We all know politics is the mind-killer, but it sometimes comes upanyway. Eliezer maintains that it is best to start with examples from other perspectives, but alas there is one example of current day politics which I do not know how to reframe: the health care debate.
As far as I can tell, almost every provision in the bill is popular, but the bill is not. This seems to be primarily because Republicans keep lying about it (I couldn’t find a good link but there was a clip on the daily show of Obama saying “I can’t find a reputable economist who agrees with what you’re saying”(sic)).
When I see this, my mind stops. I think “people who disagree with my are lying scumbags or having the wool pulled over their eyes.” Of course, this is probably not true.
Robin Hanson seems to think that it’s good that the health care bill is not being passed, and I usually respect what he thinks a lot more than to accuse him of saying “my side wins!”
So I started to wonder, what am I missing?
The first explanation that came to my mind is not very good. I often think of libertarianism as starting from the idea of “don’t patronize me.” Phrased a little more maturely, it becomes “don’t stop me from making deals I want to make.”
So assuming that most people want to force everyone to make a deal, how does this get resolved?
a) living in a democracy, the majority (of voters!) force their will on the minority—the majority patronizes and the government patronizes.
b) politicians vie for their personal interests without regard to majority—the politicians patronize the people.
c) something I haven’t thought of (legacy for comments)
d) opposition should block bills any way they can, even by exploiting poorly designed institutions—opposition should patronize the majority.
None of these seems reasonable or likely to me, but this is where my mind stops, and I don’t want it to stop there.
EDIT: politics killed my mind halfway through the first draft.
We all know politics is the mind-killer, but it sometimes comes up anyway. Eliezer maintains that it is best to start with examples from other perspectives, but alas there is one example of current day politics which I do not know how to reframe: the health care debate.
As far as I can tell, almost every provision in the bill is popular, but the bill is not. This seems to be primarily because Republicans keep lying about it (I couldn’t find a good link but there was a clip on the daily show of Obama saying “I can’t find a reputable economist who agrees with what you’re saying”(sic)).
When I see this, my mind stops. I think “people who disagree with my are lying scumbags or having the wool pulled over their eyes.” Of course, this is probably not true.
Robin Hanson seems to think that it’s good that the health care bill is not being passed, and I usually respect what he thinks a lot more than to accuse him of saying “my side wins!”
So I started to wonder, what am I missing?
The first explanation that came to my mind is not very good. I often think of libertarianism as starting from the idea of “don’t patronize me.” Phrased a little more maturely, it becomes “don’t stop me from making deals I want to make.” So assuming that most people want to force everyone to make a deal, how does this get resolved?
a) living in a democracy, the majority (of voters!) force their will on the minority—the majority patronizes and the government patronizes. b) politicians vie for their personal interests without regard to majority—the politicians patronize the people. c) something I haven’t thought of (legacy for comments) d) opposition should block bills any way they can, even by exploiting poorly designed institutions—opposition should patronize the majority.
None of these seems reasonable or likely to me, but this is where my mind stops, and I don’t want it to stop there.
EDIT: politics killed my mind halfway through the first draft.
c)