Category: Political Science
*Perfecting Parliament*
The author is the highly intelligent Roger Congleton (my colleague) and the subtitle is Constitutional Reform, Liberalism, and the Rise of Western Democracy. Here is the home page summary:
This book explains why contemporary liberal democracies are based on historical templates rather than revolutionary reforms; why the transition in Europe occurred during a relatively short period in the nineteenth century; why politically and economically powerful men and women voluntarily supported such reforms; how interests, ideas, and pre-existing institutions affected the reforms adopted; and why the countries that liberalized their political systems also produced the Industrial Revolution. The analysis is organized in three parts. The first part develops new rational choice models of (1) governance, (2) the balance of authority between parliaments and kings, (3) constitutional exchange, and (4) suffrage reform. The second part provides historical overviews and detailed constitutional histories of six important countries. The third part provides additional evidence in support of the theory, summarizes the results, contrasts the approach taken in this book with that of other scholars, and discusses methodological issues.
The book's introduction is here (pdf). It is the best public choice/historical account of the rise of democracy that I know of and there is also a very interesting chapter on Japan.
Ideas Behind Their Time
We are all familiar with ideas said to be ahead of their time, Babbage’s analytical engine and da Vinci’s helicopter are classic examples. We are also familiar with ideas “of their time,” ideas that were “in the air” and thus were often simultaneously discovered such as the telephone, calculus, evolution, and color photography. What is less commented on is the third possibility, ideas that could have been discovered much earlier but which were not, ideas behind their time.
Experimental economics was an idea behind its time. Experimental economics could have been invented by Adam Smith, it could have been invented by Ricardo or Marshall or Samuelson but it wasn’t. Experimental economics didn’t takeoff until the 1960s when Vernon Smith picked it up and ran with it (Vernon was not the first experimental economist but he was early).
(Economics, and perhaps social science in general, seems behind its time compared say with political science.)
A lot of the papers in say experimental social psychology published today could have been written a thousand years ago so psychology is behind its time. More generally, random clinical trials are way behind their time. An alternative history in which Aristotle or one of his students extolled the virtue of randomization and testing does not seem impossible and yet it would have changed the world.
Technology can also be behind its time. View morphing (“bullet time”) could have been used much more frequently well before The Matrix in 1999 (you simply need multiple cameras from different angles triggered at the same time and then inserted into a film) but despite some historical precedents the innovation didn’t happen.
Ideas behind their time may be harder to discover than other ideas–“if this is so great why hasn’t it been done before”? is an attack on ideas behind their time that other innovations do not have to meet. Is this why social innovations are often behind their time?
What other ideas were behind their time? Are some types of ideas more likely to be behind their time than others? Why?
Addendum: See Jason Crawford on Why did it take so long to invent X?
Time inconsistent markets in everything
Diplomatic ties with El Salvador remain solid amid reports that the Central American nation was considering switching its recognition to Beijing, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA, Taiwan) said yesterday.
Salvadorean President Mauricio Funes was quoted by The Associated Press (AP) as saying that his government was “exploring” the possibility of establishing diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
Funes said the decision would depend on “what is best for the country,” business-wise, adding, “we’re exploring new markets,” AP reported.
Funes’ comments came as a trade fair opened in San Salvador that included representatives from more than 50 Chinese firms, AP said.
And this:
The loss of El Salvador would be extremely embarrassing to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英ä¹), who has said that the apparent truce between Taiwan and China concerning attempts to gain diplomatic allies at the other’s expense was a major accomplishment of his administration.
Foreign affairs analyst Alexander Huang (黃介æ£) of Tamkang University said in Taipei that it was very unlikely that China would risk undermining Ma’s position by poaching El Salvador, particularly ahead of the special municipality elections on Saturday.
More here, and here. The first and context-setting installment of the story was here.
David Brooks on Tolstoy
Tolstoy devoted himself to activism and spiritual improvement – and paid the mental price. After all, most historical leaders write pallid memoirs not because they are hiding the truth but because they’ve been engaged in an activity that makes it impossible for them to see it clearly. Activism is admirable, necessary and self-undermining – the more passionate, the more self-blinding.
Here is more. By the way, here is the Pope on padded pipes.
The war of politics and finance
There is talk of upping the euro bailout fund:
European Central Bank council member Axel Weber said governments can increase the size of the European Union-led bailout fund if necessary to restore confidence in the euro.
“Seven hundred and fifty billion should be enough to assure the markets,” Weber said at the German embassy in Paris late yesterday. “If not, it will have to be increased.”
