Politics: July 2010 Archives
The Law of CONCENTRATED BENEFIT over DIFFUSE INJURY
Examples of this phenomenon in the realm of pollution, how to fight against the "iron law," and the connection to the Founders' insistence on limited government:
"A necessary requirement is that most people recognize the nature of the universal law which favors injustice over justice -- even in peaceful democracies. Since this type of education so rarely comes "from the top," either grassroots activists will do it, or it will not occur. The ground for inventing good and effective strategies will be much more fertile when everyone is so aware of the axiom that it enters the folklore ... when just the two words, 'Concentrated Benefit,' can communicate the ages-old dilemma and the dynamics of it.
"Successful solutions to the dilemma are far more likely to come from the grassroots than from prominent intellectuals who so often depend today, directly and indirectly, on approval from one special interest or another. We note that the 'founding fathers' of the United States were less beholden to special interests than today's professional intellectuals. The founding fathers actually addressed the law of Concentrated Benefit.... In the text of the Constitution, its authors tried to limit the areas of government activity -- limits which (if they had been honored) would have greatly reduced opportunities for narrow interests to 'persuade' elected officials to operate on behalf of the narrow interests."
Down With Big Business - WSJ.com
Robert L. Bartley in a 1979 Wall Street Journal op-ed (via @TPCarney on Twitter): "These insights are gradually helping us to understand why the very biggest businesses are such unreliable allies in the fight to preserve a free enterprise economy."
For the GOP, Insiders Finish Last | Wilson Research Strategies Political Insider Journal
Revolt against corporate welfare? "Many, like Sen. Graham, chalk up the strength of the Tea Party to the anger-fueled 'throw the bums out' mentality that is gripping the GOP electorate in the wake of the Obama administration's liberal policy initiatives. While that dynamic certainly plays a major role, it does not account for the fact that insiders aren't the only candidates being defeated en masse by Tea Partiers. Businessmen candidates, whom many analysts predicted would be strong in 2010 due to the troubled economy, are also falling short when faced with conservative activist opponents."
Jacob Sullum is pleased that five Supreme Court justices upheld the individual right to keep and bear arms but worries that four justices believe that democracy should be able to override individual rights:
"In their dissenting opinions, Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer (joined by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor) worry that overturning gun control laws undermines democracy. If 'the people' want to ban handguns, they say, 'the people' should be allowed to implement that desire through their elected representatives.
"What if the people want to ban books that offend them, establish an official church, or authorize police to conduct warrantless searches at will? Those options are also foreclosed by constitutional provisions that apply to the states by way of the 14th Amendment. The crucial difference between a pure democracy and a constitutional democracy like ours is that sometimes the majority does not decide."
