1
Re-imagining Democracy
MMolvray
2010
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 2
(CC) 2010 MMolvray Licensed under Creative Commons 3, BY-NC-ND: May be freely copied a) if author is cited and link is included (MMolvray, http://molvray.com/govforum) b) if use is non-commercial, and c) if content is copied without modification. (ND stands for “no derivatives.”) All other use, please contact MMolvray [1]. For the most recent versions, and information about downloads and other formats, please visit the home web site [2] for Re-imagining Democracy. ISBN: 978-0-9829518-9-7 (.prc) and 978-0-9829518-5-9 (.epub)
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 3
Table of Contents
(Link URLs are listed at the end of the work in the order in which they appear.) Control Government 2: Oversight Oversight Rights Regulation Defining Terms Public Works Missing Rights Privacy Money and Work Right to Live The Nature of Money Rights in Conflict Capital Free speech vs. noise Finance Summary Scale of Business Corporations as Bodies Environment Advertising Defining the Problem Prices and Incomes Facts (Not Decisions) Pricing of Basics Costs and Choices Labor Decisions (Not Facts) Problems and Penalties Care Costs of Transition Medical Care Retirement Sex and Children Disability Relationships Child Care Parents Care of Infants Children Care Facilities Anti-Poverty Measures Government 1: War and Politics Medical Research Introduction Force Education Between Groups Social Implications Against Criminals Teaching and Learning Decision-making Formal Schooling Voting Advanced Education and Research Minority Protections Diffuse Learning Officeholders Precognitive Decisions Creativity Laws Administration and Taxes Afterword
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 4
Control
Government is about control: who gets it, how always more people getting the bad end of the much they get, and what they can do with it. The deal, so majority rule ought to be enough to put labels vary — totalitarian, democratic, commu- an end to inequity for all time. Except it doesn’t. nist, monarchist, anarchist — but in practice it After just a few years, one morning it turns out comes down to power. The labels only tell us that the rich have gotten richer, civil liberties how to think about it. have been quietly legislated away, and massive But how we think about it can also be impor- global problems with obvious solutions stay un- tant, for either good or ill. solved no matter what the majority wants. Theories of government and the pull of power There are often legislative loopholes that facili- are two unrelated forces at work, like thought tate the process, but the real problem is more ba- and gravity. Gravity, by itself, is boring. It doesn’t sic than that. We’re fighting human nature. Until result in anything particularly interesting and we recognize that and compensate appropriately, dealing with it is a lot of work. Thought, by itself, I don’t think we can escape the cycle of increas- also doesn’t get anywhere. Worse, when applied, ing inequality and subsequent nasty corrections. theories can be deadly. A theory about how to fly Consider a basic premise of democracies. Safe- that ignores gravity will have regrettable results. guarding freedom and our rights takes vigilance. Unsatisfactory governments based on untenable We have to inform ourselves about the issues. theories have killed millions of people. But when The system depends on an informed electorate. the two work together, when thought invents air- That has not been working out well for us. planes and space craft, then whole new worlds One can point to deficiencies in education and can open up and everyone can benefit. the media, but I think even if they were perfect, I’d like to discuss and, if I can, contribute to we’d still have the problem. Less of it, perhaps, two things in this work. The first is the impor- but always enough to lead to the inevitable con- tance of limiting the control people exercise over sequences. The reason is that people have wed- each other, consistent with the same desirable dings and funerals and jobs to attend to. They situation for everyone else. The second is the im- have neither the time nor the interest to stay cur- plementation of rights. The rights themselves are rent on the minutiae of government. And it is in well articulated by now, but we seem to keep for- the minutiae that the trouble starts. How many getting how to apply them every time a new situ- voters will notice changes in liability law that ation comes up. make vaccine development too risky? When an My focus is more or less on how to ensure sus- epidemic is sweeping the land it’s too late for a tainable equity and liberty. That implies a degree do-over. How many will notice that a lethally bor- of both are there to be sustained, or at least that ing redistricting law is being passed? How many the evolution required doesn’t involve a change will realize it disenfranchises some voters? How into an unrelated organism. So, even though this many will care, if it’s not their vote? is a work about rights, it’s not about how to ac- Take an easy example. In the US, five states quire them. It’s only about what’s needed not to (South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont, lose them. I don’t have a new or improved way to and Wyoming) with just over three million people change bad governments into good ones. I wish I have the same Senate voting power as the five did. states (California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illi- nois) with 110 million. (2007 numbers) The Senate - + - can effectively derail legislation. So a Californian has less than 3% of the political clout of a South Dakotan. Three percent. Placing consistent limits on people’s ability to (That disenfranchisement has been accom- take resources and control is much harder than plished without protecting minority rights. Mi- logic suggests it ought to be. After all, there are nority rights do need protection when the majori-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 5 ty rules, and that was once the intent of the which means that there’s strong resistance to skewed representation of one particular group, stopping them. The resistance comes not only but in our case one third of the population has from the few who’d lose by being stopped, but al- lost much of its voice while minorities still have so from the many who wouldn’t. That may seem no protection.) counterintuitive, but remember that the situation Giving some people three percent representa- is going to be a challenge to a social superior tion compared to others is so anti-democratic it’s over something minor. That doesn’t feel like a no- not even funny, and yet nobody can find a practi- ble defense of freedom. It feels like making a fuss cal solution within the current system. That’s be- over nothing. It feels like a waste of time and an cause there is none at this point. It would involve embarrassment. So even at those early, small dozens of politicians casting votes to throw stages, there’s a cost associated with doing some- themselves out of a job. The solution was to pay thing. People tend to look at the cost, weigh it attention when the problem was tiny and boring, against the smallness of the issue, and decide it’s when nobody except professionals or interested not worth doing anything just yet. The next time parties was ever going to notice it. So we’re head- the envelope is pushed, the issue is a bit bigger, ed into one of those nasty corrections. Not any but the cost is also higher because the perpetra- time soon, but the longer it waits, the bigger it’ll tor now has more power. Pretty soon, there may be. All of history shows that it’s not a question of be personal consequences, small ones at first. By “if,” but of “when.” the time people wake up to the fact that freedom The problem is that nothing on earth is going itself is being lost, the price of resistance has to make people sit up and take notice of tiny bor- grown high enough so that it’s still not worth ing issues. Building a system dependent on that is fighting for at the time. It’s only in hindsight that no smarter than building one dependent on peo- the mind reels at people’s lack of action. ple feeling altruistic enough to deprive them- Another complication is that the process does selves according to their means in order to pro- not take place in the full glare of consciousness. vide for others according to their needs. It’s as The original issue may evade attention simply by doomed as an economic system that thinks it can being too small to notice. Once there’s a cost as- rely on rational decision-making. It just isn’t go- sociated with noticing, the tendency is not to go ing to happen. Instead some people will use the there. We’d rather forget about it, and we’re very loopholes made by unrealistic ideas to use the good at finding reasons why we can. system for their own ends. Communism becomes The resistance to examining disparities of totalitarianism, and dies. Capitalism becomes a power is one example. In the good old days, noth- set of interlocking oligopolies that privatize profit ing needed to be examined because inequality and socialize risk. Democracies become … well, it was natural or ordained. Generations of goofy, in- varies. Some places are more successful than oth- bred aristocrats made no difference to the con- ers at slowing the slide into media circuses fund- viction. Now nothing needs to be examined be- ed by the usual suspects. cause we’re all equal. In Voltaire’s immortal words, “The law forbids rich and poor alike to - + - sleep under bridges.” The idea that we’re all so- cial equals is patently absurd, and yet it’s so per- vasive that a President can compare the homeless There’s another aspect of human nature in to campers and it is considered evidence only of conflict with the way democracies are supposed his heartlessness, not of his lack of mental capac- to work. It’s the idea that freedom is not free, ity. We’re convinced, so the evidence makes no that we the people must defend it. There’s noth- impression. ing wrong with the idea, all things being equal. Not only are the issues hard to follow. We The problem is that all things are not equal. don’t want to follow them. Abuses of power start small. They start when Does that mean it’s hopeless to aim for an eq- someone who can pushes the envelope just that uitable self-regulating system such as democra- one little bit. In other words, they’re started by cies are supposed to be? I don’t think so, or I people already some way up the social tree,
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 6 wouldn’t be writing this tract. Exhortations to be don’t know if the law still exists or if they’ve better citizens might not work, but that’s not the found a way to evade the intent by now.) only choice. Effective feedback loops aren’t always simple, The solution is to match the ease and effec- and finding a short term loop that accurately re- tiveness of action with the level of motivation. flects a long term situation is much harder than That’s not a startling insight, but it does suggest rocket science. However, the point of the feed- that the wrong question is being asked in the back loops is the same: to bring home the conse- search for a solution. The question is not why quences of actions to those people who make the people don’t make the necessary effort. The ques- relevant decisions. Initial solutions that are less tion is what prevents people from using or de- than perfect could evolve toward improved effec- fending their rights. How long does it take to find tiveness if the system was set up to make the information once someone starts looking for it? process easy. The degree to which feedback loops How many steps are involved in acting on it? sound nice but impossible to implement is a How obvious are the steps? How much time, measure of how far we are from actual equality. knowhow, or money do they take? Is there any personal vulnerability at any point? You see - + - where this is headed. The solution is to remove the obstacles. It is not a luxury to make it easy to fight back. It is a critical, perhaps the critical If I’m right that people ignore the small stuff, lever for sustaining a free society. and that what matters all starts as small stuff, Another part of the solution is to minimize the why would things ever change? number of problems needing action to begin First, I’d like to mention a couple of reasons with. Again, that’s not a startling insight, but it why enlightened self-interest says they should does run counter to the prevailing model. Now change. The state of enlightenment being what it we have laws to stop abuses. That requires the is, these factors probably won’t make much diff- abuse to be committed before it can be dealt fference, but you never know, so they’re worth with. In the best case scenario that means deal- pointing out. ing with issue after issue, as each one comes up. Accumulations of power actually benefit no- A better model is one of prevention. The desire to body, not even the supposed elite beneficiaries. commit abuses has to be reduced, and that’s not The effect of power on society is like that of grav- as impossible as one might think. The trick is to ity on matter. Eventually the mass becomes so shorten the feedback loop caused by abuse until huge that movement on the surface is impossi- it affects the person committing it. ble. Economic mobility, social mobility, inventive- Imagine a simple world in which a person ness, and in the end even physical mobility, all owned a factory. Then imagine the law said they become limited. It becomes a very boring world and their family had to live downwind of it. In a which even the elites seek to escape. Take an ar- world without loopholes, pure air would be com- chetypal concentration of power, that found in ing out the “smoke”stack. In a world where it Saudi Arabia. The process has gone so far there was effortless to take action against evasion of that half the population can’t go for a walk. And the law, there’d be no loopholes. Both pollution yet, if being at the top of the tree is so nice, why and ownership are too complicated for obvious is the proportion of wealthy Saudi men vacation- solutions, but that doesn’t mean there are none. ing outside the country so much higher than the A salary feedback loop, to give another easy ex- percentage of, say, rich European men relaxing in ample, would require management decisions Saudi Arabia? Just because many people lose by about workers’ pay to be applied in equal propor- the system in Saudi Arabia does not mean it’s ac- tion to management’s own net compensation. tually doing anyone any good. For some reason, One real world example was a law requiring state it’s counterintuitive that when everyone wins, legislators in Hawaii to enroll their children in there’s more winning to be had, but it is a matter public schools. It was one of the few US public of observable fact that life is richer and more se- school systems that was not underfunded. (I cure for everyone in equitable societies. Logically, that would imply the elites ought to be in the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 7 forefront of limiting themselves, since it’s easy Social tools that work are very relevant to us for them and they stand to gain by it in every run since we all live in a disaster-prone world now. except the shortest one. They are, after all, sup- For all of us the only solution is to work together posed to be the ones who take the long view, un- and expend the resources necessary to control like the working classes who live from day to day. the situation. It’s not utopian to hope we’ll do it. (Which just goes to show how much of a role log- People have, in fact, shown that they’re capable ic plays in this.) of it. Accumulations of power do worse than no The truly utopian assumption is that there can good. Eventually, they bring the whole society be a technological solution to the problems fac- down. That, too, is a matter of observable fact. So ing us. That’s a logical impossibility not because far, no society with a significant level of technol- there is no fix, but because somebody has to ap- ogy has managed to limit power sustainably and ply it. Technology hugely increases the available ensure sufficient adaptability and innovation to physical power in a society, and that also increas- survive. The only societies that have made it es social power. Holding all that at our fingertips, longer than a few thousand years are hunter- as it were, means that every action is also hugely gatherers. Living at that technological level magnified. Expecting technology to fix anything is seems like a high price to pay for stability. We the same as expecting people to always and have over 1300 cc of brain. We can do better than everywhere apply it for the greatest good of the cycling through periods of destruction in order to greatest number. That’s why hoping for a techno- achieve renewal. logical fix is like hoping that a change in gun de- Although history doesn’t give much ground for sign will lead to the end of murder. hope based on enlightened self-interest, the track Amplified power has another critical conse- record for plain old self-interest is better. Not per- quence. Enough of it, used badly, can destroy the fect, but better. When survival is at stake, people society that couldn’t figure out how to control are capable of great things, even changing a few the power of the people using it. habits and working together. Ostrum’s work (e.g. That is not hyperbole. It might seem like it be- 1990 [3] , or a very potted summary [4] on cause modern technological societies are only at Wikipedia) examines avoidance of ecosystem col- the very earliest stages of being able to destroy lapse in detail. What I find most interesting is the the planet. At this point, we’d probably only be extent to which widespread responsiveness to so- able to destroy it for us. The proverbial cock- cial members and some degree of distribution of roaches would move in. But it’s no longer hard to power play a role. These are the attitudes that imagine a scenario in which we destroy it for life. seem impossible to achieve, and yet some soci- A big nuclear war could have done it. Global eties manage it for the sake of survival. The type warming could do it. In a far future when every- of danger involved, which is a force of nature and one has personal spaceships, an evil mastermind doesn’t lend itself to unproductive resentment could orbit a light-bending device between us the way enemies do, and the type of situation, and the Sun which would shade the whole Earth which benefits from the application of foresight to death before the machine could be found and and coordinated action, can facilitate beneficial destroyed. There isn’t just one way to destroy a social structures that rein in self-interest. highly technological society, and the more ad- I’m putting it backwards in that paragraph. To vanced it is, the more ways there are. Bad govern- be more precise, humans started out facing ments can do it. All the people together can do it ever-present “ecological collapse” because of with tiny actions that add up. Mad individuals their inability to control any but the tiniest fac- can do it with sabotage. There are so many ways tors of their environments. Hunter-gatherer soci- that it is literally only a matter of time. The more eties are also remarkable for their egalitarianism, technologically advanced the society, the more compared to states that succeeded them. So, it’s essential limits to power are for its very survival. probably not that later groups achieved more So, to return to wondering why things would power-sharing as that they retained or regained change, it looks like that may be the wrong ques- it. tion again. It’s trite, but nonetheless true that
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 8 things always change. The status quo can never ple feel the effort of taking action costs too much be maintained. The only choice is to follow the for the perceived benefit. path of least resistance or to expend more energy It all comes down to limiting power. The pat- and take action. The path of least social resis- tern is so obvious and repeated so many times in tance is to let the powerful do their thing. But, so many different spheres that there has to be a sooner or later, that’ll be fatal. common element preventing effective action. Planetary changes are just as threatening now There’s at least one thing pervasive enough to as any flood, so much so that plenty of people see qualify. Everybody wants to limit the ability of the need for action. However, “plenty” hasn’t be- others to hurt them, but not as many want to come “enough” yet because of the usual impedi- limit their own ability to take advantage of oth- ments. Those who don’t know, don’t want to ers. That, by itself, may be enough to explain why know. Many of them — those with little control we don’t get effective limits. The problem is more over the situation — would do something about it than global threats and too much power in too if they could, but it’s just too difficult. The re- few hands. It’s also that we have to put limits on maining few do control the situation, and there’s ourselves to get to the good life … and to avoid currently no way to bring the consequences of the opposite. That’s hard to take on board. It just their actions back to them. The reason there’s no feels so right that if somebody else loses, I must way is because they’ve made sure of it, and the be winning. But no matter how self-evident it reason they can make it stick is because of the feels, that’s not actually a logical necessity. We power imbalance that’s been allowed to develop. can all lose. We’re doing it right now. It’s the same story over and over again. And the reason it persists is also the same. Too many peo- + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 9
Rights
So rights are not equal. They can depend on other rights, vary in importance, or be entirely Defining Terms absent. However, those factors don’t receive the same attention as the equal application of rights Limits to power aren’t just for the powerful. to all. The latter is critical, of course, but it can They have to start with the individual, with each also be meaningless if one of the other factors is and every individual. Rights are supposed to pro- in play. If people are to use, in fact, the rights vide those limits, to demarcate the borders so they have in theory, then all the factors are criti- that everyone has the most freedom compatible cal. Obscuring that point by focusing only on the with an equal level for others. However, equality equal application of rights does nothing but ren- is so far from realized that the word has become der the right useless. Sometimes it seems that Orwellian: some are always being more equal the focus is not an accident, since it allows than others. weightier parties to say they’re for the equal Given how well-articulated and well-known rights while pulling the actual situation their the basic rights are by now, the pervasive difficul- way. Then conflicts aren’t resolved on the merits, ty of actually implementing them has to be due which leads to the usual descending spiral of en- to an equally pervasive factor. External factors, croaching power. It is not simply a philosophical such as apathy or ignorance, should vary inde- exercise to figure out how to resolve the inequali- pendently of rights. They shouldn’t be able to re- ty between rights. It is essential. sult consistently in the same losses and the same The first step is to enumerate how the inequal- pattern of losses that we see repeated over and ity among rights plays out. Which ones, exactly, over again. Rights are gained or regained in a so- take precedence? This is a ticklish issue, since no- cial convulsion, and then the slow erosion re- body wants the rights dear to them declared in- peats. The uniformity of failure suggests the fault significant. The usual way of handling it is to has to be endogenous, a problem with the under- gloss over it. The Universal Declaration of Human standing of the rights themselves. Rights, for instance, has a couple of articles at However, at the most fundamental level there the end pointing out that no right may be con- doesn’t seem to be much to misunderstand. All strued so as to abridge other rights. That’s a rare rights share one quintessential feature: they ap- acknowledgment that rights can conflict, but it’s ply equally to everyone. When that’s not true, also ironic because a little higher on the same they’re not rights. They become privileges. So far, page are two rights, one of which has to abridge so clear, but then it rapidly becomes less so. the other. It states that everyone has a right to The rights themselves are not all created education that promotes personal fulfillment, equal. Some depend on others. For instance, free- peace and tolerance, and then it says that parents dom of assembly is meaningless without freedom have a “prior right” to determine their children’s of movement. Their relative importance can also education. But, despite the injunction against vary. Perfect guarantees of security of life and abridging, there’s no word on how to handle a limb become useless without any freedoms to parental choice of militant patriotic or religious make life worth living. On the other hand, free- indoctrination for their children. dom doesn’t mean much when keeping body and Examples of direct conflicts between rights are soul together takes all one’s time. Last, some many. Is vaccination more important than re- rights are just plain missing. The right to make a spect for the right to refuse medical treatment? living is included in the Universal Declaration of Is it never, always, or sometimes more impor- Human Rights, but it’s really more of a hope tant? Does freedom of speech trump freedom everywhere in the world. And yet it’s obvious to from persecution? Can speech insult religious the meanest intelligence that without a liveli- icons? Can it threaten death by mail? Or on the hood no other freedom means a thing. web? What is the difference between speech and
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 10 persecution when it’s a telemarketer’s call? it’s obvious that cost-benefit analysis can only be- Rights can also be related in other ways be- gin after deciding who pays the cost and who sides a straightforward conflict. Depending on gets the benefit. That can’t be decided without point of view or context, the same right can be rules about what’s fair, or, alternatively, about vital or irrelevant. Someone trying to pass a final what some people can get away with. Cost-bene- exam isn’t hoping to exercise the right to free fit analysis can’t take away the need for the step speech. A person facing a murderer’s gun may it rests on. It can, however, muddy it. Possibly, not share Patrick Henry’s feelings on the relative that comfortable obscurity is the attraction of worth of liberty and life. The dependencies of pretending the first step can be ignored. different rights can change, too. Freedom of reli- Dealing with that first step of defining fairness gion for a mystic does not require the right to as- is not impossible. It’s not any specific or static semble in the same way as it does for, say, a situation. It’s that everyone has equal rights. Each Catholic. A whole series of interlocking and individual enjoys the widest possible range of changing issues all need to work together to re- rights that is compatible with the same range for solve rights into their correct relationships, and others. The essential step in applying the idea is even then they’re only valid in a given situation. that some rights depend on others, and that the The complexity is more reminiscent of biology totality must be preserved. No single right takes than logic. Rights may be universal, but how peo- precedence over all others. ple feel about them isn’t. The principle that rights must apply equally, Given the complexity, and especially given its and that the priority of rights may change in or- mutable nature, looking for static answers seems der to preserve that equality, can provide a reso- foolish. And yet the concept of adapting to reality lution of some conflicts on that basis alone. For is sometimes rejected out of hand because it instance, it’s not hard to see that allowing a reli- would lead to a legal morass. That is a strange gion, any religion, to dictate speech will make re- approach. Saying “away with complexity!” ligious freedom meaningless. If everyone is to doesn’t make it so. The Dutch might as well de- have both freedom of speech and of religion, cide that this business of having a fluid ocean speech has to have priority. Giving religion priori- makes life too difficult, so dikes will be built as if ty would paradoxically end freedom of religion, the sea was solid. Writing laws that ignore reality since any offensive expression associated with is equally senseless. It’s the legal system that another set of beliefs could be prohibited. must adapt, not the other way around. Expecting laws to create their own reality is just magical thinking. Missing Rights The complexity of the situation doesn’t make it hopeless, however. Simple rules can often deal So far, so good, but even that blindingly obvi- with an infinitely complex reality, and the same is ous example gets into trouble rather fast. Free- true here. Specific static answers may be impossi- dom of religion is meaningless without freedom ble, but the rule of equality can find a way from persecution, and some speech can certainly through much of the complexity even when the feel like harassment to the recipient. The current answers themselves depend on each given situa- solution is to try to put conflicting demands on tion. No situation has exactly the same blend of the same right: to promote free expression and to important factors, and equality just needs to be throttle it back; to promote freedom of religion balanced among all of them, not limited to one. and to refuse it a congenial environment. That’s Another objection made sometimes is that doomed to failure. striving for equity is naive. It requires a definition However, logical absurdity is not the only of fairness, which is a subjective matter and thus choice. The irresolvable nature of the conflict is a doomed to failure. It’s said to be better to rely on symptom not of inevitability but of a deeper something quantifiable, such as a cost-benefit problem. The borders between the two rights analysis. I’m not sure whether that view is based aren’t good enough. They leak over onto each on willful ignorance or the plain variety. Surely, other’s territories. The solution is not to let one
