I found freedom in an unfree world"!
Only two points: do you really believe that just 800m people would migrate if all migration laws were abolished tomorrow?!? Like.... Really?!?
And how are those constraints not artificial? Last time I study physics at uni (admittedly, it was circa 2000 and I don't have a good memory) I could not find the Law of Forbidden Migration in any of those books.
(Forget Libertarianism, the new frontier is Anarco-Capitalism 😆)
Well, lets have a look at some data shall we?
https://news.gallup.com/poll/652748/desire-migrate-remains-record-high.aspx
"16% of adults worldwide -- which projects to over 900 million people -- said they would like to leave their own country permanently, if they could"
So migrating is hard. You have to give up all your local family and communal networks and most of your financial assets are probably physically in your home country and you probably have to learn a new language. It took me a good 5 years to find my feet after I arrived in Australia - and that had no (major) language differences to the UK that I came from. "Character-building" tho.
Altho props to America, she has done a great job of making herself a less desirable location for migrants over the last 13 years.
When I heard of Anarcho-Capitalism, I thought the name sounded really cool. Then I read some ACs and realized they were dickheads.
Government is about order and chaos… Sir Humphrey Appleby - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIYfiRyPi3o
Nice Matt. So important to articulate the context of today's events. The category error is rife, and I've generally suspected not an error at all, but on purpose. Your last wondering about greed is the truth I suspect. They just want to seize the assets of the state, without delivering its purposes, instead delivering their own. And I'm looking at Musk and his lackeys here. A, mostly, bllodless coup we are in
I don't want to tar all libertarians with the same brush - as I think they can offer some cogent defenses of the need to individual space. But I am out of patience with the techbros.