The Spanish approach the same issues with another tone:
Spain has warned financial traders betting against its debt that they will lose money, in a defiant challenge to the markets which are driving Madrid’s cost of borrowing sharply higher.
José Luis RodrÃguez Zapatero, Spanish prime minister, on Friday ruled out any rescue package for the country even as the premiums demanded by investors to hold Spanish sovereign debt over that of Germany’s rose to euro-era highs.
You can find more detail at ElPais.com; most significantly it is a much bigger headline in the FT than in the Spanish paper.
In a nutshell, we’re watching the most pitched, highest-stakes, most determined battle between politics and finance which has been staged. I am expecting finance to win. It’s not just about PIGS and the future of the eurozone, it’s settling a very general question about the relative power of politics and finance. Either way, it is an event of momentous importance.
Concerns about Spain
More federalistic than you might think, indeed more like the EU than you might think:
Another concern is that the central government’s cost-cutting zeal might not be matched by regional and local authorities, which accounted for 57 percent of public spending last year.
The full story is here.
Arnold Kling on the political spectrum
Here in the United States, one thing that strikes me about my most liberal friends is how conservative their thinking is at a personal level. For their own children, and in talking about specific other people [TC: especially in the blogosphere!], they passionately stress individual responsibility. It is only when discussing public policy that they favor collectivism. The tension between their personal views and their political opinions is fascinating to observe. I would not be surprised to find that my friends' attachment to liberal politics is tenuous, and that some major event could cause a rapid, widespread shift toward a more conservative position.
Here is more. I would make the related point that, in the economics profession, academic liberals are especially likely to believe in statistical discrimination: "Does he have a Ph.d. from Harvard or MIT?" On the right, Chicago's previous reputation as an outsider school blunts this tendency, plus there have been Arizona, VPI, and other off-beat centers of market-oriented thought.
Simon Johnson analyzes the Dublin gambit
There is little doubt that Ireland, as a one-off situation, is handled easily, albeit at greater expense than anyone would like. But how does the game tree run?
…the Irish leadership has every incentive to delay until other countries can be dragged into turmoil. The crisis will become euro-zone wide, at which point all eyes will turn to some combination of the European Central Bank, the German taxpayer, and the IMF. But the ECB can’t pay and the German taxpayer won’t pay. Does the IMF have the resources to tackle Spain, let alone a bigger country like, say Italy or even France?
The U.S. could add sufficient funding to the mix — this is what it means to be a reserve currency — but the mood in Washington has shifted against bailouts.
As an alternative, Europe could place a call to Beijing to find out if China would like to commit some of its $2.6 trillion in reserves to keep European creditors whole. This would be an enormous opportunity for China to vault to a leading global role. Perhaps it was a good idea to place Min Zhu, a top Bank of China official, in a senior position at the IMF.
Sentences to ponder
Well, “Mom”, if flying is a “privilege, not a right,” it’s because over the last century we have gradually accepted the proposition that anything the government tells us it can regulate, it can regulate.
Here is much more, courtesy of The Browser. And this:
Throughout my career – both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney – I’ve observed a consistent inverse relationship: the more petty a government officer’s authority, the more that officer will feel a need to swagger and demand that you RESPECT HIS AUTHORITAH. Your average FBI agent might search your house based on a crappy perjured warrant, invade your attorney-client emails, and flush your life down the toilet by lying on the stand at your mail fraud trial. But he doesn’t feel a need to vogue and posture to prove anything in the process. He’s the FBI. But God above help you when you run into the guy with a badge from some obscure and puny government agency with a narrow fiefdom. He and his Napoleon syndrome have got something to prove. And he’s terrified that you’ll not take him very, very seriously. When I call FBI agents on behalf of my clients, they’re cool but professional and nonchalant. When I call a small agency – say, state Fish & Game, or one of the minor agency Inspector Generals – they’re hostile, belligerent, and so comically suspicious that you’d think I was asking for their permission to let my client smuggle heroin into the country in the anuses of handicapped Christian missionary orphans. They are infuriated, OUTRAGED, when a client asserts rights, when a client fails to genuflect and display unquestioning obedience. They are, in short, the TSA.
Megan says she is (partially) boycotting flying, but I am surprised by this decision. In relative terms it is the driving experience which has deteriorated, largely because of traffic congestion. Imagine what flying would be like if they were not allowed to charge you a proper price for the experience.
When it comes to airports, some high MU of money users will be better off as a result of TSA abuse; it will lower the price of flights. Personally, I'm happy to put up with the practices if it means less congestion in the airport security line.
Who wants to cut government spending?