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 11 or the other leak preferentially, but to plug up the people that, no, it shouldn’t be up to us. We have gap. The solution is to find what’s missing, and a right to silence. that actually doesn’t seem too difficult in this Although the right has yet to be articulated, case. What’s missing is the right not to hear. it’s already starting to be applied. It’s so obvious The lack of an explicit right to control our own to so many people that even in the U. S. of A., sensory inputs is at the root of a number of mod- where the dollar is king, a Do Not Call Registry ern frictions. The technology to amplify our abili- limiting marketing by phone is one of the most ty to bother each other, for good or ill, simply popular laws of the last decade. Stephen Fry [78] , wasn’t there before. The lack of a right not to champion and master of communication that he hear is doubly odd because it would seem to be is, has made the same point about avoiding un- an obvious parallel to other well-established sought words: “No matter who you are no one rights. For instance, control over our own bodies has … a right to address you if you don’t want to means more than freedom of movement. There’s be addressed.” However, the lack of articulation also the right to refuse medical procedures, to be about a right to silence causes helplessness in the free of assault, and generally to limit other peo- face of all kinds of violations, not all of them ple’s ability to impinge on us. We control not only commercial. Cell phone conversations in con- what we do, but also what other people can do fined spaces are another example. The level of to us. Yet when it comes to sensory matters, we discourse about that sometimes echoes the old have freedom of expression, but no equivalent one about smoking. The “right” to smoke was im- right to refuse inputs from other people. That’s a portant and the right to breathe was not. recipe for disaster which is in the making all Soft porn is one area where the right not to around us. see is explicitly discussed even if not always ac- Aggressive marketing, whether commercial, knowledged. (There is general agreement that we charitable, or political, is currently considered a have a right not to see the hard core stuff.) As minor annoyance worth suffering for the sake of with telemarketers, sometimes the need for a free speech. The advertisers aren’t expected to missing right is so clear, it’s demanded even if we control themselves. The targets are expected to don’t know what to call it. But because we don’t “tune it out.” Interestingly, research [73] shows have a name for it the argument is ostensibly that the effectiveness of advertising depends on about whether parents should decide what’s ac- the extent to which it is tuned out. That makes the ceptable for their children. So a parent’s right to injunction to ignore it downright sinister. (Repeti- control what a fifteen year-old sees is more im- tive messaging is discussed at greater length un- portant than anybody’s own right to control der Advertising [74] and in Education [75] .) We’ve what they themselves see. It’s another farcical become so habituated to advertising that it takes contortion symptomatic of unresolved conflicts a new angle to remind us just how intrusive it is. between rights. There is now a technique to use focused sound Now that everybody has the ability to din at that reflects off the inside of the cranium (1 [76] , 2 everybody, 24/7, it’s going to become increasingly [77]). At the focus of the speakers, you hear voices obvious that an explicit right not to hear, see, inside your head. Marketers placed these things smell, taste, or touch is an inalienable right, and on buildings to advertise a movie about ghosts by that it has to stop being alienated. As a short- making passersby hear what seemed to be hand, I’ll call it a right to silence in the same way ghosts. It came as a surprise to them that people as free speech is used to mean all forms of ex- were outraged. (The marketers were surprised. presssion. Not the ghosts. They have more sense.) There is The big sticking point with any “new” right is no real difference between reflecting sound off a how to implement it. It always seems laughably wall or a skull to get to the auditory nerve. The absurd at the time. In the high and far off times, only difference is that we’re not used to tuning when there was talk of broadening voting rights out the latter. But once we’re used to it, the ten- beyond the landed gentry, the gentry sputtered dency is to accept that it’s somehow up to us to about the impossibility of determining the ad- deal with it. It takes a new intrusion to remind dresses of fly-by-night renters. We’ve managed to
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 12 solve that problem. The same process is repeated to silence is the one brought up at the beginning with each newly recognized right. Creating a qui- of this discussion: how can the greatest scope be et environment is no different. It only seems diffi- preserved both for offensive opinions and for the cult because it’s a measure of how much intru- right to an unintrusive environment? Bottling ad- sion has become commonplace. vertising or soft porn back up may be very diffi- The basic rule is that any given expression cult in practice, but there aren’t too many con- should be sought out, and if it’s not, it shouldn’t ceptual gray areas. How to draw the lines be- intrude. The old clumsy brown paper covers on tween conflicting opinions, however, is a much sex magazines were a step in this direction. Those tougher question and it starts with the funda- who wanted that content could get it, but it mental one of whether any lines should be drawn wasn’t up to the general public to avert its eyes. at all. Serrano desecrated a crucifix for the sake Updating that attitude to the electronic age, the of art. Hoyer drew Mohammed in a cartoon for idea is that all content has to be opt-in rather the sake of free speech. Should they have been si- than opt-out. If a web site wants to carry ads, a lenced? Absolutely not. button click could lead to them, but there can be Should the people offended by it have had to nothing “in your face.” Billboards would be notice it? That’s a much harder question. At least banned since there is no way for them not to be in those cases, the desecration happened in in your face. Magazine articles and advertising venues not likely to be frequented by those faith- would have to be distinguishable and separate. ful who would take offense. (A modern art show, Television advertising would be grouped together and a general circulation Danish newspaper.) The in its own time slot, as it is in Europe. Product issue had to be brought to their attention; a fer- placement in entertainment would be a no-no. vor had to be whipped up. In that case, if people Obviously, respecting the right to silence go out of their way to notice things they don’t would affect current business models dependent like, there is no issue of persecution and freedom on ad-supported-everything. However, simply be- of speech takes precedence. Persecution seeks cause a whole industry has fattened on the viola- out its victims, not vice versa. tion of rights doesn’t mean they must continue In a different situation, where the wider cul- to be violated. (For ideas on how to pay for con- ture presents a rain of unavoidable and offensive tent without ads, see an earlier piece [79] of mine, messages, such as an insistence that homosexual- or the chapter on Creativity [80] , which reflects an ity is a perversion, justice seems better served by idea gaining currency in many places, (e.g. 1 [81] , 2 limiting that expression to venues where people [82], 3 [83] ). Once again, the distance between re- would have to actively seek it out. The principle spect for the right to silence and our current is always the same, which means the resolution world is a measure of how far technology has en- may or may not be. Conflicts should be resolved abled some people to push others and how far to preserve the most rights for everybody, and to we have to go to get back. preserve the most equality among the conflicted Not all implementations of the right to silence parties. Precisely because equality is the goal, the require readjustments to the whole social order. resolution of any specific conflict has to be decid- The issue of bellowing into cell phones could be ed on its own merits. solved rather simply, for instance. They don’t have a feedback circuit to allow the caller to hear their own voice at the ear piece. No doubt it was Privacy cheaper to make them that way. Mandating a feedback circuit, possibly an amplified one to While I’m on the subject of missing rights, pri- make people talk very, very quietly, (and usable vacy is another essential one. Unlike the right to volume controls to boost the sound from mutter- silence, at least we know it’s name and there’s ing callers) would go a long way to returning cell growing acknowledgment that it should be on phone bellowing back to normal speaking tones. the books. However, as a recently understood Sometimes there are technological fixes. right, it’s relegated to the status of the new kid The thorniest balancing issue raised by a right on the block: tolerated if it stays on the fringes,
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 13 but not welcome to interfere with the old big formation to first get permission to have it. So, ones like free speech. I’m going to argue that this no, Google can’t photograph recognizable resi- is backwards. Respect for privacy is fundamental dences. Marketers can’t track your every web to all the other freedoms and should take prece- click. Credit reporting agencies can’t hold data dence as a rule. against people’s wishes. Before anyone objects To begin at the beginning, what is privacy? that then life would cease, remember that loans What is it that we have a right to? Thoughtful were made and insurance risks evaluated before and thorough discussions of the definition of pri- the days of centralized databases. There’s nothing vacy (such as Solove’s “Understanding Privacy” impossible about respecting privacy rights. It’s [84]) explore the concept in all its permutations. just expensive because a whole industry has been However, in one important respect there’s a miss- allowed to feed on violating them. That’s only ing element. Just as with all the other rights, it’s made us used to it. It doesn’t make it good. Nei- not the exact definition or its place in the hierar- ther does it stop the growing resentment that al- chy that matters because those change depending ways accompanies violated rights. The anger will on the situation. burst out eventually, and no doubt stupidly, since Trying to make a fluid issue static is part of the we haven’t put a name on the real problem. reason it’s generally easy to subvert the intent. It One curious aspect of privacy is that as a would be better to go to the shared characteristic rather newly recognized right which is not well of all the concerns about privacy. Every aspect of articulated, it has become an umbrella for several privacy involves the ability to control the flow of unarticulated rights whose lack is becoming obvi- information about oneself. Exactly which bits of ous. There’s a sense that privacy is about control, information need to be controlled varies accord- so sometimes what I’ve called the right to silence ing to personal feelings. It’s not the information is conflated with it. This is especially so when the that defines privacy. It is, once again, about con- unwanted noise involves sex. Sex is a private mat- trol. ter, one wants enough control not to hear about Control implies that the individual decides somebody else’s work on it, so it must be a priva- which information about her or him can be cy issue. Because the terms haven’t been correct- stored, where it can be stored, and for how long. ly defined, it’s relatively simple to argue that sex- It implies that the permission to store it can be ual content, unless it’s about the viewer, has revoked at any time. And it implies that potential- nothing to do with his or her privacy. The argu- ly private information also follows that rule. It ment then spins off into being about the chil- has to be “opt-in” and never “opt-out,” and the dren. In reality, it’s about different areas of con- permission is revocable. trol. The right to silence is control over the extent As with all rights, if they are to be meaningful, to which one can be forced to notice the activi- the burden of implementing respect for privacy ties of others. Privacy is the right to control one’s falls on the potential violators, not the victims. A own information. so-called right might as well not exist if it’s noth- Another issue conflated with privacy is abor- ing but the suggestion that people can spend tion rights. The main thing the two seem to have their time trying to defend against violations. The in common is that both started to be discussed in equivalent in a more familiar situation would be public at about the same time. Possibly it has to to make robbery illegal but to do nothing to stop do with the fact that medical procedures are nor- it except give the victims, without any police as- mally private. However, whether or not medical sistance, the “right” to try to find the perps and procedures are performed has nothing to do with to try to get their property back. That’s not the privacy. That has to do with the right to control way rights work. one’s own person, one of the most fundamental Violating a right is a crime and it’s up to the vi- rights of all. Even the right not to be murdered is olator not to do it. That is equally true of privacy secondary, since killing is allowed in self-defence. as it is of personal safety. It is not up to the indi- Similarly, if there was no right to control over vidual to try to object to violations after they’ve one’s own body, patients dying of, say, kidney dis- happened. It’s up to the people who want that in- ease could requisition a kidney from healthy peo-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 14 ple walking around with a spare. over one’s body, control over one’s own informa- Abortion muddies the argument only because tion is necessary if other rights are to have any some people believe the fetus is a person with le- meaning. The only reason that hasn’t always gal rights greater than those of the mother since been obvious is that we haven’t had the technical it can require her life support. There is nothing to capability to spy on each other 24/7, or to retain stop women from believing this and living ac- every whisper forever. When anyone on the inter- cordingly because there is a right to control one’s net — including, for instance, your boss — can own body. look over your shoulder and examine where you Everyone has the right to live according to live, which plants grow in your window boxes, their own beliefs. The relevance to abortion is which gym you visit, who you have sex with, and that personhood is necessarily a belief, a social or how you looked in your baby pictures, there will religious category. It is not a matter of objective effectively be no freedom left. Everything will fact. Biology can only determine who belongs in have to be hidden if everyone can see it. What the species Homo sapiens [85] . No cellular marker you can say will depend on what others approve lights up when someone is due to get legal rights. of being said. Where you can go will depend on It bears repeating: personhood is necessarily a where others approve of you going. Old-fashioned matter of belief, whether that’s based on religion police states, which depended on limited little or social consensus. Therefore those who oppose human informants to keep people in line, will abortion because they believe the fetus is a per- come to seem like desirable places with a few mi- son with special status have to hope they are nor constraints. The logical conclusion of no pri- never successful in legislating how others handle vacy rights is no freedom of speech, movement, their pregnancies. If they were, it would mean or assembly. that exceptions could be made to the right to A common objection to drawing logical con- control one’s own person. And once that princi- clusions is that the situation would never really ple is admitted, then there is nothing to stop a get that bad. There’s no need to take the trouble majority with different beliefs from legislating to prevent a situation that’s not going to arise. forced abortions. That kind of thinking is wrong on two counts. The fight over abortion is a good example of One is that it’s symptomatic of evaluating the just how bad unintended consequences can be if cost of preserving rights against losing bits of there is enough confusion over concepts. Control them, and of the tendency to opt for the path of over one’s own person is different from a right to least resistance. It’s too much trouble to fight so privacy. So is the freedom to live according to we put up with the loss. Then we get used to it. one’s own beliefs. When the issues involved in Then there’s a further loss … and so on. The evi- abortion are correctly categorized as ones of con- dence so far does not provide grounds for opti- trol and beliefs about personhood, then the ap- mism that things will never get too bad because propriate social policies are not hard to identify. people won’t stand for it. Individual decisions are not the point here. They But even if there is no problem at all, even if may be complex, depending on beliefs. Fair social an invasion of privacy never happens, that is not policies are obvious: everyone has the same right the point. The thinking is wrong on a second, and to control their own bodies. Nor can any religion even more important, count. Rights aren’t aban- take precedence over that control without, ironi- doned just because nobody happens to be using cally, destroying freedom of religion as well as them. A nation of bores with nothing to say still other basic rights. Privacy is not the issue at any has to preserve the right to free speech, or stop point. being a free country. A nation of atheists has to Having discussed what privacy is, and what preserve freedom of religion. A nation where no- it’s not, let’s go on to why it is a fundamental body has ever been murdered still has to consider right. That seems counterintuitive at first be- murder a crime. And a nation where nobody cause privacy, in and of itself, is not very interest- cares about privacy has to enforce the right to it. ing. Like the right not to be murdered, it becomes It’s not good enough to say that the explicit right critical only when it’s violated. But, like control is unnecessary because nobody needs it. Having a
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 15 right to privacy is different from waiting for nario is so comforting that it’s now the dominant someone to take it away. We find that out every model for how economic justice will happen. time a new invasion occurs. Sadly, it’s doomed. That’s not because growth Privacy is a linchpin right that needs to be ex- could never be sufficiently vast. It could be and plicitly included in its real place in the hierarchy. has been at several points in recent history when technological advances led to huge wealth cre- ation. But spontaneous equitable distribution of Right to Live that wealth has never happened. If enough peo- ple spontaneously limited themselves to ensure There’s another vital but missing right, one justice for others, there wouldn’t be a problem to that’s been identified for decades, one that was begin with. There’s a problem because people do noted by statesmen like Franklin Roosevelt, and want justice, but for themselves, not as limits on one that requires plenty of social change in some their own activities for the sake of others. Eco- parts of the world. It’s the right to keep body and nomic growth doesn’t change that. soul together under all circumstances, not only The truth of the matter is that a right to live the special case of avoiding violent death. There’s will inevitably be costly to some people in the a right to make a living, a right to medical care, short term. Wealth is currently distributed with- and a right to care in old age. Obviously, the right out regard to economic justice, so the people to live has to be understood within its social con- whose money comes at the expense of the lives text. In the Paleolithic, people didn’t have the of others would not get that money under a just same capacity to provide for each other that we system. Again, if nobody made money unjustly, do now. There are limits to how much we can there wouldn’t be a problem to begin with. Given guarantee each others’ lives, but within those that there is a problem,there is no way to make it limits, there is the obligation to respect every- cost-free to everyone. one’s right to live. Not recognizing that right In some ways, it’s ironic that there should be leads directly to the eventual loss of all other resistance to implementing economic rights be- rights as people give them up to make a living. cause there’s really nothing objectionable about Just the threat of being deprived of a living leads them. Economic justice, which strives to balance to the loss of rights. The right to live isn’t merely all rights equally, would respect property rights a nice, pie-in-the-sky privilege for when we’re all and wealth accumulation that didn’t deprive oth- rich enough to eat off gold spoons. It’s critical to ers of a living. Most people, honest people, are any sustainable free society. disturbed at the mere thought of making money The right to live, perhaps more than any other, at the expense of others’ lives. In a just system, makes people fear how the inevitable conflict be- they could make money without that distur- tween rights can be resolved. A right to live costs bance, nor would anyone fear grinding poverty. money, and many people want to be sure it’s not It’s a win-win situation. their own money. However, conflict with other And yet, the harder it is to make a living, the rights is not some special defect that makes this less anyone cares how it’s made. The less eco- one uniquely impractical. All rights have conflicts nomic justice, the greater the fear of poverty and and need to be balanced. The solution isn’t to the more a right to live sounds like a right to im- rigidly prefer one. It’s to evaluate the situation on poverish others. It’s a downward spiral just as the its merits and see which solution preserves the previous situation is an upward one. Taking ad- most rights for everyone. vantage of others is a very difficult pattern to The sticking point is how it might work in stop unless there are rules in place preventing practice because the greatest good of the greatest everyone equally from doing it. The truth of that number is not the same as a guarantee that is evident from the worst economic crimes, like wealthier citizens won’t lose by it. The only way slavery, right down to accepting minor bribes. Be- to achieve no-cost economic justice is sufficient fore the laws are in place, the haves fight them growth, equitably distributed, which brings because of the spectre of poverty. After laws pro- everyone up to an adequate level. That rosy sce- moting economic justice are passed, lacking
