I like this article a lot. My solution (borrowed from Nassim Taleb) would be skin in the game. Any potential outcome resulting from the actions of the agent should be also affecting the agent.
Interesting: Left Anarchist, Right Libertarian, and Distributist ideals are fundamentally the same. While Right-Libertarians pay a form of lip service to the idea of hierarchical corporate capitalism, scratch them a bit and you find they long for SV startups or farmers on the American Frontier, as presented in books like The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress—family businesses or small, egalitarian workgroups like the 3 guys who founded YouTube. And Left-Anarchism and Disrtributism are pretty much the same, the difference is LA putting a mainly socially liberal sauce on it, while Distributism putting a socially reactionary medievalist-catholic sauce on it (medieval artisans loosely cooperating in guilds being their ideal).
From this angle, a lot of different people want a small-business world, apparently we can have both socially liberal and socially reactionary versions of it, we just don’t know how to deal with the Economies of Scale. But apparently if we could figure that out, it would be an economic model usable by many different people. Distributist Catholics could worship the idea of the Family (as a productive economic unit), Left-Anarchist would have their non-hiearchy, and Right-Libertarians could have people get off their lawn.
I like this article a lot. My solution (borrowed from Nassim Taleb) would be skin in the game. Any potential outcome resulting from the actions of the agent should be also affecting the agent.
Interesting: Left Anarchist, Right Libertarian, and Distributist ideals are fundamentally the same. While Right-Libertarians pay a form of lip service to the idea of hierarchical corporate capitalism, scratch them a bit and you find they long for SV startups or farmers on the American Frontier, as presented in books like The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress—family businesses or small, egalitarian workgroups like the 3 guys who founded YouTube. And Left-Anarchism and Disrtributism are pretty much the same, the difference is LA putting a mainly socially liberal sauce on it, while Distributism putting a socially reactionary medievalist-catholic sauce on it (medieval artisans loosely cooperating in guilds being their ideal).
From this angle, a lot of different people want a small-business world, apparently we can have both socially liberal and socially reactionary versions of it, we just don’t know how to deal with the Economies of Scale. But apparently if we could figure that out, it would be an economic model usable by many different people. Distributist Catholics could worship the idea of the Family (as a productive economic unit), Left-Anarchist would have their non-hiearchy, and Right-Libertarians could have people get off their lawn.