Via Kevin Drum, here is the report:
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) was asked to be an appropriator and said thanks, but no thanks. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), a tea party favorite, turned down a shot at Appropriations, which controls all discretionary spending. So did conservatives like Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), an ambitious newcomer who will lead the influential Republican Study Committee.
….”Anybody who’s a Republican right now, come June, is going to be accused of hating seniors, hating education, hating children, hating clean air and probably hating the military and farmers, too,” said Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), a fiscal conservative who is lobbying to become chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “So much of the work is going to be appropriations related. There’s going to be a lot of tough votes. So some people may want to shy away from the committee. I understand it.”
Kingston said he’s approached Bachmann, King and Westmoreland about the committee, and they all told him they weren’t interested.
In equilibrium, is this a sign that spending cuts are likely or unlikely?
One problem with charter cities
In Haiti there are riots against the UN, for fear that the aid mission brought cholera to the country:
…clashes between rioters and troops left two dead, dozens injured, foreigners in hiding and an awful question hanging in the tear-gassed air: did the UN mission, known as Minustah, bring cholera to Haiti?
The boys and men hurling rocks and bottles and shooting at foreign soldiers in the northern towns of Cap-Haitien and Hinche had no doubt. Nor did the residents of Port-au-Prince, who greeted UN convoys with sullen stares and insults.
The circumstantial evidence, which is not considered to be definitive, is this:
There had been no cholera here in living memory. The strain appears to be from south Asia. Soldiers from Nepal, which has cholera, moved into a base beside the Artibonite river in early October. The base has sanitation problems. A week later the river was contaminated and people in the area started vomiting and getting diarrhoea.
Why Ireland fears a bailout
Ireland fears the punitive terms of a bailout as it would have to give up partial sovereignty over its finances and could be forced to raise corporation tax.
The story is here. Note that casting your financial lot with the EU is especially problematic if you don't expect the EU to be so influential five or ten years down the road. Obviously the Irish are betting against the idea of a major step toward EU fiscal union and correctly so.
Addendum: Finland weighs in.
How does the President order flowers?
I don't post much about the President, so this puzzle caught my eye:
Asked if he has a hard time ordering flowers – as the Michael Douglas character did in "The American President" – Obama said, "The truth is, actually, I get to keep my credit cards, and if I want to go to the florist, I could order some flowers and pay for it." (He did add that if he tried to order the flowers by phone, "they might not believe me.")
What could you say to prove, over the phone, that you are the President of the United States? If you assume the florist is at a working computer terminal and can access Google, you could promise to answer questions about your life, and to answer them so quickly the florist would not think you are googling to those answers. Plus you are dialing from a 202 area code and you sound like President Obama (because you are President Obama), whose voice is well-known and distinct. I would think he would have an especially easy time establishing his identity over the phone. Furthermore the audience, wondering that maybe you are the President of the United States, would fall into the deference mode, even if some residual doubt remained.
Impersonating the President of the United States might draw interest from the law, or at least an inquiry, and that would discourage potential pranksters and make your claim more credible.
Who would have a tougher time establishing a credible identity over the telephone? How about Lady Gaga? Her speaking voice is not well known, fans will know the details of her life on the web and thus pass the Google test, she does not command deference from many florists, and if you impersonate her the Secret Service won't come knocking on your door.
Somewhere in here is a lesson for evolutionary biology…
Haiti claim of the day
Court the income:
“If you can gain the support of one person in Boston, it can translate to 10 people in Haiti,” said Mark P. Jones, a professor of political science at Rice University who has studied Haiti.
Haitian candidates are spending a lot of time campaigning in the United States, even though Haitians who are U.S. citizens are ineligible to vote in the election. It is also a venue for raising money. The full story is here.
Words of wisdom
I think that where a lot of progressive political junkies go wrong is that they think “blame Republicans for failing to pass plan to fix the economy” is a close substitute for “fix the economy.” In reality, the evidence that fixing the economy would help Democrats politically is overwhelming, while the evidence that the plan/block/blame strategy would work is non-existent. People like me and Atrios would feel better about President Obama and his team if they made public statements that indicated that he roughly agrees with our take on what ideally should be done, but people like me and Atrios are neither swing voters nor marginally attached voters. Our emotional state has very little political relevance.
What’s more, there’s unfortunately a real tension here. The things you would do to outline a bold progressive approach to fixing the economy are very different from the things you would do to try to get the GOP votes you need to pass economy-fixing legislation. In particular, the reaction red state (or district) Democratic members of congress to those things would be very different. The fact of the matter is that the mistakes of 2009 in terms of the stimulus and the Fed can’t be easily undone.
That is from Matt Yglesias.