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 16 those laws becomes a mark of barbarism. For in- Now, nobody can see how anyone could have stance, turning a blind eye to slavery is now con- thought slavery brought any benefits. The fact sidered despicable everywhere. On the other that the slaveholders made some money is seen hand, an effective social safety net is still incon- as an infinitesimally small quantity compared to ceivable to many US citizens, while Europeans the astronomical social costs. It’s become incon- can’t understand how any society can be said to ceivable that anyone could have missed that. function without one. The concept that increased justice leads to in- The point of this digression on the costs of a creased benefits for everyone — not just nebulous right to live is that I want to be clear on the fact moral benefits but plain old quality of day-to-day that there are inevitable short term costs for life benefits — is something that’s much easier to some people. It’s also inevitable that at the level see when it’s been experienced. So easy, in fact, of whole societies, judging by the weight of the that for people in that position it must seem too evidence so far, everyone is better off in the medi- obvious to need as much repetition as I’m giving um term and even more so in the long term. Eco- it. nomic justice does not have to be the apocalyptic Although the right to live suffers the most catastrophe that communism made of it, so long from seeming impossible to implement, all miss- as rights are balanced rather than given rigid prece- ing rights seem fanciful. After they’ve been artic- dence. On the contrary, equitable economic rules ulated, but before they’re applied, the usual ex- lead to increased, not decreased, wealth. They’re cuse is that they’re impractical. The examples are also fundamental to a generally equitable and legion. Government of the people couldn’t possi- therefore sustainable society. In the chapter on bly work because the people are simpletons. Free Money and Work [86] , I’ll give some examples of speech will lead to a breakdown of order. Univer- how a right to live might be applied in ways that sal health care will bankrupt the country. Respect balance available resources, property rights, em- for privacy will make it impossible to do busi- ployers’ rights, the right to an equitable share of ness. And so on. Yet, oddly enough, whenever the created wealth, and the right not to die of pover- fight to gain respect for rights is successful, the ty. opposite happens. Democracies work rather well; Of all the rights, the one to live suffers most countries with free speech have more order, not from a breakdown of imagination, so I want to less; and industrialized countries with universal digress a bit on that, too. With the others, such health care have lower medical costs than the as the right to privacy (unless you’re Google), USA, which is the only one doing without. None there’s not a widespread sense that it’s silly to of the missing rights would be impractical to ap- even try implementing them. But it’s inconceiv- ply. What feels impractical is that they involve able to many people that a universal right to live limiting the power of those currently benefiting could exist outside a fairy tale. “Inconceivable” from their abuse. That’s different. It’s difficult, isn’t just a figure of speech in this case. It is, liter- not impractical. ally, inconceivable. For instance, no matter how many times accountants do the math and show that everyone in the US would benefit if we had Rights in Conflict universal health care, many US citizens simply cannot take on board the fact that they’re losing Most of this piece on conflicting rights has by not spending money on medical care for oth- been devoted to errors in the framework which ers. No doubt, if you had never seen the color cause conflicts even when none is necessary, red, having physicists tell you its wavelength such as missing or badly defined rights that blur wouldn’t help. But once you had seen it, anybody the necessary boundaries among people. But who told you it couldn’t exist would seem to lack even when all those errors are solved, rights can vision. and will conflict precisely because there is no sin- Slavery provides one example of that change in gle right answer to their order of precedence. vision. At one time, some people in the US However, although there cannot be a rigid pri- thought slavery was essential to the economy. ority among rights, there is a clear goal. The via-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 17 bility of all rights should be preserved. The best the lengths to which people will go to avoid in- outcome preserves the most rights and the most conveniencing the powerful party. freedom for the most people. In consequence, Of course, the more evenly balanced the con- conflicts between rights need to be resolved in fa- flict, the harder it is to see a clear resolution. vor of the ones whose loss in that situation would Consider, for instance, the issue of someone who otherwise cause the most damage. objects to vaccination versus the public health As an example of how this might play out con- need for most people to be vaccinated. On the sider a recent conflict [87] . Muslim workers at a one side is the bedrock right to control one’s own slaughterhouse needed to pray five times a day. person, and on the other side is … the bedrock Other workers were reluctant to fill in to the ex- right not to be killed by a disease carrier. If an tent required. Filling in is a non-trivial task in epidemic is actually in progress, the public health that environment. The butchering process moves considerations take precedence because the at blinding speed, so workers who step away threat is real and immediate. But if there is no briefly create a real burden for those who have to immediate threat, and the level of vaccination in make up the difference. The risk of serious injury the population is sufficient that there is unlikely is increased and, if there’s any faltering, the to be one, then the situation is different. Then whole line can be halted, carcasses pile up, the individual is being asked to give up a funda- there’s an incredible mess, workers get in trou- mental right without medical justification. On ble, and there may be consumer health issues or the other hand, if there is widespread sentiment financial losses if some of the product winds up against vaccination, consistency may be essential being mishandled. for the sake of fairness. (Information about the The conflict was between religious rights and real pros and cons of vaccination would also be workers’ rights. The Muslims shouldn’t have to indicated in that case, but that’s a separate is- scrimp on their beliefs just to keep their jobs. The sue.) Assuming that it doesn’t start an anti-vacci- non-Muslims shouldn’t have to work faster and nation movement (which would damage public increase risk of injury just so somebody else health) my preference would be to decide in favor could have extra breaks. Oddly enough, a third al- of the less powerful party, in this case the individ- ternative was not mentioned. The processing ual rather than the public as a whole. But I could lines could be slowed down enough at the rele- as easily see an argument in favor of maintaining vant times of day so that the missing workers consistent treatment of all citizens. The specific didn’t cause a problem. In fact, it was a decision in a specific case would depend on the three-way conflict and the balance lies between attitude of the community. That’s messy, but all three factors, not just two. If the owner of the messiness is unavoidable when there is no clear plant had been a struggling start-up operating on path to a decision. It’s better to be clear on the razor-thin margins, then any loss of profit could real factors in a decision than to create false have meant closure of the plant. That would neatness by pretending some of them don’t exist. make both workers’ and religious rights moot and would be the wrong place to look for a solu- tion. In this particular case, the owner was a For- Free speech vs. noise tune 500 company for whom the very limited slowdown would have made some correspond- We have gone off the rails as regards freedom ingly limited impact on the bottom line. That of speech. The freedom part is all-important and property right needs to be balanced against the speech part is forgotten. It’s important to re- equality among workers and the freedom to prac- member what freedom of speech is for: to ensure tice one’s religion. It’s not too hard to see which a hearing for all voices so that information or right would suffer the least damage in this case. truths aren’t stifled. Aiming for maximum equality among rights, the In the 1600s and 1700s when the concept was obvious alternative is to slow down the produc- being developed and applied, the signal to noise tion line. It’s so obvious, that its absence from ratio was very different from what it is now. Few the discussion can only be one more example of people had the means to disseminate their ideas
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 18 to begin with, so there weren’t many voices. Ad- [73]. Tuning it out, far from making it powerless, vertising barely existed. (Evidence of people gives it maximum effect. hawking things probably goes right back to the The way our brains work, repetition is appar- cave dwellers, but the volume of advertising, its ently assumed at some very basic neural level pervasiveness, and its ability to distract were or- (pdf) to be indicative of something real, some- ders of magnitude lower than they are now.) Nor thing on which we can base projections and ex- was there the technology to din at people pectations without having to go through the 24/7/365. So noise was not a large concern of the work of reprocessing all the inputs as if they main early thinkers on the topic of freedom of were new every time. The need for rapid deci- speech. Their big concern was silencing. sion-making based on insufficient information is Silencing was and remains something that a fact of life, sometimes it’s a matter of life or must be prevented. The dreadful irony, though, is death, so it’s hardly surprising that our brains that a fixation on allowing all speech as the defi- would be primed to take all the shortcuts they nition of freedom facilitates the loss of the whole can get. Repetition, whether in advertising, dog- point of freedom of speech. ma, propaganda, opinions, news items, or catchy Drowning out voices kills their message at tunes, will lead to the same result in some large least as well as silencing. Insisting that everyone, proportion of people. Science can’t say that any everywhere, for any purpose, has an equal right given individual will be susceptible, but it can say to speak hasn’t preserved freedom of speech. with high statistical certainty that groups of indi- That’s killing it. When everybody can shout as viduals will be affected. loud as they can about whatever they want, the The implications of the power of repetition for biggest voices will dominate. freedom of speech are huge. It means that the Nor is it possible to take comfort in the fact loudest voices drown out others not just because that the little voices are still there if needed, that they’re loud. They also seem more persuasive [89] no information or truth will be lost. That only (pdf). And the human mind being what it is, once holds in theory. In practice — and we live in prac- persuaded, won’t admit the possibility of manip- tice, not theory — there are a number of consider- ulation. Who wants to admit to that? Even to ations that mean the drowned voices are gone. themselves? Instead, people generally defend Time and attention are finite. There are a lim- their current point of view by any means avail- ited number of items we can notice, and of those able, always convinced that they thought the an even more limited number we can fully whole thing through carefully. There is no other process. That limited amount of information will way to maintain the sense of being in control of inform action. In terms of practical conse- one’s own thoughts. quences, any further information, even if it came So, freedom of speech interpreted as a from an omniscient god, might as well not exist. free-for-all of shouting does the opposite of its in- Freedom of speech is supposed to prevent pre- tentions. It does not preserve diversity and the cisely that loss of useful information, but when richness of public discourse. It does not preserve it’s drowned out, it’s gone. truth wherever it might appear. It drowns it. It It gets much worse, however. Repetition is reverts us back to dependence on the ideas of the well known to lead to a sense of familiarity, and few. One can argue about the wisdom of crowds, from there to the sense that the brand is known but there’s no doubt about the foolishness of and good, for some value of the word “good.” elites. None of them has ever been right often (Just a sample reference: Unconscious processing enough to avert disaster. Not a single nation of Web advertising. 2008 [88] ) There is accumulat- traces its roots to the Paleolithic. Judging by that ing evidence from those who study the cognitive record, reverting to dependence on an elite is effect of advertising that the feeling of comfort is guaranteed to end in somebody’s wrongheaded independent of conscious thought or attention ideas taking over the public sphere, and leading on the part of the target. Even when people try to to the usual consequence. be sure they don’t react favorably to advertised To preserve freedom of speech it is critical to objects, they wind up choosing them more often do more than prevent silencing. The noise must
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 19 be dialed back, too. Of course, that requires mak- protect all religious and political speech has re- ing distinctions between signal and noise which sulted in a curious chimera. Now any statement is the prickly task we could avoid by defining defined by the speaker as a belief is automatically freedom of speech as a free-for-all. protected. The consequence is absurdity, which Making any distinctions is supposed to put us can be lethal. For instance, when some parents on a slippery slope headed straight down to cen- hear about somebody’s beliefs on the evils of vac- sorship and thought control. As I’ve said many cination, they decide to keep their children safe times, the existence of a slippery slope is not a from it. Once vaccination levels are low enough, good enough excuse to head over a cliff, no mat- group immunity is lost, the disease itself comes ter how clear cut it is. Right now, we’re heading back, and causes deaths in children [90] . Some- into thought control by allowing too much noise. times the two groups include the same children. That is no better than thought control caused by Suppressing noise without falling into the er- too little. Either way, we lose a freedom essential ror of suppressing thought requires objective to quality of life and sustainable government. We methods of telling them apart. So the core ques- have no choice but to do a better job of distin- tions are whether truth can be distinguished guishing signal from noise. It’s not optional if we from lies, and if so, in which cases. want freedom of speech. The general question has been addressed by a The slipperiness derives from the difficulty of considerable body of philosophy, including most distinguishing what is noise in all cases. The sim- recently deconstructionism. Various schools have ple solution in the murky middle zone is to al- made the case that the truth may be unknow- ways err on the side of allowing speech rather able. Generalizing from that sense of inscrutabili- than suppressing it. The harder part is to make ty has led to the feeling that nobody can dictate that zone as narrow as possible. what is the “right” way of thinking. Let’s start with the easy cases. It’s been clear However, generalizing from abstractions to for a long time that there is speech which has no the fundamentally different class of things repre- right to expression. Free speech doesn’t confer a sented by tangible facts is lumping apples with right to perjury, to wrong answers on exams, to pineapples. The knowability of truth has little di- yelling “fire” for nothing in crowded theaters, or rect relevance to the physical world in which we to incitement to riot. The unacceptability of lying have to deal with stubborn facts. Those who have in order to extract money is the basis for truth in people to do their laundry for them can write advertising laws. None of these limits has led to screeds about whether the clothes really exist or thought control. It is possible to apply limits on are truly soiled and criticize the internal contra- speech without losing freedom. dictions in each others’ texts. The rest of us just The task now is to update those limits to ac- have to try to deal with the things at minimum count for new technology. Flimflam used to be cost and maximum benefit. hard to repeat often enough to create plausibility Thus, in the general case there may or may on that basis alone. Now it can be, which means not be any philosophical truths, but in the spe- identifying untruth becomes an urgent task. cific case of fact-based issues the answer is differ- Identifying falsehood leads straight to the even ent. Even if the truth (possibly with a capital “T”) thornier issue of deciding where truth begins. is unknowable, fact-based issues can have statis- There’s an allergy to that in current thinking for tically valid answers, and we have the lightbulbs, two good reasons. The received wisdom has computers, and airplanes to prove it. That means proved very wrong on many occasions over the counterfactual assertions exist. They are not just centuries, and some of the worst excesses by au- some other equally valid point of view. The yard- thorities have been committed in the name of do- stick of truth-in-speech can be applied to matters ing the right thing. That’s led — rightly — to an of fact, those things which can be measured and absolute commitment to protect expression of re- studied using the scientific method. Nobody is ligious and political beliefs. entitled to their own facts, and labeling them But the combination of a healthy uncertainty “beliefs” doesn’t make it so. about truth together with the commitment to A couple of caveats follow, of course. Reason-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 20
ably accurate discovery of the facts and their opinions. Limitations on beliefs or opinions really meaning may be non-obvious. That doesn’t mean can lead straight into censorship. That includes it’s impossible. Nor is there anything wrong with wildly unpopular opinions such as justifications thinking carefully about assumptions, methods, for terrorism. or conclusions. It’s essential. Re-examination of To illustrate my interpretation of these distinc- data in the light of new knowledge is equally es- tions, I’ll take an example from Glenn Greenwald sential. But revisiting the same issue without [94], a stalwart proponent of the freest speech, new supporting data, after repeatedly reaching discussing the University of Ottawa’s censorship the same conclusion with a high confidence lev- of a talk by Ann Coulter. I would describe her as el, such as 95%, is a waste of time. It’s noise. favoring a vicious branch of right wing ideology So far, the murky part of the slippery slope no with not a few overtones of racism, sexism, and longer includes demonstrably counterfactual as- any other bigotry you care to mention. In short, sertions. Whether they happen on the news, talk just the kind of person any right-thinking citizen shows, printed matter, or any other disseminated would want to censor. medium, repeating untruths is not protected as In his view the University was wrong in plac- free speech. That means the end of (legal) manu- ing any limits on her speech, no matter how re- factured controversy about many current topics, pulsive it was. He supports that view because “as such as evolution, vaccination, or the monetary long as the State is absolutely barred from crimi- cost-benefit ratio [91] (pdf) of illegal aliens to the nalizing political views, then any change remains rest of US society. Which would be quite a possible because citizens are free to communi- change. (I’ll discuss in a moment how one might cate with and persuade one another and express give such laws practical effect.) their political opinions without being threatened On the other hand, as an example of a factual by the Government with criminal sanctions … .” controversy that has not yet been decided, it I’ve agreed above that political views can’t be would still be possible to worry about the effects suppressed, and I’ve already disagreed that mere- of cell phone transmitters on nerve tissue. Stud- ly allowing everyone to talk guarantees the viabil- ies of harm have come up negative, but they ity of even minor voices. But I think he misses an- haven’t had sufficient duration across enough other vital point in the mix. Whether in support studies for the required level of statistical certain- of good or revolting opinions, allowing anyone to ty. (As if to make the point, a study came up a propagate lies does not serve the public good. few months after that was written: Trees are aff- There’s a difference between government restrict- ffected by electromagnetic radiation [92] . Original ing speech it dislikes — which is very bad — and [93], in Dutch.) restricting speech that is objectively untrue — The point I’m trying to make with these exam- which is essential. ples is that the standard of what constitutes cer- It seems to me that the Canadians and Euro- tainty should be high, and anything which a rea- peans are attempting that distinction in their sonable person could question based on the facts laws against hate speech. They’ve labeled it “hate should continue to have protected status. speech,” but I’ve seen it applied against groups Another murky area of the slippery slope are that spread lies to foment hatred, such as the bad beliefs and opinions. (Good ones everybody Shoah-deniers in Germany. It was careless to la- wants to hear, so they aren’t generally targets for bel it according to the goal, suppressing hatred suppression.) There is not, in any system of (which can’t be objectively identified and there- thought I’m aware of, an objective way to deal fore can’t be legislated away), instead of the with subjective matters. It’s a logical impossibili- method, stopping lies, which sometimes can be ty. The most one can say is that some beliefs can objectively evaluated. It’s understandable that the have very harmful practical effects, but the laws Europeans would be particularly aware of the are already in place to prevent or punish those need to short-circuit hateful falsehoods. They’ve effects. They can be objectively evaluated. The be- certainly suffered from seductive lies (seductive liefs themselves cannot be. at the time) which caused enormous real harm. Therefore everybody is entitled to their own But it is important to give such laws their right
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 21 name because that helps to delimit them objc- in-speech test. Which brings me to the hard part: tively and thus makes them consistently enforce- how can the prohibition be put into practice? able. I’m a believer in first figuring out where to go, In the specifc example of Coulter’s talk in then seeing how to go there. So, even though I’m Canada, the authorities based their objection on not at all sure how to implement these ideas, the hatefulness in question, which led to the that doesn’t change the point that they do need charge of preferring one set of subjective atti- implementing. What follows are suggestions. tudes over another. They could have more validly There are bound to be better ways to do it, but I told her she would be expected to stick strictly to feel I should moor the ideas in some kind of ac- the facts. For instance, according to the rules tion since I’ve been discussing them. suggested here, nobody could stop Coulter from People opposed to a given viewpoint will be giving a speech about, for instance, how much the quickest to find errors of fact in it. They’ll al- she disliked blacks. That’s her opinion and, al- so generally be the quickest to try to suppress the though it may not be doing her cardiovascular viewpoint itself. Those two opposing forces must health any good, she’s entitled to it. As soon as be balanced, but the opposition can serve a use- she says she has nothing against blacks, it’s just ful function by identifying errors clearly, logically, that they’re good-for-nothing freeloaders who are and with substantiation. Substantiated objections draining the system of resources put there by would require a response within a specific time, hardworking people, then she has to be able to such as a week. If neither party then agreed to prove it or she’s indeed liable for spreading false- modify their stance, the process would ratchet hood. Those are facts. One can count up the up. It would be submitted for comment to the money and see whether they’re true. community of those trained in the relevant field. (And, indeed, people have tallied those particu- (I describe the feedback process as an integral lar facts, and race is not associated with being on part of government generally in the section on welfare. Poverty is associated with being on wel- Oversight [97] in the second Government chapter.) fare. For instance, 2004 numbers [95] (pdf), over If an overwhelming majority, such as 90% or 30% of blacks are poor, and over 30% of welfare more, of the experts agree with one side, then recipients are black. Over 10% of non-hispanic the other side would be expected to withdraw its whites are poor, and comprise over 10% of wel- statements. The losing side could appeal through fare recipients. Whether blacks themselves or dis- the legal system (in a process decribed here [98] ) crimination is at fault for the higher poverty rates to confirm or deny the earlier consensus. To re- is another factual point which is not the issue duce frivolous attempts to use the process to here. The point here is, if they were better free- suppress opposing views, people or groups who loaders, they’d have to be using welfare in higher charge errors of fact, but turn out to be in error proportion compared to their poverty rate.) themselves more than, say, three times in row The point to the example of Greenwald’s objec- would be barred from raising fact-based objec- tions to Coulter’s talk is to show the distinction tions for some length of time, such as five or ten I’m trying to draw between suppressing untruths years. and allowing the free expression of opinions. I’d The rules about truth-in-speech would apply to like to give a feel for how it would change the anyone disseminating a message widely: people discourse if free speech did not mean a speaking to audiences in person or through some free-for-all, if truth-in-speech laws applied to medium, whether physical or not. It would not everyone, not just advertisers. It’s become clear apply to interactions among individuals, whether that spreading demonstrable falsehood generates at the dinner table or digital. Messages going out what people already call a “noise machine.” The to groups, on the other hand, are going to an au- wisdom of the crowd is way ahead of the deep dience. So, yes, it would include bloggers. It thinkers on that. would include social networking, since messages The idea is that presenting counterfactual are generally visible to a number of people at points as plausible in any form, even as mere im- once. The heaviest responsibility would fall on plications or dogwhistles [96] fails the truth- those with the largest audiences, and the en-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 22
forcement should be strictest there as well. But Stories are the most effective way to spread mes- everybody, down to the smallest disseminator of sages, more effective than news, and sometimes information would be held to the same standard. even more effective than people’s own actual ex- Being small does not confer a right to disregard perience. It is no more acceptable to spread dan- facts. Everybody is subject to the same truth- gerous falsehoods that way than any other way. in-speech laws, and it behooves everybody to However, the distinctions have to be drawn in make sure they’re not disseminating false ru- rather different ways. mors. The excuse of not having done one’s home- Stories become very boring if they can’t em- work can only be valid a couple of times, other- bellish. As both a scientist and a science fiction wise viral lies by little people would become the writer (who sometimes even gets paid for the oc- new loophole for big ones. casional story) I’m very aware of that. So I’m also I know that a general responsibility to check aware that there are important differences be- the facts would be a huge change, and I know it tween counterfactual elements completely out- would be hard to enforce at the smallest scale. side of both experience and possibility, such as But I’m not sure how socially acceptable rumors faster than light travel, those which are outside with no basis in fact would be if that practice of experience but seem possible, such as a bus was labelled reprehensible, stupid, and illegal at jumping a sudden chasm in a road [99] , and those the highest levels. Currently, the only value at which are part of people’s experience and contra- those levels is being first with anything hot at dict it, such as jumping from the top of a six sto- any price. It’s not surprising to see it spread ry building, landing on one’s feet and sprinting downward. If there’s an understanding that lies away. are a social toxin and social opprobrium attaches The last category is not a big problem, because to being first and wrong, I think there may be people generally know from their own lives what less pressure toward rumormongering even at the facts of the matter are. The first category is smaller levels. Respect for truth can spread just not a big problem because it has no practical ap- as disrespect can. Otherwise there’d be no cultur- plication. It’s the middle category which can al differences in that regard, and there are. cause real difficulties. In that case it is not simple The effect on news outlets, as currently under- to tell fact apart from fiction. The common as- stood, would be severe. It would not be enough sumption that people know to suspend all belief to attribute a statement to someone else to avoid in anything labeled fiction is obvious nonsense. responsibility. It still comes under the heading of Nobody would have any interest in fiction if they disseminating untruth. The fact-checking depart- were sure it had no application to their lives ments of news organizations would become siz- whatsoever. People pay attention to stories, in able. Being first would share importance with be- the broadest sense, because they give them ing fact-based. frameworks to integrate their own experiences. The sanctions against those who persist in ly- For the most part, that’s on the level of intangi- ing could be multilayered. After some number of bles and is not a concern here, but the same atti- violations, say five, that fall into a pattern of tude applies to the whole of the story. If the story practice showing a carelessness about facts, a implies that a car going very fast can escape the news outlet could be required to show, simulta- shock wave of an explosion, most people have no neously with their assertions, what their opposi- personal experience telling them to doubt that. In tion has shown really are the facts in the matter. the case of the jumping bus mentioned earlier, If the problem persists, they could lose status as who knows to what extent movies showing simi- a news organization and be required to show a lar stunts contribute to drivers trying to jump label of “for entertainment only” at all times. If potholes and crashing their cars [100] ? The stories they cannot meet even that standard, they could certainly don’t help. be shut down. The thing that is so frustrating about those I realize I just said that entertainment is in- lapses in storytelling is that they are completely cluded in truth-in-speech standards. It’s very diff- unnecessary. They are based on nothing more fferent, applied to that industry, but it still applies. than laziness. One can write the story and in-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 23 clude the real physics, biology or chemistry grimmest war stories impossible. The truth about where it matters without changing the degree of the actual practice of science would make “War suspense or interest by one jot. All that’s needed and Peace” seem like a fast-paced action flick. is a bit of research into the facts. In the bus story, The truth about politics would be unwatchable. the first part of the road just needed to be higher As before, where there’s doubt, let people speak than the second. Then the front of the bus could out. start falling, the way it would at real world A very difficult case is unreality that shades in- speeds, and (given a good stunt driver) the chasm to such a one-sided presentation it amounts to a could have still been almost as wide as the bus’ propaganda piece for very destructive attitudes. wheelbase. The larger the media company, the What should one do, for instance, about D. W. less excuse they have. A thousand biologists Griffith’s classic, “Birth of a Nation?” I really would have been glad to volunteer the informa- don’t know. So if I were deciding, I would have to tion to Paramount that the sentence “Oh my allow it. Another example is entertainment God! The DNA! It’s degrading into amino acids!” whose whole point seems to be violence. One needed a minor change: “Oh my God! The DNA! such game or movie is just stupid. A whole It’s degrading into nucleic acids!” That error nev- decades-long drumbeat of them is going to shape er killed anyone, but it adds to the confusion attitudes. But at what point does one draw the around science for nothing. line? Possibly a requirement to depict the action From a writer’s perspective, it’s ironic that tak- and physical effects in accord with real physics ing care about facts is part of awareness and re- and biology would be enough to reduce the pro- spect for the power of storytelling. Pretending it paganda value. doesn’t matter is saying that nobody listens to The sanctions for dangerous lies in entertain- that stuff. The social good, however, is that sto- ment need to be different than in, for instance, ries are an important and effortless way for peo- news. Probably the most damning thing of all ple to learn. Entertainment can assist in that vital would be a requirement to intercut a clip show- social function in ways that don’t interfere with ing what was very wrong about a scene. The sto- it’s primary mission at all. ry would come to a screeching halt, the audience Consider another example. Medical emergen- would be exposed to the issue, and there’s proba- cies in entertainment generally leave the audi- bly every chance they’d flip to something else en- ence with the impression that the way to get tirely, which is the worst thing you can do to a help is to push a few buttons on a phone and storyteller. The people behind the entertainment shout, “Ambulance! Now!” (Yes, yes, I know. I em- causing the problem would be required to fund bellish a bit for the sake of my story … .) That’s al- the production of the clip made for those who so the natural thing to do when desperate, so successfully objected to its stupidity. That would there’s nothing in an inexperienced audience’s mean a pre-release would have to be available to mind to suggest otherwise. The result is that in those who wanted to examine it for errors. real life valuable time is wasted while dispatchers There’s a remaining gray area I wouldn’t know get the information they need. That really can kill how to handle at all, and yet which is in many people. Following the real protocol would neces- ways the worst problem of all. (I discussed this in sarily change the pace of the story at that point, an earlier piece, Weaponized Free Speech [101] , but it’s a truly vital part of social education, and from which the following is taken.) I’ve been dis- it doesn’t actually need to change the tension. It’s cussing the pernicious effect of lies, but the big- the type of fact-based truth that needs to be re- ger issue is not lies. The bigger issue is what to quired so that storytellers without enough re- do when free speech itself is the problem. spect for their craft don’t spread toxic misinfor- In a 2006 article [102] by George Packer, Kil- mation. cullen, a counterinsurgency expert, makes the Being unreal is an important part of entertain- point that “when insurgents ambush an Ameri- ment, and the distinction to dangerous and use- can convoy in Iraq, ‘they’re not doing that be- less untruth is hard to draw. The truth about the cause they want to reduce the number of facts of war, for instance, would make all but the Humvees we have in Iraq by one. They’re doing it
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 24 because they want spectacular media footage of prohibition against yelling “Fire!” as a prank in a burning Humvee.’ ” The US government has al- crowded theaters. Freedom of speech understood so used events to shape rather than inform in a way that improves the signal to noise ratio thought. One needs only to count the incidence would make it easier to develop that informed of terror alerts in the year leading up to and the citizenry on which sustainable societies depend. year following the 2004 presidential elections for one example. Like mangled bodies around a burn- ing Humvee, these things aren’t lies. The pictures Summary aren’t doctored; the information leading to the alert may be genuine. And yet, their purpose is What are the conclusions from this discussion not to tell the truth. of rights? One is that rights, to be rights at all There is something deeply sinister about using and not privileges, must apply to everyone equal- freedom of speech to cloud thinking instead of to ly. Two is that the rights themselves are not clarify it. There’s a lethal virus in there, some- equal. To preserve the maximum equality among where, when free speech is used to steer people’s people, it’s essential to take the inequality among feelings in ways that bypass their higher brain rights into account when they conflict. It’s also functions. And that’s especially true when those essential to recognize that they will sometimes brain functions are bypassed to make it easier to conflict, even in a theoretically perfect system, kill people. because their relative importance can vary in diff- What’s the cure? Publicity is the point of fferent circumstances and because people place weaponized speech, and yet there is no way to different priorities on them. say, “You can report on these stories, but not The conflicts among rights need to be resolved those stories” without striking at the heart of in ways that are explicitly directed toward pre- free speech. serving the maximum equality among people. If censorship couldn’t work, it might seem That requires two important balancing acts. One that an alternative is to make the voice of reason is explicit recognition of which rights depend on louder until it overmatches violence, but I don’t others. The current implicit assumption that see how. There is no symmetrical fix. There is no rights are equal serves only those people who are way for reason to deliver a message that has the more equal than others. If there is explicit recog- same punch as dead bodies. If it tried, it would nition of inequality, then primary rights, such as cease to be a voice of reason. freedom of movement or speech, can be given I don’t see a solution so long as there are peo- the necessary precedence over dependent ones, ple willing to commit violent crimes or violent such as freedom of religion. Two is that conflicts acts or wars, so long as there are people who need to be resolved in ways that do the least broadcast them, and so long as there are people overall damage to any of the rights. All of them who want to hear that message. The “market- need to be viable, because they’re all essential to place” of ideas only functions when nobody some degree. Allowing any right to become brings a machine gun into it. meaningless, which is what happens when one is There are several main points to keep in mind automatically demoted, opens the door to the on the subject of limiting freedom of speech. It erosion of all rights. relies just as much on the presence of silence as I want to stress that when I say “necessary it does on avoiding silencing. When distinguish- precedence” for some rights that does not mean ing signal from noise, in order to know what to exclusive or automatic precedence. It means that silence, any distinctions that can’t be made ob- we have to be very careful about preserving the jectively must default to favoring the freedom to linchpin rights, but it does not mean that they al- speak. There are, however, many more distinc- ways “win.” The essential point is the balance, tions that can be made than we make now, pri- and that the different kinds of balance all have to marily those which relate to matters of fact. Im- happen at the same time. It’s rather like surfing, plementing factual-truth-in-speech practices does in which balancing for forward motion and for not lead to censorship any more than does the not falling down both have to be done at once.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 25
On a different level, it’s the same problem we simple, rigid system can handle the complex and solve in order to walk. Both require practice, but fluid dilemmas of people’s rights may be decisive, they’re not impossible. but it achieves the wrong goal. The Queen in Al- The point is that the balance in any given case ice Through the Looking Glass was wonderfully depends on the situation so it has to be decided decisive about demanding people’s heads, but it on its merits. The goal is the same: not to fall in didn’t do much for running the country. In Alice’s the physical world, and to preserve maximum Wonderland that didn’t matter. In the real world, equality in the social world. The balance that we wind up having to deal with the inevitable achieves the goal is always different. I’m not try- and nasty consequences. ing to say that it would be easy, but I am saying it’s possible. It’s also necessary. Pretending that a + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 26
Environment
grasp. The truth is that we have miles to go. If everyone can pollute and use resources Defining the Problem equally, then it follows that social justice requires completely clean, sustainable, and renewable The government’s role in environmental issues agriculture, technology, and industry. The same is currently seen as something like neighborhood holds for individual activities. There’s no question code compliance. It should stop people from lit- that we’re so far away from justice that it would tering and make sure the place looks nice. It’s take time to reach it. The transition would have handled very much as an afterthought, as some- to be measured and planned if it wasn’t to create thing far removed from the core functions of de- more suffering than it solved. And there’s no fence, law, and order. Government is supposed to question on a practical level that it’s a real chal- regulate the interactions of people. The environ- lenge, considering our current technologies, to ment is just where we live. But with technology move from burning through our planet toward comes increased power. People can change the living on it. environment to the extent of destroying liveli- hoods and lives. Suddenly, the environment is a massive way people affect people. Environmental Facts (not decisions) regulation has gone from being an afterthought against littering to being a core function of gov- One problem continually crops up in this tech- ernment. nological age: the distinction between facts and If rights are the essential limits that enable decisions is not clear enough. They are not the free societies, and if they apply equally to every- same thing. Treating them as interchangeable one, preserving the environment is the first, not causes problems instead of solving them. A deci- the last, function of government. After all, given sion can’t generate a fact, or vice versa, and yet that people’s activities have effects on the physi- people seem to expect discussions to generate ev- cal world, then equality among people means idence and more study to indicate a course of ac- that everyone has the same right to affect the en- tion. Looking for things in the wrong place is a vironment. Imagine if every man, woman, and sure way not to find them. child on the planet polluted as much as the worst There’s also a lack of clarity about the distinc- offenders. What we’ve done is give a few people tion between facts and ideas. In the wonderful the privilege to pollute and use resources out of words of Moynihan, you are entitled to your own all proportion by virtue of having been first or opinions, but you’re not entitled to your own having more money. There is not one shred of facts. Yet it’s common to hear people say they fairness in that, and the consequences for the liv- don’t “believe in” a given problem, and then to ability of the whole Earth are just what you expect their belief to be accommodated, as if it would expect from gross injustice. Environmental really was a religion that deserved protection. I issues are a fundamental component of social discussed issues involved in delimiting objectively justice. One could say they are the fundamental verifiable facts (as opposed to truth) at greater component since without a viable physical envi- length in the Free Speech vs. Noise [103] section of ronment none of the other rights have any mean- the Rights chapter. ing. The main point here is that we do have an eff- It’s intimidating, or discouraging, or both, that ffective way of finding objectively verifiable facts. the very first field of activity under consideration It’s called the scientific method. Not using sci- requires a realignment of everything we do if the ence, and acting as if the facts can emerge from a principle of equality is actually applied. The as- political discussion, is a waste of time. It’s as silly sumption of equality has become so ingrained as arguing about whether the planet is round. It that evidence to the contrary can be hard to is not a mark of balance, seriousness, or complex-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 27 ity to do that. It’s a way of showing one doesn’t ing the questions scientists may ask. understand the topic. A discussion of environ- Once science has spoken on an issue, the only mental issues has to encompass the complexity problem for non-scientists is figuring out which of competing interests, but that does not include experts to believe. It’s not simple for non-special- ignoring the available evidence. ists to evaluate technical evidence, nor should It would, of course, be a departure to require a they have to. That’s what the specialists are for. government to pay attention to the facts, but it’s As a scientist myself, I think there’s a rather easy necessary for real equality. Without an explicit re- answer to this dilemma. It may not be the best quirement to get and use the evidence, we are one, but it’s a start. entitling some people to their own facts. Lack of What we should do is measure the degree of access to information, whether because it’s ac- agreement among the specialists, who can evalu- tively hidden or poorly presented, deprives people ate the evidence. And we should measure that of their single best tool to make good decisions. agreement not by a poll, because scientists are Then they can plausibly be told to leave it to the notorious for waffling, but by tracking the con- experts. But worst of all, obscuring the facts is clusions in peer-reviewed journals. Sample size the least visible and thus most effective weapon might be a problem for insufficiently studied of those with a hidden agenda. It’s the primary questions, but the burning issues of the day gen- tool of those who want to take more than their erally receive a good bit of attention. Then all one fair share. Having the facts and giving them their has to do is decide which level of agreement proper role is not a minor issue. It’s central to a among scientists is significant. Since we’re deal- fair government. ing with human beings, perhaps it would be ap- I have to go off on a tangent here, since I’ve propriate to take the level social scientists use: come down solidly on the boring side of the de- 90%. bate about whether facts are out there or some- It’s not unknown for a scientific consensus to thing we shape inside our heads. In any practical be overturned, and it’s great fun to point out the sense, facts are objective … facts and we have to few examples (such as phlogiston [106] and land adapt to them. But there are a number of gray ar- bridges [107] ), but it is very uncommon. New dis- eas on the path toward figuring out what those coveries happen all the time, and as consensus facts are. develops it’s refined by more and better data, but First, if we rely on science, it’s essential that those are both different from being flat wrong. scientists ask the questions that need answers. Conclusions that stand the test of time while The very questions being asked can steer thought subjected to the scientific method are rarely on a subject. That’s a huge, almost invisible issue flat-out wrong. precisely because it’s hard even to see the ques- Following better-than-90% agreement among tions that aren’t being asked. (I touch upon it scientists is a much safer bet than most of the here [104] .) It’s beyond the scope of a discussion bets we take in life. When the vast majority of on the environment to explore that particular scientists agree, we can take it that the evidence philosophical point, but it does have to be ad- is solid and the issue in question is settled, even dressed effectively in any system of government if we don’t understand how they got there. It’s that would like to be reality-based. And that the same as accepting that the law of gravity is won’t be easy because, among other things, it not in serious dispute, even though most of us implies changes in the reward structure of acad- don’t understand the physics involved. (Up on eme. (Discussed briefly in Education [105] ). Fur- their own high level, that includes the physicists ther, even though they may know which ques- looking for the Higgs boson, come to think of it.) tions need asking, scientists can easily be herded Just because, before Newton, people had a differ- into avoiding topics by depriving them of fund- ent explanation for the lack of levitation doesn’t ing. Awareness of these background issues is es- mean that different “beliefs” about gravity must sential in order to neutralize them, not as a rea- be entertained. son to deny the usefulness of science. It’s a rea- Presenting the right information is only half son to make sure there are no pressures channel- the battle. Not presenting the wrong information
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 28 is perhaps a bigger and harder task. I’m not sure called lateral gene transfer. That’s never been ob- that it’s even theoretically possible when news is served between large organisms like corn or for-profit. Sensation will always make a quicker cows and humans. Transfer of genetic material buck than education. And yet, when there’s from bacteria to humans has occurred and it’s something as sensationally dangerous as global been studied (e. g. Science, 2001 [108] ). It’s a rarer warming, the “news” media can’t be bothered to event than, say, a large meteor strike. A search of discuss context or consequences. The structural the literature allows one to say there is well over fault may be that entertainment ceases to be en- 99% agreement that genetic damage to humans tertaining when it reminds viewers of real prob- is not the problem. lems, and people generally would rather be enter- On the other hand, if you search for ecological tained than bothered. In a for-profit environment, damage from lateral gene transfer, allergic reac- “news” isn’t just a minor irritant obstructing tions to modified proteins, or nutritional damage knowledge. It may well inevitably become the an- to humans due to the poor farming practices fa- tithesis of understanding. cilitated by the genetically modified organism, That is a non-trivial problem when fairness re- then it’s a different story. (The nutritional dam- quires accessible information. It’s another case of age is due, I suspect, to the fact that about 75% conflicting rights, one where it’s foolish to hope of genetically engineered crops involve genes for free speech can solve the problem of costly RoundUp, or glyphosate, resistance. At least it did speech. I’ve tried to come up with some ideas the last time I looked, around 2006. In that case, about how to approach a fact-checking, truth- crops are engineered to resist large doses of her- in-speech goal, which I mentioned in the Free bicide so that very high doses can be applied. Speech vs Noise [103] section. Whatever methods That reduces weed competition until resistance prove most effective, the important point is that ratchets up. For a while, yields are higher. Obvi- there do need to be standards for what consti- ously, using vast quantities of RoundUp is not tutes actual news. People have no way of know- conducive to either nutritional quality or ecologi- ing what’s true in unfamiliar topics, and it’s es- cal health.) I haven’t tallied the papers to know sential to make it easy for everyone to distinguish what the level of consensus is, but even a cursory fantasy from reality. It’s also essential to prevent glance shows that there’s evidence of a problem, silencing of any opinions and alternate interpre- enough to make it worth looking into. tations. It’s a difficult balancing act. The rules are A more difficult example is nanoparticles. bound to be imperfect and in constant need of There’s plenty of research showing that wonder- improvement, but there do have to be truth- ful and amazing things are just around the cor- in-speech rules. ner, or even already here, because of nanotech- So the first step in dealing with environmental nology. That’s great, and we’re gearing up to pur- issues is to get the evidence, the actual evidence, sue it in the usual way. No holds barred. Mean- not the evidence according to anyone who stands while, there are disquieting rumbles in the bio- to make money by the result. None of that can be medical research that the particles are the right a political process and give reality-based results. size to interact with cells, and that some of them Then one tallies the weight of the evidence. It’s may even be carcinogenic [109] in much the same not hard to do and specialists in government and way as asbestos fibers. It’s a new field, and with- watchdog groups could provide that information. out a review of the literature I couldn’t tell you I’ll give a few examples of a very informal tally of whether there’s an emerging consensus on this. the evidence in the controversies about genetical- What is clear is that there is some danger here. ly engineered food, nanoparticles, and global The question then becomes what to do about it. warming. More study? Mandating better containment of The popular concern about engineered food, nanoparticles preventively (and expensively)? embodied in the colorful term “frankenfoods,” is Halting all use of nanotechnology? Decisions of some kind of genetic damage from these mu- about future action are choices, not facts, and tated organisms. That would require genes in have to be approached differently, as I’ll discuss frankenfoods to infect humans through a process in a moment.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 29
Or take yet one more topical example: global spent. It may be spent directly on clean air or in- warming. Far over 90% of climatologists [110] say directly on disease, reduced food production, or a the data show our activities are warming the hundred other things. In all cases, there’s a cost. planet far beyond the averages seen in hundreds When it’s stated plainly like that, nobody de- of thousands of years (e.g. Nature [111] ). For those nies it, and yet it’s always waved away as being who want more, a couple of summaries of data irrelevant in something called the real world. here [112] and here [113] , and a recent article [114] That makes no sense. The real world is the one showing how feedback loops and thermal storage without a free lunch. Perpetual motion machines take the situation beyond our ability to influence. are the fantasy. It doesn’t matter how abstruse With that kind of consensus, the issue is settled the downstream math is, the machine will not (and has been for years). Global warming is right work. Everybody knows that, too. Pretending oth- up there with other facts established well beyond erwise, however, lets the unspoken gamble con- the 90% consensus standard, such as the harm- tinue. It’s the bet that someone else will pay the fulness of smog, the carrying capacity of given price while we get the goods. That’s what it’s re- ecologies, evolution, and reduced lifespan from ally all about. smoking. Without digging very far, people will admit Once the fact-based step is done, the next one that’s what they’re doing. Sometimes they even is deciding what to do about it. Science may be put it on bumperstickers. “Nuke their ass. Steal the best tool for figuring out if there’s a problem their gas” for example. Or talk to someone about and for finding possible solutions. But it can not downstream costs, and the response is liable to make the decision on which solution to use. That be, “In the long run, we’re all dead.” No, actually, involves making choices, not discovering facts. we aren’t, unless the whole human race goes ex- It’s foolish to think a friendly discussion could tinct. What they’re really saying is that other peo- find a fact, and it’s equally foolish to think sci- ple’s grandchildren don’t matter. (Their own will ence can find a decision. A decision will never presumably somehow be immune.) emerge from more study. That will only produce If there were some way to ensure that all the more facts. (At best.) Facts inform a decision, but costs could be passed to powerless people, then they can’t make it, and pretending otherwise is at least from a biological standpoint the damage just a way of taking decisions out of our hands would be limited and the system wouldn’t neces- and giving them to interested parties or the inex- sarily collapse. But the most voiceless group of all orable march of events. is future people, and the big problem with the fu- ture is that it doesn’t stay put. It becomes now. We’re becoming the people who’ll pay the price Costs and Choices even though we won’t get the benefits because those were already taken. At that point, it ceases Before going into what equitable decision- to look like such a bright idea. making might look like, it’s vital to recognize the So, since what I’m trying to do here is delin- role of costs in making a decision. eate a fair system, the first point to make about There’s a funny assumption that runs through costs is that they are never zero. We don’t get to the thinking about environmental costs. It’s em- decide whether to spend money or not. We only bodied, for instance, in the polls asking people get to decide when to spend it and how high a what they’re willing to spend on, say, air quality. price to pay. Paying early for intelligent interven- The answers are generally on the order of fifty tion is always the cheapest solution. Letting cents a day, and this is then taken in all serious- events happen and then trying to recover from ness by economists as a starting point for dis- disaster is always the most expensive. In be- cussing realistic tax costs of environmental poli- tween, there’s a range of relationships between cies. It’s as if they truly believed in a free lunch. prevention and price. Somebody always pays and, There is no free lunch. The choice is not be- in fairness, that should be the people who incur tween paying fifty cents or nothing. The no-cost the costs. scenario does not exist. The money will always be To go back to the clean air example, the real
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 30 question is not “Do you want to pay for healthy ing and providing information, follow that with a air?” It’s “Would you rather pay for healthy air or call for comments, a ruling, and possibly appeals. for dirty air?” Nor is it, “How much do you want However, fairness requires much higher trans- to pay?” It’s “Which choice, with it’s associated parency and accountability. It also requires that price tag, do you take?” In a fair system, the costs the fair and open process results in the actual rul- of any choice have to be attached to that choice. ings instead of being a way to keep people busy If all the pluses and minuses are explicit up front, while the real decisions are made elsewhere. the optimum choice is often easy to see. Environmental decisions are a special case of That obvious method of pricing isn’t already decision-making generally, which I’ll discuss in applied for the simple reason that industries are the first Government [115] chapter. Decisions can not currently regulated that way. Governments be grouped into three quite different types. allow them to pass costs on to people and to fu- The most far reaching kind should perhaps be ture generations. Accountants then label those called unexamined assumptions rather than deci- costs “external” to the companies’ own balance sions. They’re orientations more than conscious sheets and they don’t book them. In many ways thoughts and people can dislike examining them, it’s astounding that, when you come right down but that doesn’t stop them from influencing to it, an accounting rule is the proximal cause of choices and outcomes. For instance, the issue of our environmental disasters. However, unlike the when to take action is probably most acute for environment itself, regulations can be given a environmental issues. There’s a big difference in do-over. costs and benefits depending on whether one I’d like to stress that it is possible to make esti- chooses prevention or cure, and since it deals mates of costs, including downstream medical with the physical world, it’s not usually possible and ecological costs. Even if it’s nothing but a to start over after making a mistake. Absolute minimum and maximum boundary, it gives a prevention, that is, doing nothing unless it’s first pointer to the order of magnitude involved. The shown to be harmless, would mean real safety. It newer and less known the technology, the more would also mean that nobody could ever make a the estimates will need refinement as data be- move, because everything, including sitting in a come available. But that does not affect the vast room and growing fat, has some level of harm or majority of estimates for the simple reason that risk associated with it. The opposite approach, the bulk of technology is necessarily not new. waiting for problems to happen and then curing There are always data available to estimate most them, allows a great deal of room for initiative, risks, costs, and benefits. When there is over 90% but it also puts us in our current interesting situ- agreement on what the data show, then that be- ation where we get to find out if any of the disas- longs in government, voter, and news informa- ters actually have a cure. The balance of risk-tak- tion. There’s also nothing except special interests ing — and the associated danger of disaster and to stop those estimates from being clearly pre- benefits of innovation — is a community decision. sented in ways that can be grasped at a glance, One could almost say a cultural decision. and that can link to layers of medium and com- On a less lofty level are broad issues of policy. plete details for interested voters and specialists. For instance, which mix of power sources to use in a given area if wind and tidal are feasible as well as solar. Broad policies are more a matter of Decisions (not facts) priorities than facts, except perhaps at the ex- tremes, and are appropriately decided by consen- Finding and presenting the facts may not be sus processes, such as voting. simple, but making the right decisions is even The vast majority of decisions are specific: harder. The pressure from interested parties what to do in a given situation to get a given out- ratchets up, which makes the essential task of ig- come. These require knowledge and constant at- noring them that much tougher. tention detail, in other words they require profes- The general steps to a decision would be simi- sionals. Making voters decide specific questions lar to the official process now. Start with gather- results in voter fatigue and, at best, near-random
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 31 choices based on anything but the boring facts. Total cost is necessarily nebulous. However, neb- Responsible officials with the necessary back- ulosity in and of itself doesn’t stop businesses ground need to be appointed to make these deci- from coming up with an estimated price. Few sions. I mean that adjective “responsible” literal- things could be more intangible than good will, ly. Officials who make decisions against the evi- yet it’s regularly estimated in accounting. Costing dence that lead to predictable bad outcomes such things out doesn’t require any conceptual should be held personally responsible for them. breakthroughs. It’s only some of them, the ones All types of decisions, if they’re to be rational which reduce profit, that are supposedly too hard and equitable, depend on transparency in the to handle. And that, as I’ve said several times, is whole process, explicit criteria, and the right to just an excuse to pass the hidden costs on to appeal. someone else with no voice in the matter. Transparency means more than making details While I’m on the subject of intangibles, I’d like available. The experts of obfuscation have figured to make the point again that there is no way to out how to deal with the requirement to provide avoid dealing with them. Estimates are necessari- details. They drown people in data. Providing all ly not perfect, and they always need refining as the data is essential, but transparency also means more data come in. People also disagree about well-summarized data, graphically presented in the very premises of the estimates since priorities the clearest way possible. It means cognitively, vary. However, none of that is a sufficient excuse not just physically, accessible information. It also for pretending that things like future costs or means that every step of the process, the facts, quality of life don’t exist. Ignoring them doesn’t deliberations, rationales, and outcomes, should make them go away. All it’s done is take away our be clear. control over the process. In one respect, though, there could be less No matter how nebulous important intangi- transparency than we have now without losing bles are, some estimate of them is better than accountability. So far, the rules about recording none. The way to mitigate the associated uncer- every word and note don’t seem to serve much tainties is not ignorance but clarity about the as- purpose. Some quite spectacular corruption has sumptions and data behind the estimates. The festered right next to those rules, flouting them probable range of estimates, not just the best effortlessly. When recordkeeping does prevent guess, must be explicit. When the assumptions corruption, then it must be required. But theatre and their implications are clearly stated, people should be reserved for the arts. can make their own adjustments based on their Explicit criteria in a fair system would be sim- own priorities. But once all that has been done, ple. Double standards should not be in evidence once we’ve given the intangibles our best guess at any point. Given that criterion, least total cost and made clear what that guess is based on, then is the yardstick to differentiate among choices. we have to go with it. As I said earlier [116] , refus- That’s not to say that least total cost has some ing to consider significant complicating factors sort of moral superiority in itself or that it’s al- because they make the question messy is a sign ways the best yardstick. It applies in this case be- of avoiding real answers. cause a government is, in effect, a way of decid- The right of appeal, which provides a check on ing how to spend other people’s money, and the arbitrary or corrupt decisions, is important to only right answer after the demands of fairness keep feedback loops short. Different kinds of ap- are satisfied is that as little as possible should be peal are appropriate for different deficiencies. If a wasted. decision ignored vital facts, it needs review by ex- Total cost is only easy to discuss, not easy to perts and a legal process to sustain or overturn it. determine. It’s really short for “the sum of tangi- That would be true whether the disputed deci- ble and intangible costs plus the community’s sion was made by officials or voters. Majority priorites.” Some of the costs and benefits will vote can’t decide facts. A discussion of the legal have an obvious price tag. Others, like how much process in is the first Government chapter [98] . If the community cares about visual pollution ver- the deficiency was in not holding a vote when it sus product price may be very hard to pin down. would have been appropriate, or in the voting
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 32 process itself — for instance, not making all rele- Human factors cause two very different obsta- vant facts available — then the petition would be cles to progress on environmental issues. for a vote on the topic. That process is discussed The first is that pursuing perfect environmen- in the section on voting [117] . Since the idea is for tal policies too singlemindedly would cause more it to be a real check, not just a means of harass- hardship than it prevents. There’s a gap between ment for people with vested interests, some level what’s right and what’s attainable because we’ve of general support needs to be required as dis- let the distance grow too big. It’s one more case cussed in that section. where rights have to be balanced to achieve fair- The argument against a decision has to be ness. With time, if we moved toward sustainabili- based on the same goal, fairness and least total ty, this obstacle would evaporate. cost, and it would have to show where and why The other one, however, would not. We’ll al- the decision taken, whether by officials or voters, ways have people who try to trash the environ- missed the optimum. The suit wouldn’t necessar- ment for personal gain. Selfishness doesn’t disap- ily have to be heard if careful consideration indi- pear in the face of fairness. It’s merely contained. cated that the people complaining did not have a Each of these obstacles requires it’s own ap- reasonable interpretation of the facts on their proach. Going slower than one would like out of side. That decision could itself be appealed some consideration for the people involved may be nec- limited number of times. If they did have a case, essary in the first case, but is toxic in the second however, and if they prevailed, then the decision one. I’ll talk about mitigating some of the transi- would be nullified and the official who made it, tion problems first, and then discuss the so far especially if it wasn’t the first such error, would unlabelled class of crimes against the environ- be that much closer to losing their job. ment. That brings me to the officials, the actual peo- A big issue whenever there’s talk of balancing ple whose job it is to implement regulation when competing interests is that before you know it, it will do the most good for the least cost. It all the balance winds up on the side of all the takes a great deal of expertise to recognize those money. It’s too easy to use the gap between points. When the process is done right, it will what’s right and what’s possible as an excuse to look to the general public like nothing has hap- slide into an ever-diminishing definition of “possi- pened. There won’t be any disasters that need fix- ble.” As in other situations when the easy way ing. They will have all been prevented. And yet in- out is to avoid conflict with vested interests, it’s novation will never be hampered. essential to explicitly and consciously compen- Back in the real world, there will always be sate for the effect of power on decision making. officials who are less omniscient and who need The only valid reason to go slow is to spread the to be prodded in the right direction. Methods to hardship of transition for the majority of people that end are discussed under Oversight [97] . The over enough time so that there’s an optimum be- officials who need so much prodding that they’re tween achieving a sustainable system and the more trouble than they’re worth need to find cost and effort required. It’s about the greatest other lines of work. The definition of that point good of the greatest number, not the greatest at which officials need to be fired might vary a good of the biggest pile of money. bit across communities, but there needs to be an Even when the ideal is not yet attainable, explicit point. Otherwise the tendency is always some ways of getting there may be better than to excuse bad behavior from those in charge. others. I’ll state the obvious: for any damaging in- Last, there needs to be recourse against those dustry, the solution in a rational world is to re- who’ve been negligent, incompetent, or criminal. duce the damage to the minimum, to make sure Which brings me to the next section on what to that no people are hurt by it, and to reduce need do about problems. for non-renewables by every possible recycling method. One way of reducing damage is to switch from Problems and Penalties methods that create hard-to-handle diffuse pollu- tion, and instead use processes that cause more
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 33 easily controlled point source pollution. For in- of-the-road” ones, could then be put out for stance, pollution from isolated large power widespread, double-blind peer review and com- plants is easier to contain than that from millions ment. The study (or studies) judged to have the of vehicles. Least total cost solutions would con- most robust methods and conclusions would centrate pollution to its most controllable mini- then be used to set policy. If two of them are in a mum and then make sure it does not escape into tie, a midpoint between them could be used. And the environment at large. then, since our knowledge is necessarily approxi- Materials research that helps find renewable mate, the decisions should be reviewed by the substitutes would be promoted. That research is same process every so often, maybe every ten also part of the price of using non-renewables. In years, like the Census. It probably goes without a far future time, space-based industry might saying that such a method is not perfect and make finite resources functionally infinite. (That’s should be improved, but I hope it also goes with- a boring and practical reason to continue explor- out saying that it would be a lot better than what ing space, besides the much more fun one of we have now. Almost anything would be. boldly going where no one has gone before). Limits mean different things in different indus- The cost of doing what is needed to cancel out tries because there’s varying potential to ap- the damage from damaging industries is simply proach the ideal. There’s no reason why, eventu- the cost of doing business. Putting those costs on ally, agriculture couldn’t be a non-polluting, sus- the books where they belong would mean that tainable industry. There’s no reason why energy prices contained real cost information, which is production couldn’t come very close to that ideal. always said to be desirable for markets. Fair pric- At the other end of the scale, there is no way for ing would also make it much easier to evaluate an extractive industry to be theoretically sustain- alternatives as they’re developed. able (barring faster-than-light travel, I suppose) If some damage is allowed in the interests of or completely non-polluting. And, although it’s making transition costs less painful, then there possible that in some far future time civilization has to be an explicit floor below which more will cease to need metals, I don’t see that hap- damage is unacceptable. That goes back to the pening soon no matter how fair a society is. point that paying nothing is not a real option. On various levels geared to their own require- That floor has to be compatible with improving ments, industries will always need practicality sustainability and needs to meet standards of sci- adjustments to the ideal of purity and sustain- entific validity. Communities could move toward ability. That departure from the ideal incurs costs sustainability faster, if they feel able to handle to compensate for the damage. The important the cost, but they couldn’t move slower. It’s emi- point is that the expense of those adjustments nently clear by now that hyperslow motion to- should be paid when they’re made, and not ward a goal is just another way of avoiding it. dumped on a future that has no vote in the mat- A minimum rate of progress toward sustain- ter. If all costs are included, the tendency to use ability means doing better than running in place, up the planet will be de-incentivized, to use busi- but determining that rate is the same type of ness’s own doublespeak. problem as pinning down other environmental is- In a bit of a class by itself is individual pollu- sues. The minimum rate has to be estimated be- tion, things like backyard barbecues, household cause we can’t have perfect knowledge that tells chemicals, and batteries thrown into the trash. us exactly what the limits are. But the one thing This is where people’s desire for a healthy envi- a minimum rate of progress does not mean is ronment meets not only the cost but also the in- pretending there’s no answer merely because convenience. It’s not just some faceless fat cat there’s no precise one. who has to shape up. There tends to be less ac- An example of one possible way of determin- tion on this front than one might expect from the ing limits is to commission studies, say three of widespread support for “green” issues. them, from specialists who represent the range The reason for the recalcitrance comes from of ideas in that particular field. Those three stud- the other sticking point with regard to individual ies, the “no-limits,” “strict limits,” and “middle- pollution. It’s a similar problem to mass transit.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 34
There is no way for an individual to have mass something like that. There is no way to recover transit, and there is no way for an individual to what was lost, and any punishment is insignifi- clean the whole environment. Only a social solu- cant in the face of the suffering caused. tion is possible to a social problem. That makes it We’re pretty clear on the minor nature of the very discouraging when there’s no social direc- first type of environmental crime. But the kind tion behind those goals. which causes physical harm to people doesn’t However, when there is, then individual action seem to be on the legal radar yet. The kind that fits that paradigm. In places with excellent mass murders a whole species doesn’t even have a transit, such as Holland, it’s a significant way of name. Environmental crimes are all punished as moving people, with all the attendant social ben- if they’re a harmless white-collar infraction of efits. Likewise, when the whole society makes it some arcane legalism about property. Not all of simple to recycle, to keep houses clean without them are. Some are wholesale robbery, assault, violent toxins, and so on, individual pollution poisoning and murder. The fact that they’re big- might well cease to exist. People don’t contribute ger than ordinary crimes does not make them to pollution and resource depletion because it better. It makes them worse. They need to be makes them feel good. We do it because we have punished accordingly both for the sake of justice, no other sufficiently easy choice. and to help those who are slow to understand Individuals do have a massive effect on the en- what’s at stake. vironment in another way, one that isn’t usually One problem peculiar to environmental crime classed with environmental issues. Without effec- is figuring out who to punish. In the Chernobyl tive and universal policies of sustainability, the example, is it the people who decided to build a number of people on the planet is the single reactor? The ones who decided to build that type biggest determinant of how much damage we do. of reactor? The ones who decided that running Infuencing the number of children people have without maximum safeguards was worth the cuts across so many rights, freedoms, privileges, risk? And who are all these people? It’s one of the and issues that it needs a chapter of its own [118] . hallmarks of modern industrial society. No one is I’d just like to stress here that population is, obvi- responsible. ously, an environmental issue. If one admits the That’s the primary change needed in law and principle that we don’t have the right to ruin the custom. The people holding the final word on de- environment for each other, then it applies to in- cisions affecting the environment have to be held dividuals just as it does to industry. personally responsible for those decisions. Right Those were some of the human problems as- now, there’s so little sense of the seriousness of sociated with environmental issues. The last is- the crime that the same people who committed sue is human crimes and penalties. it can generally retain their jobs as if it was just Punishments are supposed to be proportional some accident that happened on their watch. In to the crime committed, so the first question is fairness, responsibility can’t be palmed off on a where does environmental crime fit in the legal fiction of corporate entities without any ac- scheme of things? Is it a property crime? A crime tual corpus. Actual human beings with the actual against humanity? Something else entirely? power have to hold the actual responsibility. Dumping a load of packing crates in an empty Those are the same rules that apply to everyone field is an environmental crime, but it’s pretty else. If people were less deafened by the call to much down there with littering. It would hardly power, it would be considered absurd to jail qualify as the crime of the century. Closer to the shoplifters while putting decision-makers in an other end of the scale is something like the Cher- accountability-free zone. nobyl nuclear reactor accident. Sickening thou- Environmental issues are perhaps the most im- sands of people, killing some of them, causing portant area where the feedback loop between birth defects, and making a whole section of our those making the decisions and those dealing planet a no-man’s land does qualify as a new and with their consequences has to be so short that awful kind of crime. It’s hard to even imagine there’s no difference between the two sets of what would be the appropriate penalties for people. A system that makes it simple for small
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 35 voices to call big ones to account should help to 2006 review of the economics of climate change reach that goal. [121]. (Wikipedia has a summary [122] .) His esti- Restitution is always a factor in environmental mate is that 1% of global GDP is the cost of avert- cases. Recovery always costs money, and that ing “the worst effects” of climate change, usually money should come first from the pockets of pegged at 450ppm CO2eq, although recent data those responsible for the problem. It doesn’t mat- indicates a number closer to 400ppm or even ter if the scale of the costs makes any indvidual lower. Note that his target is at the lowest end of fortune a drop in the proverbial bucket. No assets the range studied by IPCC 2007, so implementing controlled by a responsible party should be it is bound to be more expensive. off-limits, there can be no sheltering of funds That brings up the question of what the scien- from the consequences of environmental mis- tifically valid target should be. There are plenty of deeds. Fairness requires that. indications that feedback loops have been insuffi- The bottom line is that the environment is the ciently included in climate change models, and precondition for every aspect of quality of life, that therefore the situation is much more dire and for life itself. Crimes against life have to be even than most predictions so far (i.e. 2009). Ac- treated with the same seriousness whether cording to the grand old scientist of climate they’re small- or large-scale. change, James Hansen, we’d have to return to a level below 350 ppm to avert unacceptable (read impoverishing and lethal) warming. (An explana- Cost of Transition tion of the relationships between CO2 ppm and temperature increases is here [123] .) The How to get from where we are, here on the take-home message is that aiming for less than brink of ecological disaster, to the promised land 450ppm CO2 eq is not excessive or idealistic. It’s of sustainability is, of course, the burning ques- on the optimistic side of what it will take to avert tion. As a matter of method rather than principle, disaster. And since averting disaster is the mini- it belongs to the purview of economists and spe- mum acceptable course, whatever it takes to cialists in the relevant sciences, but it’s such a achieve that is the lowest cost fairness allows, barrier to action in many people’s minds that it even if it’s more expensive than anyone likes. needs to be discussed if the principles are to have Even more interesting, in some ways, is Stern’s any plausibility. estimate of what it will cost to do nothing. Twen- Money is the only stumbling block, but it’s ty percent of GDP. Again: 20% of GDP. That kind of enough. Everybody would like to live in a reduction in GDP was last seen in the US in the non-polluting, sustainable society. We just don’t Great Depression, when there was over 25% un- want it to cost anything. Since that’s what we’re employment, tent cities, hunger, and beggared afraid of, let’s face it squarely. How much would rich people committing suicide. The comfortable the transition cost? people became uncomfortable, and found them- There are numbers available on the cost of selves suddenly among those who don’t matter. switching to renewable energy economies. For in- That is the cost of doing nothing. stance, the IPCC 2007 Report on climate change Before continuing, I’d like to mention briefly a [119] (p. 21) points out, “In 2050, global average couple of the criticisms from some economists macro-economic costs for mitigation towards leveled at any report that implies the cost of tran- stabilisation between 710 and 445ppm CO2 eq are sition is feasible. One is that they review the between a 1% gain and 5.5% decrease of global work in question and point out that it underesti- GDP. This corresponds to slowing average annual mates costs. When there’s validity to the objec- global GDP growth by less than 0.12 percentage tion, it’s generally because the review takes time. points.” After a thorough summary [120] with When about a year has passed between the re- links to dozens of original sources, another esti- view and the original study, that year of doing mate is a cost of 0.11% of GDP per year to stay be- nothing has already raised the price of mitigating low 450ppm. the increasingly bad situation. It’s not so much Higher estimates come from Stern’s landmark that the estimate was wrong as that they prove
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 36
how quickly inaction raises the price. ble. A family of four living on $11,000, the poverty The other objection tends to be that the price level in the US, might become homeless in a of doing something is totally unrealistic. The month if their pay suddenly dropped by $110. economists’ explanation assumes that the Someone living on one dollar a day (over a billion amount of money people save in current people in 2005) could die if it turned into 90¢. economies is indicative of what they’re able to Also, it’s not only energy that needs realigning. spend on the costs of transition. Since the per- Waste treatment, recycling, industrial practices centage saved is less than the estimated costs of all need huge changes that will initially cost more transition, the transition is supposed to be unaff- than current practices. My guess is that those ffordable. They dress it up by using mathematical would be less costly than the enormous, sys- models and their own definitions of common and tem-wide undertaking of moving to different en- uncommon words, but the whole effort fails be- ergy sources, but let’s say it’s about the same. So, cause garbage in always means garbage out. This say 1% for energy transition, 1% for other indus- is the old notion that we can choose to pay noth- try transitions, and another percent for agricul- ing. We can’t. Saying, “But I don’t want to pay ture transition. A three percent reduction in anything!” makes no difference, even when you growth of GDP happens regularly, and the world say it in mathematics. does not end, although it can be very hard on the The choice is paying 20% (or more) by doing vulnerable. The solution is to spread costs so that nothing or paying less to prevent disaster. they’re borne by those best able to do so. That re- Whether the “less” is 1%, 2%, or even 5% is not quires planning, coordination, and cooperation. the point. The point is that is is much less. Even That requires the most powerful — wealthy peo- the critics can see that. ple and large businesses — to pay much more of There is also some evidence that costs may ac- the costs than the powerless. That’s the problem, tually be lower than expected. As I discussed in but that’s different from unaffordable or impossi- an earlier post [124] , the cost estimate does not in- ble. clude the benefits to GDP from local business op- Those estimates are for a transition within 40 portunities, improved property values, reduced years. Whatever the actual estimate, it could be need for environmental mitigation, and so on. halved by spreading it over 80 years, assuming That’s been estimated to increase GDP by as the extension didn’t mean progress toward sus- much as several percent in developing countries, tainability stopped. Those estimates, or some- which need it the most. thing close to them, are the costs if we started So, let’s take the 1% of GDP number as a rea- now. Every year that passes while business as sonable middle-of-the-road estimate of what it usual makes the problem worse reduces the would take to move to clean, sustainable energy amount of time we have and raises the price of within 40 years. Given an estimated current glob- doing nothing. Never forget that doing nothing is al budget of around $43 trillion, that’s around the most expensive option of all. $430 billion per year. It’s easier to understand I can’t begin to say how much it stuns me that those numbers if they’re brought down to earth. for fear we may miss out on the national equiva- For someone who’s well off and making $50,000 lent of a widescreen TV, we’re gambling the fate per year, 1% of annual income equals $500. That of the only planet we have. It’s insanity. would buy meals at a good restaurant once every It does not have to be that way. (I need to re- couple of months. Or a very good wide-screen TV. peat that.) It does not have to be that way. Yes, it Or a few days’ vacation. The amount is tiny. [Up- would take global cooperation and regulation. date 2009-03-23: Well, when it's not being poured Yes, it would take concerted action, such as peo- down a rathole, it's small. When spent to bail out ple do in time of war. As in war, our survival is at banks with no oversight, it doesn't feel so good.] stake. Unfortunately, though, we have only our- On the other hand, the amount is huge. A re- selves to fight against. Instead of the satisfying cession is any drop in GDP. ( A depression is a big work of whacking enemies, the problem requires drop: 10% or more.) Some people suffer during global cooperation and international institutions even the smallest drop, usually the most vulnera- capable of planet-wide enforcement on the same
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 37 scale as the planet-wide effects of environmental don’t spend what is necessary to move to a clean, damage. It’s all very unheroic. sustainable future, then we won’t have one. It’s But it is affordable. Environmental fairness is that simple. just as practical as all the other kinds. It’s envi- ronmental unfairness that’s impractical. If we + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 38
Sex and Children
least are supposed to be, such as profiteering in time of disaster or violence against toddlers. Relationships The hallmark of a sex crime is the lack of con- sent, which of course implies that if consent This may be the chapter people turn to first can’t be given, a crime has been perpetrated re- because of the title, but the only thing to say gardless of any other factor. So, for mentally about sex is that there is nothing to say. The role competent adults to have sex with the mentally of government is to enforce rights, to stop people incompetent or with children is, ipso facto, crimi- from stepping on each other. Nothing about con- nal. Sex among young but sexually mature adoles- sensual sex is the business of government. cents is a much grayer area. If no abuse of any On the other hand, marriage has to do with kind of power is involved, then it’s hard to see sex, or is supposed to, and the powers-that-be how it could be called criminal, although each have always had much to say about it. That re- case would need to be considered on its own lates partly to the joy of messing about in other merits. As with gray areas in other aspects of life, people’s business, but partly it also has to do the fact that they exist does not change the clari- with something real. Families are the irreducible ty of the obvious cases. It’s simply another situa- unit in the social mix, and all societies recognize tion where the rules are the same — in this case that by giving them legal rights. Hence the role of that sex must be consensual — which means that government in what could be construed as a pri- the remedies may vary. vate matter. The few societies that have tried to Another favorite bugbear of the restrictive sex- ignore those bonds, such as the early Commu- uality proponents is that any freedom will lead to nists, have failed. Families aren’t called “nuclear” no limits at all. What, they worry, will stop peo- for nothing. ple from marrying dogs? The answer is so blaz- In fairness, though, the recognition of the ingly obvious, the question wouldn’t even occur strength of the bond between people who love to a normal human being, but since there seem each other has to apply to everyone equally. It to be some very odd people around, I’ll be explic- shouldn’t be limited to biological or sexual rela- it. An animal can’t consent, so bestiality comes tionships. The germ of that idea lies behind the under the category of cruelty to animals. right to adopt, but there’s no reason why volun- tary lifelong commitment should be limited to the parent-child relationship. (Well, it’s voluntary Parents for the parent(s). Children’s rights are discussed later.) Any pair or group of people who have a The current concept of parenting goes right lifelong commitment to support each other back to the one provided by Nature: it’s some- should have the legal rights of families. And the thing for everyone to do to the maximum extent same legal obligations if they decide to part compatible with survival. This works well in Na- ways. ture’s merciless biological context. It produces Last, there is the nasty topic of sex crimes. lots of extra offspring, who are selected against if Let’s be clear from the start: these are not an un- they’re less adaptable than their peers, and over fortunate form of sex. They are crimes that use time the species gets better and better. To put it sex. Like any other crime, they are completely the in plain English, the system works if enough chil- business of government. I’d maintain that since dren die young. they affect people at a point of maximum vulner- As human beings, we’re having none of that, ability and can poison much of life’s joy, they and we’ve been quite successful at the not-dy- should be dealt with much more severely than ing-young part. But we’re still determined to fol- nonsexual crimes. Other crimes that attack vul- low Nature’s program as far as maximum parent- nerable people are penalized more severely, or at ing goes. This has not been working out well for
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 39 us. We’re an ecological disaster, all by ourselves. that. However, it’s still about people producing It’s important to fully absorb the fact that Na- children, and the number of children per person ture always wins. There is no way to continue doesn’t change based on the means of produc- overpopulating the planet and to also get off tion. Only the method of doing the math scotfree. It isn’t going to happen. We may be able changes.) The right to have children should, obvi- to put many more people on the planet than we ously, apply to everyone equally, but there’s the once thought possible, but space on the earth is usual stumbling block that although the number finite and reproduction is not. There is no way, of children women have is not subject to doubt, no way at all, to avoid Nature’s death control if the number of children men have can be much we humans don’t practice birth control first. One harder to guess. A fair method requires some way way or the other, our numbers will get con- to determine who is the male parent, and in this trolled. We don’t get to choose to reproduce technological age that’s easy. All that remains is without limits. We only get to choose whether to apply the methods we already have. the limits are easy or lethal. And, no, that would not be a DNA test one The limits themselves are a matter of biologi- could refuse. The socially essential function of cal fact within the bounds set by what one sees fairly distributing the right to have children takes as an acceptable lifestyle. The earth can hold precedence over the right to refuse to pass a more people who have one mat and one meal a toothpick over the inner cheek cells to provide a day than people who want two cars and a sum- sample. It’s a parallel case to the requirement for mer house. That’s why estimates of the Earth’s vaccinations [126] in the face of an epidemic. carrying capacity for human beings can vary all I know that I’ve used the dreaded word “per- the way from 40 billion down to two billion. mit.” It leads to the difficult question: How are However, it’s academic at this point what a de- these desirable limits to be achieved? sirable carrying capacity might be because under There are a number of non-punitive measures any comfortable lifestyle scenario we’re already that limit the number of children in families to either above that level or very close to it. (AAAS, smallish numbers, and all those measures would 2000 [125] ) It’s becoming more critical by the day already operate in a fair society. First, people to at least stabilize population, and preferably to must have enough security in old age that they reduce it to a less borderline level. On the other don’t need a small army of offspring as their own hand, without totalitarian controls and a good personal social security program. Second, women deal of human suffering, it seems impractical to must have their rights to self-determination, edu- try to limit people to fewer than two children per cation, and other occupations besides mother- couple. So the answer to our current reproduc- hood. Judging by the experience of countries tive limits is rather clear, even without extensive where women have acquired some rights and studies. where there is retirement security, those two The good news is that two children per couple things by themselves bring the rate of reproduc- is actually slightly below replacement levels be- tion close to replacement level. Maybe with the cause not everyone reproduces, and of those who addition of strong cultural support for families do, some have only one child. That limit would with no more than one or two children, other allow for a very gradual reduction of our measures might only rarely need to be applied. over-population until some previously agreed, Advertising, mass media, and social networks sustainable level was achieved. At that point, an would all have to send the same message, in a egalitarian system — a raffle of sorts, perhaps — similar way as they do now, for instance, about could be applied to fairly distribute the occasion- the undesirability of smokers. al third child permit. However, limits laid down in law would still In the real world, it’s not always couples who be necessary if for no other reason than to stress raise children, although I’ve been discussing it their importance and to provide recourse against that way because it takes a pair to produce them. the occasional social irresponsibles who we will (Yes, I’m aware that with new genetic engineer- always have with us. The punishments for ex- ing methods it can get more complicated than ceeding those limits would have to be rather diff-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 40
fferent than for other anti-environmental excess- after sixty years and the total number is ten. es. After all, nobody on earth would want to, how Everybody has only one child each, but age at re- should I say this?, “remove” the children. Incar- production has a big effect on total numbers. The cerating the parents also wouldn’t be helpful. It longer lifespan becomes, the more critical this would create problems and solve none. effect is. If lifespan increases very gradually, that What’s really at stake is a special case of envi- might not matter, but should there suddenly be a ronmental mitigation. Just as an industrialist medical advance that has us all living to 400, it would be required to pay for cleanup, likewise would again become important to adjust repro- parents would be required to pay the excess costs ductive rates downward or suffer the conse- brought on by the overpopulation they’re facili- quences of reduced quality of life. I wouldn’t be tating. But that doesn’t really help to put a price hugely surprised — maybe just a bit surprised — on it. The immediate actual cost of just one extra to see noticeably lengthened life spans, say to 120 child in a whole country is nothing. If the actual or so, as a consequence of stem cell therapies, so cost of everyone having extra children were visit- even in the near future this discussion is not ed on just one pair of parents, the richest people completely theoretical. on the planet would be ruined. Producing children has always been socially as So actual costs unfortunately don’t provide ac- well as personally important. But fairness re- tionable information. One would have to fall back quires changes to its significance. Who has sex to the merely practical and set the level high with whom has zero public significance, and the enough to be a deterrent, but not so high as to be sooner that’s universally recognized, the sooner ruinous. Just as with incarceration, ruining the we can stop generating massive suffering by un- parents creates more problems than it solves. A fairly, unethically, and immorally interfering in deterrent is necessarily a proportion of income each others’ lives. On the other hand, parenting and assets, not an absolute amount, and the has huge environmental consequences which are higher the level of discretionary funds available, ignored at this point. We’re used to that privilege, the higher that proportion needs to be. For the but that doesn’t make it right. poorest, one percent of income might be enough of a motivation, whereas for the richest the level might have to be fifty percent. Time and experi- Children ence would tell. Furthermore, like unpaid taxes, this overpopulation mitigation cost could not be [This section benefited a great deal from comments by avoided by bankruptcy, and if it were not paid, it Caroljean Rodesch, MSW and child therapist. Errors and could be taken straight from the individual’s pay bizarre ideas are, of course, mine.] or assets. And the amount would be owed for the The first thing that has to be said about chil- rest of one’s life. There’s nothing naturally dren is that they have rights. They have none self-limiting about the effects of overpopulation, now, at least not in law. Where children are in- and neither should there be for the deterrent im- volved, the discussion is about how much dam- plemented to prevent it. age parents can do before their rights are revoked There’s one technical aspect to replacement in favor of the state. It’s the same level of igno- levels that has a big effect but that people some- rance men once had (and in some places still times ignore. Aside from absolute number of chil- have) about women, when they argued about dren, the age at which those children themselves how much husbands could beat their wives. reproduce changes population numbers. Just to Any mention of actual children’s rights is writ- make that clear, let me give an example. Consider ten off as impractical, just as every other expan- a sixty year span of time. If a couple produces sion of rights to former chattel has been, and two children at thirty, and those children each with about as much actual merit. I’ll discuss be- have a child apiece when they are thirty, then the low (and in the chapter on Care [127] ) some exam- total number of people after sixty years, including ples of how children’s rights could be implement- all three generations, is six. If, instead, everybody ed. reproduces at fifteen, there are five generations Another class of objections is variations on the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 41 theme that any rights will result in a dictatorship with respect to children, not less. Limits are nev- of rude, free range children. That’s nothing but a er a welcome message, not for polluters, and not false dichotomy between absolute parental rights for you and me. But it’s true nonetheless. In a fair and absolute children’s rights. Those are not our world, children have rights. only choices. Children’s rights are yet one more The primary and most important right is the case, perhaps the most difficult case of all, where fundamental one to be safe from harm. The exer- many different rights have to be balanced. An is- cise of all other rights depends on that one in sue that depends on balance cannot be solved by adults, and the same is true of children. There- saying balance is too difficult. With echoes of fore, when parental rights are balanced against other similar excuses, it’s amazing how consis- physical harm, the child’s rights take precedence. tently the corollary is that all power has to stay in That has consequences for how abuse cases statu quo. are handled. The well-being of the child is a high- All that said, there are major differences be- er priority than preventing family break-up. The tween children’s rights and those of any other current assumption is that it’s always best for the class of people because of children’s lack of expe- child to stay with their family, even when they’ve rience. Rights for children does not imply that been harmed by it. It takes huge damage to the they should suddenly dictate how schools or fam- child, such as imminent danger of death or per- ilies are run. Their usual ideas on those topics manent disability, before the legal system moves would prove neither sustainable nor effective. to revoke parental rights. (Disrespected minority Under normal circumstances, parents need to be parents may lose their rights more easily, but the final authorities on what children do for the that’s a symptom of discrimination against mi- sake of the children themselves. That is the criteri- norities, not of respect for the rights of the child.) on: the good of the children. The parents’ needs The adult right to freedom from harm would be or wants are secondary. Under normal circum- meaningless if it wasn’t enforced until death was stances, parents are famous for applying that imminent. That’s not an acceptable standard for principle, sometimes at the cost of their own adults, and it is not acceptable for children. lives. But that’s as it should be. It’s when things Parenthetically, I want to comment up front are not as they should be that the problems arise, on the cost issue. I get the sense that the primacy and it’s those situations that children’s rights currently given to parental rights is at least partly must help rectify. due to a rather broad-based horror at otherwise There are other differences based on the lack having to care for strange kids. It’s true and it’s of experience. It’s plain that children would not unavoidable that the right to escape an abusive do well as voters, soldiers, drug takers, or drivers. situation is going to be more expensive for soci- It’s plain that they have much to learn and need ety than ignoring the problem. But the fact that teachers. However, the fact of their different it’s cheaper is not an adequate reason for allow- needs is a reason to satisfy those needs, not to ing some people to suffer at the hands of others. deprive them of all rights. Parents don’t own It’s not adequate when everyone is the same age, their children. and it’s not adequate among different ages. Fur- Parental rights, as distinct from children’s thermore, just as a practical footnote, I’m not at rights, have next to no limits at this point. We’re all sure that the overall cost of enabling children only one step away from those ancient Roman fa- to escape abuse really would be more expensive. thers who were at least consistent and claimed Abused children go on to become some of the the right to kill any of their household chattel, in- most expensive adults in society, and this may be cluding children. The lack of boundaries to yet one more instance where prevention turns parental rights leads to the usual damaging con- out to be cheaper than cure. sequences. Children are astonishingly resilient, so Given that children have the right to be free of the human race hasn’t died out (yet), but a mi- abuse, it’s important to define what abuse is. The nority become dysfunctionally damaged and definition is a prickly issue because socialization grow up to impose an incalculable social price. sometimes requires physical measures. However, Every adult needs more limits than we have now the issue of occasional physical restraint is not
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 42 unique to children. Adults sometimes have to be and never could work no matter how well funded physically restrained as well. We have models for the system was. The younger and therefore the what is appropriate corrective action, and it does more vulnerable the child, the less likely they are not involve beating people up. Also, in a child’s to know they’re being abused or that there’s any- case, the motivation has to be teaching, not sim- thing they could do about it. ply a removal from society of an offending ele- There are two points that need realignment. ment. In other words, the good of the child is the The first is that for children, the most meaningful priority, and not the convenience of adults. So and practical means of exercising the basic right there are two criteria. One is that physical correc- to live free of abuse would be the right to leave it. tive measures should be of the same general type They should be able to get a divorce, as it were, for children as for adults. Two is that for children from a bad situation. The second is that the the teaching or rehabilitative component is of adults in the community need a great deal more primary importance. Using those two criteria, it’s encouragement to interfere when they see a bad possible to delimit physical restraint as opposed situation developing. Both of those require good to abuse, and to distinguish a wholesome up- judgment on the part of many different people, bringing that creates options as opposed to one which make them both very hard to implement. that shuts them down. I see the child’s right to leave as critical to the Medical treatments are one area where the prevention of abuse. And prevention, after all, is rights of children have to differ from those of the essential point. Punishment after the fact adults. Given children’s lack of experience, that doesn’t undo any of the damage. But the right to probably goes without saying. Again, the criteri- leave is complicated not only by children’s own on is the benefit to the child and keeping their fu- lack of perspective, but also by the existence of ture options more open, not less. Making sure a stupid, selfish, or even criminal adults. Parents child gets necessary medical treatment for health shouldn’t have to contend with abuse allegations is an essential parental function. That doesn’t because they made their kids eat peas for dinner. mean all medical treatments are at the discretion A vengeful ex-partner shouldn’t be able to waste of adults. When benefit to the child is the criteri- everyone’s time by bribing Junior away from the on, then, just as one example, it is arguably child custody parent with promises of never having to abuse to subject him or her to body-altering do homework. Worst of all would be if children’s treatments for the sake of a beauty pageant. rights didn’t help children but hurt them by giv- There are many gaps in the current systems of ing the world’s vilest criminals more opportunity. child abuse prevention. Each new case of abuse Given those issues, children’s right to leave has underscores that. Some of it is not due to faulty to involve responsible adults. I can’t see any oth- rules, but to understaffing due to meager re- er way to implement the right without inviting sources. In all the cases I’ve heard about, that’s more trouble than it solves. That doesn’t mean due to the low priority of children and not to the there necessarily is none. The more control over literal lack of money in a country. Protecting chil- that decision that can be put in the hands of the dren is not wildly expensive, but governments child concerned, and that is consistent with ben- would rather spend money on other things. eficial outcomes, the better. Any adult who Those priorities reflect power, not justice, and comes in contact with the child is in that posi- wouldn’t be legal in a fair society. Enforcement of tion, and should fill it. (More on the duty of re- rights is not optional, for children no less than porting in a moment.) But in order for children to for others, so an adequate system of protection have consistently effective advocates there also for them must be funded through taxes just as need to be people whose job is nothing else. the other essential functions of government are. In the chapter on Care [127] , I discuss the role Deficient resources are not the only problem, of child advocates at greater length. The point I unfortunately. The legal system is geared to want to stress here is that professionals who ad- adults, who can deal with small problems on vocate for children are an essential component of their own and need help only in exceptional cas- enforceable children’s rights. Another essential es. That model does not work for children at all, component is the existence of places where the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 43
child can actually go. I’ve called these facilities solution is to strengthen the feedback loop. Re- “children’s villages” (after the orphanages set up tention of the license to practice one’s profession by the Tibetans in exile [128] ), and they’re also dis- needs to depend on fulfilling the duty to report cussed in Care. Additionally, the process of adop- just as much as it does on adequately performing tion needs to be facilitated so that it happens the other duties. Further, the child needs to have quickly enough to be relevant. the right to take any professional who should As with divorce between adults, separation of have reported, but didn’t, to court for dereliction children from their families involves a host of fi- of duty. The need to do that may only be evident nancial and practical issues that have to be re- in hindsight, so the person involved could bring solved individually. I see that as an important that suit as an adult. function of child advocates. The general princi- If those measures were still not sufficient to ples to go by are that the child has rights, so their enforce mandated reporting, additional ways of preferences — not just needs, preferences — are making it easier to fulfill that duty have to be im- an important and valid factor. And that the bio- plemented. The result has to be that all profes- logical parents, by creating the situation in ques- sionals in a community put children ahead of tion, are responsible for it and will be assessed their own desire for a quiet life. child support to be paid to the new caregivers. The same should be true of all adults in the (Again, more in the Care chapter.) community. Relatives and neighbors are generally That brings me to the second point: reporting the first to know when there’s a problem. But abuse or neglect. The older the child, the likelier they’re not necessarily trained, and they’re not that a separation initiated by them would be fea- necessarily even trying to be objective. Therefore, sible. The younger, the more important it is for for the general population, unlike for profession- other adults to be willing to interfere in bad situ- als, reporting can’t be mandated without creating ations. That issue, like all the others in this field, more problems than it solves. There should be is a delicate balancing act. Creating a situation in “encouraged” reporting instead. The signs of which neighbors spy on each other and everyone abuse or neglect need to be part of the curricu- lives in fear would be atrocious, but letting chil- lum in school, and public health messages need dren suffer because adults would rather be inoff- to encourage people to report when they’re sure ffensive is appalling. there’s a problem. Two lines of approach should mitigate that That would create an atmosphere where chil- dilemma. One is that all adults who come in con- dren know they can ask any adult for help. That, tact with children professionally: day care center and the specific professionals whom they should workers, teachers, pediatricians, nurses, journal- approach, ought to be a clear and present part of ists, clergy, and so on, would be trained to recog- the curriculum from the earliest days of day care nize signs of maltreatment as a condition of their up through grade school. license and would be obligated to report it to a Funding will obviously be necessary when child advocate. The advocate would be legally there have to be adequate numbers of workers obliged to look into the situation within days, not specialized in advocating for children. That is not months. This is enforcement of a basic right. It’s a sufficient reason to give up on children’s rights. not optional. Nobody complains that police are a luxury and Mandated reporting is a feature of child abuse that we should just learn to deal with crime on prevention laws in some places now, but it suff- our own because it’s cheaper. I’ve said it before ffers from insufficient compensation for the asym- and I’ll say it again: the same is true of children. metry of power between children and adults. Pro- Their inalienable rights must be enforced, and fessionals fear repercussions from parents, their the expense of doing so is simply part of being a employers, or just from mere general unpleasant- fair society. Besides, the fewer abusive adults ness, and the reporting too often doesn’t happen there are, the smaller the child advocacy offices as it should. Even full confidentiality doesn’t al- can be. People who want to reduce the money ways help matters. spent on abused children need to figure out how So, as with power asymmetries generally, the to reduce the number of adults causing the prob-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 44 lem, not how to ignore the children suffering it. to work if they want it. I realize that at the cur- In addition to freedom from harm, children rent levels of accepted exploitativeness — accept- have other basic rights, too. They have a right to ed, not even egregious exploitativeness — any sug- a living and the right to basic freedoms as they gestion that children could work if they wanted grow into the ability to use them. These, too, to is likely to be met with scorn. However, as a need adaptations if they’re to be useful to chil- matter of simple fairness, if children were reliably dren. free agents in the decision, there’s nothing bad The right to a living, in particular, has different about children working, in and of itself. Such and more facets than it does for adults. In the work has two limiting characteristics: it is not case of children, it means a right to support physically taxing and allows enough time for the rather than the right to earn a living. The right to child to stay healthy, to learn, and to play. There’s support also includes the mental and emotional a difference between occasional babysitting or support necessary for the child’s development. gardening for the neighbors, and stunting growth And it means acquiring the tools to earn a living by working twelve hours a day in a factory. Or eventually, in other words, a right to education. (now that I live near Los Angeles and have heard That, of course, has been more or less stan- of the situation) having proud parents push chil- dard practice since before the dawn of hu- dren into being full time actors at the expense of mankind. The difference, though, is that having the rest of their lives. an explicit right means there can be no “less” The right to education gives children the skills about it. A defined level of care and education needed to live on their own and to become the has to be provided, and if it’s lacking the child well-informed voters on whom the whole system has the right to get it elsewhere and the state has depends. The only universally and equally accessi- the obligation to make that financially possible ble way to fulfill that right is with free public ed- by exacting support from the parents and supply- ucation. It should enable the graduate to enter ing any shortfall. That is not standard practice, work that pays a modal income. That was once but it should be. the idea behind free schooling in the US. At the Given that a child’s main task is acquiring the time, a high school diploma was enough to get ability and tools to be a competent adult, which good work. In Europe that principle carried for- is a full time occupation, the corollary is that ward into modern times when university educa- children have the right not to work. Therefore, if tion became freely available. (At least until the their parents cannot support them, it becomes Eurozone started following the US example and the responsibility of society at large, i. e. of the trying to water that down.) In the US, sadly, the state, to do so. That’s also always been generally original idea has been almost lost, but it was a understood. In the past, extended families more good one. It is a hallmark of a fair society that it or less fulfilled the function of distributing care gives all its citizens equal tools when starting the of children among many people, but extended business of life. families are rarely extended enough these days. I Children also have rights to the freedoms of discuss possible methods of state assistance in speech, thought, and religion as they grow to feel the Care chapter. Whichever solutions a society the need for them. They’re all rather meaningless uses, the point remains the same. Children have to a toddler, but they acquire meaning gradually, a right to have their physical needs met in an without any strict on-off switch to make things emotionally kindly environment that gives them easy. It makes sense to have target dates for the enough knowledge to earn a living when the time application of various rights, adjusted for individ- comes. ual children if they exercise a right earlier than Children do, also, have the same rights as oth- most. The validity of doing so should be decided ers to the extent they can use them. So the right on a case by case basis. For instance, there have not to work is not the same as a prohibition been several high school free speech cases re- against working. If children are citizens with cently which have involved political speech is- rights, within the limits of their lack of experi- sues, such as criticism of school policy. (One ex- ence, it makes no sense to deny them the choice ample [129] from the Student Press Law Center
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 45 site, where there are dozens of others.) Some- Drug-taking could be allowed first for “low-volt- times the “free speech” of high schoolers is re- age” substances like beer, marijuana, or coca grettable rather than an expression of ideas, but leaves. As the age of greater and greater discre- that wasn’t the situation in these cases. These tion is achieved, the limits would be fewer. were about the schools shutting down dissent, I’ve stressed repeatedly that children’s lack of and using the children’s status as non-persons to experience affects which rights are useful to get away with it. The cases were decided in favor them. It also affects whether they can exercise of the powers-that-be simply, as far as I can tell, them. Saying that children have rights, but then because to decide otherwise would be to admit not providing any means to compensate for their that minors have rights. That’s the kind of thing huge inequality in any struggle with adults is to explicit children’s rights should prevent. render those rights meaningless. So the question The whole issue of applying children’s rights is is really a specific and acute instance of the more a moving target because the children themselves general problem of how to give weaker parties are growing. That means their rights and respon- the tools to deal with stronger ones. sibilities should be proportional. It’s silly to insist In many way, the rights stipulated here would a person is old enough to support her- or himself, change nothing about normal family life and up- old enough to enlist in the military and kill peo- bringing. What they (try to) do is codify that situ- ple, but not old enough to vote or to decide ation so that it can be made to apply to all. Nor- which drugs to take. It also means the acquisi- mal family and school life aren’t nearly as far off tion of rights and responsibilities should be grad- the mark as many of our other deviations from ual. For instance, the right to vote could start fairness and justice. That may not be too surpris- with municipal elections. (In the US situation, ing given that most normal people care about that includes school boards, which could turn in- children, certainly more than they do about any to a true exercise in democracy.) A couple of other class of human beings. There aren’t that years later, county, province or state elections many changes needed in normal situations. would be included, and finally national and then, Where society fails badly is in the abnormal cas- when the world has reached that stage, interna- es, the ones where children are neglected, tional ones. The right to support shouldn’t go abused, or preyed upon. And the core reason for from 100% to 0% at the stroke of midnight on a that failure is that children have no rights. The given birthday. It could decrease by 20% a year optimum balance will be enough rights for the between 16 and 21. Legal responsibility for crimi- child to avoid, escape, or stop bad situations nal activity, likewise, doesn’t have to go from without interfering in benign families that re- nothing to total. The requirement to get school- quire no interference. ing could be transformed into the availability of free schooling and ultimately, depending on the country’s resources, the need to pay some fees. + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 46
Government 1: War and Politics
here. Preventing bad actions is one type function carried out by government for the common good. Introduction The positive functions of government are as important: the achievement of desirable goals, There’s irony to the fact that in a work on gov- not merely the prevention of disaster. Some of ernment, the topic itself waits to appear till those coordinated actions for the common good somewhere in the middle. But government is a are now understood to be just as obvious a func- dependent variable without any chance of being tion of government as defense. Essential infra- functional, to say nothing of fair, if the physical structure is in this category, although people and biological preconditions aren’t met. Those don’t always agree on what is essential. Ensuring preconditions can be satisfied with less effort basic standards of living, basic levels of health, when people are savvy enough to understand and security in old age are also coming to be un- where they fit in the scheme of things, but they derstood as something government is uniquely can’t be ignored. qualified to do. And then there are the things It’s customary, or it is now at any rate, to which fire the imagination and are a quest and think of government in terms of its three branch- an adventure rather than a necessity. These are es, executive, legislative and judicial. But those big or not obviously profitable projects beyond are really branchlets all in one part of the tree the scope of smaller entities, projects such as and don’t include important aspects of the whole support for basic research, for space programs, or thing. They are all concerned with the machinery, for the arts. with how to get things done, and they don’t ad- Given that government has a great deal to do, dress the why, what, or who of government. it may be worth pointing out which functions it At its root, the function of government is to does not have. Its purpose is not to bring happi- coordinate essential common action for the com- ness or wealth to its citizens, only to bring the mon good. When resources are at a minimum, preconditions for those desirable things. And it’s the function is limited to defense, which is one certainly not to make a subset of citizens type of common action. In richer situations, oth- wealthy. Nor is it to make citizens healthy, only er functions are taken on, generally at the whim to provide the preconditions to make it easy for of the rulers and without a coherent framework people to take care of their health. That’s actually for what actually serves the common good. The a more difficult issue than the others because if priorities are less haphazard in democracies, but health care is government-funded, then a line has still don’t necessarily serve the common good. to be drawn about how much self-destructive be- Wars of aggression come to mind as an example. havior to tolerate. And that runs smack into the The defining characteristic of a government is right to do anything that doesn’t harm others. It’s said to be a monopoly on the legitimate use of a conflict I’ll discuss in the chapter on Care, near force. (Parents are allowed to use force on chil- the end of the section on medicine [126] . dren in all societies so far — an exception I con- So, having discussed the preconditions on sider wrong as I discussed in the fourth chapter — which government rests, the next step is examin- but that’s a side issue in the context of this dis- ing the machinery by which it can implement its cussion.) That force is used not only against out- functions. What we want from the machinery is side threats, but also internal ones, such as crimi- for it to interfere with those functions as little as nals. An essential function of government is to possible and for it to be as effortless and invisible protect its citizens from each other. It’s a short as possible. The business of government is essen- step from that to regulatory functions generally, tially a boring job of solving other people’s prob- to all the ways in which a government can serve lems — or that’s what it is when abuse of power to maintain the people’s rights. Economic, envi- and corruption are removed from the equation. ronmental, and safety regulations are all included Quite clearly, we have some distance to go before
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 47 achieving a silent, effortless and effective ma- among large groups within countries. If it can be chine. Below, I’ll offer my ideas on how to get done for some groups, it can be done for all closer to that goal. groups. Important aspects of the machinery side of the It should go without saying, but probably tree which fall outside the traditional executive, doesn’t, that regressions are always possible. We legislative, and judicial zones are funding the gov- could regress right back to stone-throwing cave ernment and overseeing it. Oversight is a particu- dwellers under the right conditions. That’s not larly vital issue because the thing being overseen the point. The point is that war has been elimi- also has a monopoly on force. Given the willing- nated between some groups. How that’s done, ness in enough people to accommodate anything and the huge wealth effect of doing it are obvious the powerful want to do, it’s essential to counter- by now. To repeat, if it can be eliminated be- act that call to power and to make sure that over- tween some groups, it can be eliminated be- sight retains the ability to rein in all abuses. tween all groups. It is not inevitable. Aggression Instead of discussing these topics in their con- isn’t about to go away, but that particular form ceptual order above, I’ll take them in the order of of it known as war can and has disappeared in their capacity to interfere with people’s lives. some cases. That will, I hope, make it easier to imagine how Wars happen internationally because on some it might work in fact. level enough people think they’re a better idea than the alternative. They want to retain the abil- ity to force agreements rather than come to Force them. But there’s a price to pay for the method used, and it only makes practical sense if the Between groups price is not greater than the prize. Wars make no The bloody-minded we will always have with sense by any objective measure on those us, so it’s to be expected that even the most ad- grounds. Their only real benefit is on a chest- vanced human societies will always need to have thumping level, and even that works only at the some sort of defense and police forces. But their very beginning, before the price starts to be paid. function has to be limited to small-scale threats. For anyone who doubts my statement about If an entire population flouts the law, a police price, I should mention that I’m thinking both force is powerless. It can only stop rare actions, large scale and long term. In a very narrow view, not common ones. Likewise, the defense force of ignoring most of the costs, one could claim that an equitable society would have to be targeted it’s possible to win something in a war. Take the toward stopping occasional attacks by kooks of view down a notch from international to nation- various kinds, not fullscale wars with equals or, al, and it becomes clear how flawed it is. It’s as if worse yet, more powerful countries. one were thinking on the same level as a Somali The reason for that is simple. Fair societies are warlord. If Somalia had not had a generation not compatible with war. War is the ultimate un- with no government, and hadn’t spent the time fairness. Its authority is might, not right. Even in the grip of warring gangs, anybody on earth self-defense, in other words even a just war, is (except maybe a Somali warlord) would agree not compatible with retaining a nice sense of fair they’d be much richer and better off in every way. play. Wars of self-defense may be forced on a Ironically, even the warlords themselves would country, but that doesn’t change the facts. Justice be better off. They wouldn’t have to spend a for- and war are simply mutually exclusive. tune on armed guards, for starters. And yet, un- No, that does not mean that an equitable soci- able to think of a way of life different from the ety is impossible. It’s only impossible if wars are hellhole they’re in now, they keep shooting in the inevitable, and the evidence suggests otherwise. hope of winning something in a wasteland Looking at it from a national level, how many they’re reducing to nothing. countries have internal wars? Some, but not all. That, on an international scale, is where our Not even most. Somehow, this so-called in- national minds are. That, on an international evitable state of war has been eliminated even scale is the price we also pay. What we’re losing
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 48 for the planet is the difference between Sweden el of civic involvement.) Armed conflicts, in con- and Somalia. When the vision of what we’re los- trast, tended to result simply in new dictator- ing becomes obvious to enough people, and ships, when they succeeded at all. It is easy to ar- when the pain of not having it becomes big gue with their exact definitions of what is free enough, that’s when we’ll decide that an interna- and how the struggles took place. But short of tional body to resolve disputes is a better idea coming up with an ad hoc argument for every in- than the idiotic notion of trial by ordeal. Then it’ll stance, the broader pattern of the effectiveness of be obvious what’s the better choice, even if trial nonviolence in both getting results and in getting by law does mean losing the occasional case. Af- desirable results is clear. ter all, that can happen in trial by ordeal too, but As the article points out, some of the initially with much more devastation. freedom-enhancing outcomes were later subvert- So, no, I don’t think that the incompatibility ed. Zunes et al. (1999) [131] cite one notable exam- between fairness and war is the end for fair soci- ple in Iran: eties. I think it’s ultimately the end for war. The beginnings of that evolution seem to be Once in power, the Islamic regime happening already. War is becoming less and less proved to abandon its nonviolent of an option between some countries. Even the methodology, particularly in the peri- concept of war between Austria and Italy, or od after its dramatic shift to the right Japan and France, is just laughable. They in the spring of 1981. However, there wouldn’t do it. They’d negotiate each others’ ears was clear recognition of the utilitari- an advantages of nonviolent methods off, but they’d come to some resolution without by the Islamic opposition while out killing each other. of power which made their victory That’s the future. An extrapolation of the past possible. is not. The fact that the US is closer to the past than The interesting point here is not that regres- the future doesn’t change the trajectory. Likewise sion is to be expected when nonviolence is used with the other large powers, China, Russia, India, as a tool by those with no commitment to its Brazil. They all have further to go than anyone principles. The interesting thing is that its effec- would like, but that only means regressions are tiveness is sufficiently superior that it’s used by possible. It still doesn’t change the direction of such people. the path. And even the US seems to feel the need That effectiveness makes little sense intuitive- for UN permission before marching into other ly, but that’s because intuition tells us we’re countries and blowing them up. That’s something more afraid of being killed than having someone I don’t remember seeing ever before. It’s a sign of wave a placard at us. Fear tells us that placard- a potential sea change, if they don’t zig back- waving does nothing, but violence will get re- wards again. The next step would be to actually sults. But that intuition is wrong. Fear isn’t actu- stop blowing people up. We’ll see if they zag for- ally what lends strength to an uprising. What ward and take it. counts is how many people are in it and how If violent methods are not an option as a final much they’re willing to lose. The larger that side solution to disputes, then the only alternatives is, the more brutal the repression has to be to when ordinary channels aren’t working are non- succeed, until it passes a line where too few sol- violent ones. That is not as utopian as the people diers are able to stomach their orders. who fancy themselves hard-headed realists as- That pattern is repeated over and over again, sume. A tally by Karatnycky and Ackerman (2005) but each time it’s treated as a joke before it suc- [130] (pdf) of the 67 conflicts that took place from ceeds, and if it succeeds it’s assumed to be an ex- 1973 to 2002 indicates that mass nonmilitary ac- ception. The facts become eclipsed by the inabili- tion was likelier to overturn a government and — ty to understand them. The hardheaded realists even more interesting — much likelier to lead to can go on ignoring reality. lasting and democratic governments afterward. The faulty emotional intuition on nonviolence (69% vs 8%, and 23% with some intermediate lev- leads to other mistakes besides incorrect assess-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 49 ments of the chances of future success. It results lence is a clear standard to apply, and it gives the in blindness to its effects in the present and the state that applies it an inoculation against one past as well. As they say in the news business, if whole route to subversion. When violence is un- it bleeds, it leads. The more violence, the more derstood to be a hallmark of illegitimacy, then it “story.” We hear much more about armed strug- can’t be used as a tool to take power no matter gle, even if it kills people in ones and twos, than how good the cause supposedly is, and no matter we do about movements by thousands that kill whether the abuse comes from the state or nobody. How many people are aware of nonvio- smaller groups. lent Druze opposition to Israeli occupation in the Another objection runs along the lines of Golan Heights versus the awareness of armed “What are you going to do about Hitlers in this Palestinian opposition? How many even know world of yours?” “What about the communists?” that there is a strong nonviolent Palestinian op- Or “the Americans” if you’re a communist. “What position? The same emotional orientation toward about invasions?” What, in short, about force in threats means that nonviolence is edited out of the hands of bad guys? If one takes the question history and flushed down the memory hole. His- down a level, it’s easier to understand what’s be- tory, at least the kind non-historians get at ing asked. In a neighborhood, for instance, a po- school, winds up being about battles. The result lice force is a more effective response to crimi- is to confirm our faulty intuition, to forget the re- nals than citizens all individually arming them- al forces that caused change, and to fix the im- selves. The real answer to force in the hands of pression that violence is decisive when in fact it bad guys is to take it out of their hands in the is merely spectacular. first place. If a gang is forming, the effective re- Admittedly, the more brutal the starting point, sponse is not to wait for attack but to prevent it. the less likely nonviolence is to succeed. The peo- On a local level, the effectiveness of police ple whose struggle awes me the most, the Ti- over individual action is obvious. On an interna- betans, are up against one of the largest and tional level, it seems laughable because the thugs most ruthless opponents on the planet. Even have power. But that’s common sense playing us though their nonviolence is right, it’s no guaran- false again. Brute force threats are not inevitable. tee of the happy ending. But — and this is the im- They’re human actions, not natural forces. portant point — the more brutal the basic condi- They’re symptoms of a breakdown in the larger tions, the less chance that violence can succeed. body politic. The best way to deal with them is to The less likely it is that anything can succeed in avoid the breakdown to begin with, which is not pulling people back from a tightening spiral of as impossible as it might seem after the fact. The self-destruction. Places like the Congo come to currently peaceful wealthy nations show that dis- mind. The more equitable a society is to start pute resolution by international agreement is with, the better nonviolent methods will work. possible and they show how much there is to “Common sense” may make it hard to see the gain by it. facts of the effectiveness of nonviolence, but That indicates that objections about the im- even common sense knows that ethical treat- possibility of using international norms to handle ment is likelier to lead to ethical outcomes than “bad guys” are really something else. An answer brutality. The fact that armed conflict is incom- that actually solves the problem is to strengthen patible with justice is not a disadvantage to a fair international institutions until the thugs can’t society, so long as it remembers that violence is operate, just as good policing prevents neighbor- the hallmark of illegitimacy. The state itself must hood crime. However, when people make that view the application of violence as fundamentally objection, international cooperation is the one illegitimate and therefore use its own monopoly solution they won’t entertain. That suggests on force only in highly codified ways. An analogy they’re not looking for a solution. Otherwise is the blanket prohibition against knifing other they’d be willing to consider anything that people, except in the specific set of circum- works. They’re really insisting on continued thug- stances that require surgery. I’ll discuss the dis- gery, using the excuse that so-and-so did it first. tinction a bit more below. A refusal to use vio- At its most basic level, the argument about the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 50 need to wage war on “bad guys” is built on the condone the torture of prisoners by other prison- flawed logic of assuming the threat, and then in- ers. The dominant US view that rape in prisons is sisting there’s only one way to deal with it. The nobody’s concern is another national emergency. Somali warlord model of international relations Proper care of prisoners is expensive. People who is not our only choice. don’t want the expense can’t, in justice, hold prisoners. The death penalty is another practice that can- Force against criminals not be defended in a just context. Its justification Just as war is incompatible with fairness, so is is supposed to be that is the ultimate deterrent, any other application of force where might but a whole mountain of research has shown by makes right. Therefore force is justifiable only to now that, if anything, crimes punishable by death the extent that it serves what’s right. It’s similar are more common in countries with death penal- to the paradox of requiring equal tolerance for ties than without. If the irrevocable act of killing everyone: the only view that can’t be tolerated is someone serves no legitimate goal, then it can intolerance. Force can’t be used by anyone: it can have no place in a just society. only be used against someone using it. Another problem is the final nature of the pun- Force can be applied only to the extent of pro- ishment. It presumes infallibility in the judicial tecting everyone’s rights, including the person system, which is ludicrous on the face of it. Falli- causing the problem, to the extent compatible bility has been shown time and again, and tallied with the primary purpose of stopping them from in yet another mountain of research. Executing doing violence. The state can use only as much the innocent is something that simply cannot force as is needed to stop criminal behavior and happen in a society with ambitions of justice. no more. But perhaps the most insidious effect of hav- Because the state does have the monopoly on ing a death penalty is what it says, even more force, it is more important to guard against its than what it does. The most powerful entity is abuse in state hands than any others. Crimes of saying that killing those who defy it is a valid re- state are worse than crimes of individuals. Not sponse. And it’s saying that killing them solves only do people take their tone from the powerful, something. The state, of course, makes a major but they’re also too ready to overlook bad actions point of following due procedure before the end, by them. So the corrupting influence of abuse is but that’s not the impressive part of the lesson. much greater when done by those in power, and People take their tone from those in power, and it is much more necessary to be vigilant against for those already inclined to step on others’ people’s willingness to ignore it. An event such as rights, the due process part isn’t important. What the one where an unarmed, wheelchair-bound they hear is that even the highest, the mightiest, man was tasered [132] would be considered a na- and the most respectable think that killing is all tional disgrace in a society that cared about right. They think it solves something. If it’s true rights. It would be considered a national emer- for them, it becomes true for everyone. No gency in a society that cared about rights if peo- amount of lecturing that the “right” to kill works ple saw tasering as the expected result of insuffi- only for judges will convince criminals who want cient deference to a uniform. That fascist attitude to believe otherwise. By any reasoning, ethical, has become surprisingly common in the U.S. practical, or psychological, the death penalty is The exercise of state power carries responsibil- lethal [133] to a fair society. ities as well as limits. When criminals are impris- oned, the state becomes responsible for them. That’s generally recognized, but somehow the ob- Decision-making vious implications can be missed. Not only must the state not hurt them, it has taken on the re- Voting sponsibility for preventing others from hurting [Some material also in an earlier post on Democracy them as well. The jailers can’t mistreat prisoners. Doesn't Work [134] ] That much is obvious. But neither can people The bad news is that democracy does not
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 51 seem to work as a way of making sustainable de- the process to rig. Most of the time, people don’t cisions. The evidence is everywhere. The planet is know what they want. Or, to be more precise, demonstrably spiraling toward disaster through they know what they want — a peaceful, happy, pollution, overpopulation, and tinpot warring interesting life for themselves and their children dictators, and no democracy anywhere has been — but they’re not so sure how to get there. So a able to muster a proportional response. The most few ads can often be enough to tell them, and get advanced have mustered some response, but not them voting for something which may be a route enough by any measure. A high failing grade is to happiness, but only for the person who funded still a failure. the ads. Besides the existential difficulty of figur- Given that democracy is the least-bad system ing out what one wants, there’s also a morass of out there, that is grim news indeed. But the good technical pitfalls. Redrawing voting districts can news is that we haven’t really tried democracy find a majority for almost any point of view de- yet. sired. Different ways of counting the votes can As currently practiced, it’s defined as universal hand elections to small minorities. Expressing the suffrage. (Except where it isn’t. Saudi Arabia is will of the majority, even if that is a good idea, is not, for some reason, subject to massive boycotts far from simple. for being anti-democratic even though it enforces However, although democracy’s failed assump- a huge system of apartheid.) But defining democ- tions have become clearer, one of the more opti- racy down to mere voting is a sign of demoraliza- mistic ones is unexpectedly successful. (Unex- tion about achieving the real thing. Democracy is pected to me, at any rate.) Evidence shows that a great deal more than voting. It’s supposed to be lots of people are surprisingly much better at a way of expressing the will of the people, and guessing right than most of the individuals with- voting is just a means to that end. For that mat- in the group. This has the catchy name of the ter, the will of the people is considered a good “wisdom of crowds,” although wisdom is per- thing because it’s assumed to be the straightest haps overstating the case. It implies that majority route to the greatest good of the greatest num- rule ought to work a lot better than it does. ber. There’s a mass of assumptions to unpack. I think the reason why it doesn’t lies not far to Assumption 1: the greatest good of the great- seek. The experiments demonstrating crowd est number is a desirable goal. So far, so good. I smarts rely on a couple of preconditions. Every- think everybody agrees on that (but maybe only body in the group must have much the same in- because we’re assuming it’s bound to include us). formation. And everybody in the group has to Assumption 2: Most people will vote in their come to their decision independently. The implica- own self-interest and in the aggregate that will tions for how elections must be run are obvious produce the desired result. The greatest good of and rather diametrically opposed to how they’re the greatest number is the outcome of majority run now. Just for a start, it implies no campaign rule with no further effort needed. Assumption 2 advertising and no opinion polling. has not been working so well for us. Possibly that I’ve argued repeatedly that people won’t put has to do with the further assumption, Assump- effort into issues of little direct interest to them. tion 2a, that most people will apply enlightened Governing the country is one of those distant ac- self-interest. Enlightenment of any kind is in tivities. It’s a background noise to their primary short supply. concerns, and the best thing it can do is be quiet. The other problem is Assumption 2b, which is Achieving a condition of effective yet quiet gov- that majority rule will produce the best results ernment takes a lot of knowledge, attention to for everyone, not just for the majority. There is detail, consideration of implications, and preven- nothing to protect the interests of minorities tive action. In short, it takes professionals. No- with whom the majority is not in sympathy. body is going to do the work required in half an Assumption 3: Tallying the votes will show hour on Friday night after the barbecue. Even if what the majority wants. This is such a simple they had that half hour, they’d find more fun idea it seems more like a statement of fact, and things to do during it. yet reality indicates that it’s the easiest part of The fact that people will not spend time on
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 52 what feels like boring homework means we’re widespread enough to be more than individual applying democracy at the wrong end of the dudgeon or the machinations of interested par- process. Voters aren’t much good at governing — ties. Ways to measure discontent need study be- anyone who lives in California needs no further cause there’s a fine line between capturing every proof of that. They’re not even good at finding free-floating anxiety out there and making the other people who can govern — anyone who lives process too difficult to be effective at policing on this planet can see that. officials. Petitions are one traditional way to It isn’t that voters aren’t smart enough. They measure discontent. Whether they’re the best are. The problem is that hiring is a boring job. way, I don’t know. (An example of possible imple- People get paid to do that. If they’re not paid, and mentation is given below.) are not responsible for the performance of the employee, there’s no way enough people will If 5% of the voters in the area concerned — spend time carefully considering a candidate’s re- city, state, nation, or world — or 500 whichever sume, studying their past performance, digging was larger, signed a petition for recall, and the whole recall effort was volunteer and uncom- up clues about what the candidate really did, and pensated, then the recall election would be trying to form an accurate assessment of proba- held soon after, say six weeks. The concerned ble future performance. Voters want someone parties could present their arguments in voter who doesn’t put them to sleep, at least long information booklets. They could have real de- enough to do their civic duty and decide for bates, and answer real unscripted questions whom to vote. from real unscripted people, but they could not advertise during that time (or any other That’s one of those things everybody knows time). and nobody mentions unless they’re being funny or cynical. As in, for instance, the following ironic The example is just to give some indication of comment [135] about a British candidate’s cam- what I mean. However dissatisfaction is mea- paign strategy: sured, the essential element is that the process must be immunized against influence either by David Cameron is direct about how the members of the public or by the officials, which next election is not one of ideological revo- is also why the time frame involved should be lution (which would only flame existing short. Those wise crowds only appear in the ab- suspicions that the British have about the extent of the modernization of the Tories) sence of slant. but rather who would better manage the One more safeguard is needed. Consciousness economy and government. of scrutiny can produce good behavior, but if the scrutiny only appears on a schedule, the same be- Because electing the best technocrat is re- comes true of the good behavior. Officials should ally inspirational to casual voters. be subject to random checks for which they can’t prepare. Effective methodology needs study and So voters get what they want, more or less in- trial in practice, because until it’s been tried spirational campaigns. When it turns out that do- there is no fund of experience on what works. As ing the job requires competence, it’s too late. an example of what I mean, something like ran- Voters are no good at electing leaders. They dom “snap unelections” might be useful. These should be unelecting them. (I’ll discuss below al- might list those in the top five percent for com- ternate ways of finding officeholders.) Figuring plaints, even without formal petitions against out what’s right is hard, but noticing something them. wrong is easy. We shouldn’t be looking to voters I am not trying to argue in favor of a particular to craft solutions. They’d be much better at method. Effective methods can best be found by smashing messes into small enough pieces to means of longitudinal studies. The point is that cart away. the most effective methods known at the time Of course, nobody could govern if they had to are the ones to apply, and they should be able to face recall elections every morning. There needs make officials do their jobs in the interests of the to be a threshold. The discontent needs to be greatest good all the time, not once every few
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 53 years. after the problems with the 2000, 2002, 2004, This is also the place to discuss some of the 2006, and 2008 elections. (It’s getting hard to pre- minutiae of the voting process: delimitation of tend that these are all unfortunate exceptions districts and methods of counting votes. with no pattern.) The whole process of drawing districts has The bottom line is that the method of adding reached ludicrous nonfunctionality in the US. I’m up the votes can produce a variety of results, as not familiar with the situation elsewhere, but it’s the graphic to the right shows. The example is such an obvious way to enable politicians to choose their voters, rather than the other way around, that it probably crops up everywhere when it’s not actively stopped. And stopped it must be. It makes a mockery of the whole idea behind democracy, whether the voting is used for elections or unelections. Political districts are simply a matter of popu- lation and ease of access to the seat of govern- ment. (And polling places, if the technology is at a level where neither mail nor electronics is reli- able enough.) That is a problem in geography, not politics. Districts need to be drawn by techni- cians and scientists with degrees in geographical information systems, not by politicians or judges or other amateurs. In very spiky situations with concerns of bias, three separate groups of techni- cians could draw the lines, one group from each taken from an article in Science News, Nov. 2, [136] side and another one from halfway around the 2002, by Erica Klarreich . Fifteen people have world, and the results agreed upon, or averaged, beverage preferences. Six prefer milk first, wine or whatever other solution works to provide an second, and beer third; five prefer beer first, wine objective outcome. But however it’s done, this second, and milk third; and four prefer wine first, critical step in government can’t itself be part of beer second, and milk third. (Example from work the political process. she cites by Saari.) One objection voiced against purely popula- Plurality voting is conceptually easy, it’s very tion-based districts in the US is that some have commonly used, and it’s the worst at expressing been drawn to protect minorities, and drawing the will of the voters. (In the example, 6 first them otherwise will reduce those protections. place votes for milk is greater than 5 for beer, This is an attempt to solve a problem by not ad- which is greater than 4 for wine.) It differs from dressing it. It’s like the old joke about dropping a majority voting in that the latter requires the coin around the corner, but looking for it under winning choice to have more first place votes the streetlight because it’s easier to see there. Mi- than the other choices combined, in other words nority rights need protection. There’s no question to have more than half the total votes. There is about that (and I’ll discuss some methods in a no majority winner in the example, and a second moment). So they should be directly protected. It election between the two top candidates would makes no sense to hope that some kind of pro- be needed in a majority vote system. tection might emerge from an irrelevant kabuki In instant runoff voting, the choice with dance on another topic. The fact that the dance is fewest first place votes is eliminated, and those feasible under the current political system is as voters’ second choice is used in the tally. (In that relevant to the desired outcome as the streetlight case beer would win because 6 votes for milk is is to finding the coin. less than 5 plus 4 for beer.) Methods of tallying votes is another bit of ar- Intuitively, it seems that the third system, cana that has come to wider attention in the US which allows voters to rank their choices, ought to capture people’s intentions, but the actual re-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 54 sult is to favor the least-disliked alternative. (In administrative unit. In general, cumulative voting the example, wine is liked only by 4, but disliked is applied where minorities are powerful enough by nobody. So if first place choices have 2 pts, to insist on being heard, such as corporate second, 1 pt, and third, 0, then the tally is: 12 for boards, or, in the US, where it’s mandated by the milk, which is less than 14 for beer, which is less federal government to rectify injustices under the than 19 for wine.) I’ve seen this method at work Voting Rights Act. That indicates its effectiveness in an academic department where it was mainly at thwarting majority dictatorship. However, notable for favoring the blandest candidate, since there are also potential disadvantages in that the that one had the fewest enemies. system can be vulnerable to insincere tactical A peculiar paradox can occur in multi-round voting. Given the degree of coordination required voting that wouldn’t occur in single round, ac- for tactical voting, cumulative methods could be cording to Saari. This is true whether or not the more subject to gaming in the smallest elections. second round happens on another date or imme- In large-scale ones, it seems to me that the bene- diately after the first tally, as with instant-runoff. fit of mitigating majority dictatorship far out- Increased popularity can actually cause a fron- weighs the small likelihood of successfully coor- trunner to go down a notch in the tally and lose dinating insincere votes. the election. The process is described in Klarre- Scholars of voting methods could, no doubt, ich’s article. Paradoxical outcomes, where the come up with further improvements that would most popular choice doesn’t win, have been stud- make the likelihood of tactical voting even small- ied mathematically by Saari who’s pointed out er. Furthermore, to be successful, insincere voters that plurality voting does lead to the most para- would need to have good advance information doxes by far. about likely election results. But in the system de- There is also a method called cumulative vot- scribed here, opinion polling is not allowed be- ing. In the easiest-to-use variant, each voter gets cause it interferes with the independence of deci- as many votes as there are alternatives. If it’s a sion-making. simple up or down issue, like a recall, the num- When voters need to decide among an array of ber of votes per person might be one or some possible policies rather than candidates, it is es- agreed upon number for the sake of minority pro- pecially important to use voting methods that re- tection (see below). The voter can then distribute flect voters’ wishes as closely as possible. Since those votes however they like. Cumulative voting determining policy is one of the major uses of was studied extensively by Lani Guinier [137] , who voting in the system I’m envisioning, it’s critical published The Tyranny of the Majority (1994), to use something more accurate than pluralities. among many other writings. More recently, it’s Another advantage of cumulative voting is the also been studied by Brams (2001 [138] , 2003) [139] relative simplicity of (pdf), and other publications. As Brams notes in designing under- 2003, “The chief reason for its nonadoption in standable ballots. In public elections, and by some societies, seems to the example to the be a lack of key “insider” support.” right, there are three In the example diagrammed above, cumulative bubbles to fill in next voting would give three votes to each voter. A to each choice. It’s beer fanatic could put all three votes on beer. simple to point out that putting all one’s votes on Somebody who likes all three drinks equally beer, say, would use up the votes and would could give one to each. The outcome of approval weight beer the most heavily. voting is not possible to predict mathematically One big problem with majority rule, even as- since the distribution of votes depends on the suming that large groups have a way of making voters. And that is as it should be. the right decision, is that “majority,” by itself does Approval voting has been applied in practice not mean “large group.” Even a mere unelection [140] most notably, as far as I’m concerned, in the with only two choices could deliver a bogus re- Australian Territory of Norfolk Island. That’s the sult if only a tiny minority of voters bother to closest it comes to being used in an autonomous cast a ballot. Then an even tinier minority de-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 55 cides the issue, and there’s no crowd to generate lost for all. “Fairness” limited to a few is just priv- wisdom. A quorum is an essential requirement of ilege, and a dictatorship of the majority is still a any election that’s supposed to be fair. dictatorship. The quorum, I think, should be set quite high, Various methods of protecting minority rights such as 75% or 80% of the population voting in have generally been designed with a view to a the particular election. In a fair society, register- specific minority. For instance, part of the pur- ing to vote and voting must be as effortless as is pose behind the number and distribution of Sena- consistent with honesty. If most of the popula- tors in the US was to make sure the less-popu- tion can’t be bothered to express an opinion lous states had louder voices in the Senate. At the when doing so is as simple as returning a turn of the 1800s when the system took shape, postage-paid envelope, then the issue in question the important minority was farmers. Farmers re- didn’t need a vote. It stays as it was, and the elec- main a minority and they remain important, but tion officials try to figure out how to prevent friv- they were and are far from the only minority olous elections from being called. group whose rights need protection. Elections could be called by petition or by What’s needed is a method to give any minori- some other indication of popular will or by the ty a voice. As is generally the case, what’s right is relevant officials, and could be held at any time, also what’s necessary for long term survival. Ig- although not oftener than once per quarter. Gov- nored minorities are endangering democracies, ernment should be unobtrusive to avoid citizen or preventing their birth in a pattern that’s far fatigue, and having elections every few days too common. Sectarian, tribal, ethnic, and racial would not satisfy that requirement. Since a pri- strife are endemic at this point. Often it’s foment- mary function of elections is oversight, not lead- ed by politicians with ulterior motives, but they ership, the ad hoc timing is intentional. It would wouldn’t be successful without a fertile substrate reduce effectiveness if they were regularly sched- for their nasty work. By facilitating gradual uled. change, democracies are supposed to prevent the I’m assuming it goes without saying, but per- need for violent overthrow, but their inability to haps I should be explicit about the remaining as- accommodate minorities is leading to predictable pects of voting. The process must be as easy as is results. compatible with 1) secrecy of the ballot, 2) fair The most promising idea I’ve heard for giving voting 3) transparency of the process, and 4) minorities a voice is cumulative voting, discussed maintaining tamper-proof records that can be re- by Lani Guinier (1994), which I described earlier. counted later. Although it would not help a minority against an equally committed majority, which except in un- usual circumstances is as it should be, it would Minority Protections help a focused minority against a diffuse majori- The issue of minorities is a structural weak- ty. People who felt strongly about an issue, could ness in democracies. Majority rule is a defining concentrate all their votes on one choice and po- feature of democracies, so they’ll necessarily be tentially prevail. An advantage of building minori- less than ideal for minorities. Saying “Get used to ty protections into the vote tallying method is it” is not a solution. Majority rule is not some de- that minorities don’t have to be defined either sirable goal in itself. Its function is to serve the beforehand or for the purposes of the vote. Any greatest good of the greatest number. However, group that feels very strongly about an issue has people tend to ignore any problems that aren’t a way to make its voice heard. their own, and so a minority can get stepped on (There is a point of view that democracies are for no reason at all. Minority protections coun- defined by majority rule, and any dilution of it is teract obliviousness in majorities, and they en- somehow wrong. Apparently, there’s something able minorities to require consideration of their to this effect in Roberts Rules of Order [141] . That legitimate needs. Those protections are vital be- idea could only be valid if there’s no difference cause without them fairness is lost for some, and between democracy and majority dictatorship. If since it only exists when shared by all, then it’s the idea behind democracy is fairness, which is
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 56 the only meaning that makes it a desirable form (there are some, at least in the US) tend to show of government to most people, then one has to up in the news as examples of appalling igno- do what it takes to prevent majority dictatorship. rance and bad judgment. It would be self-evident- That necessarily involves curbing the power of ly foolish to expect voters to evaluate someone’s the majority.) qualifications to run, say, the food safety division. Sometimes, a minority might need greater pro- Yet when it comes to running the whole state, tection than that afforded by cumulative voting. we revert to a Romantic notion of the purity of For instance, consider the case of a small group the amateur. A heart full of good intentions is speaking a rare language who wanted schools to supposed to work better than a skill set. For all I be taught in their mother tongue as well as in the know, that might even be true. We’ll never know dominant language. A country’s official language because there is no way to reliably find these is hardly a matter of principle. It’s something that pure amateurs. Set aside worries about purity for could be appropriately decided by vote. And yet, if the moment, and consider elections. There is no it is, all minor languages will die out. Whether or universe in which amateurs emerge victorious not one sees the value of diversity (I happen to from a system that requires a small or large for- think it’s huge), the fact is that it doesn’t hurt tune and a life remade to fit it. We’re getting pro- anyone for the smaller groups to preserve their fessionals. They’re just professionals at some- languages. In order to do it, though, they may thing other than governing. need actual preference, not just improved equali- I realize there’s nothing terribly new about ty, to ensure their ability to live as they like. those insights, and that the objection to trying A similar situation is an ethnic group which is anything else is that it will be worse. It’s back to outnumbered in its home area by immigrants. saying that “this is the least-bad system out (For a while that was true of Fijians and Fijian-In- there.” That’s fine as far as it goes, but it’s no rea- dians, for instance. Or, as another example, the son to stop trying to do better. American Indians and all the later arrivals.) Al- I’m suggesting that professionals are needed if though the new place is now home to the immi- we want professional-level workmanship. There grants, and it’s not as if they necessarily have a are indeed two big pitfalls which stop people country to go back to, yet it’s just not right for a from trying that obvious solution. The first is the people and a culture to be obliterated at home by selection process. Judging skills is very difficult. A the weight of a majority. In that case, too, I could thorough evaluation takes much more time than see a weighted cumulative voting system that people are generally willing to give, so the ten- protects the cultural viability of the original in- dency is to go to a magic number system. Get a habitants. degree from the right school, and you’re in. Take It’s possible that majority rule would be less of a test that generates a grade, and we’re all set. a problem in a fair society, since all matters of The Imperial Chinese used elements of a rights are decided by law, not by vote. Only mat- test-based bureaucracy for hundreds of years be- ters of opinion and preference could be subject to fore they fell, and all it led to was the most ossi- votes, so minority protections in voting serve as fied system on the planet. an added safeguard, not as the only one. The selectors themselves are another weak link in the selection process. It takes one to know one, and the selectors would have to be at least Officeholders as adept at governing as the pool of candidates. If We’re used to the concept that positions re- they were, though, why would they be hanging quiring special skills are filled by appointees se- around, reading applications? And that doesn’t lected on that basis. The heads of a nation’s fi- even touch on the problems of bias or corrupt- nancial oversight, environmental oversight, or air ibility. At least with hordes of voters, the thinking traffic control are not elected. Judges are appoint- goes, it’s not possible to buy all of them and any ed, sometimes for life in the hope of ensuring bias cancels out. (It doesn’t necessarily, but that’s their independence as well as their knowledge. a whole different topic.) Those jurisdictions where judges are elected The second pitfall is oversight. Once a person
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 57 has the power granted by a government position, would work best in a computer-saturated society. how do you make sure they’re doing their jobs? If Maybe it would only work in a computer-saturat- they aren’t, how do you prevent the elite cliques ed society, because the pool of selectors should from covering for each other? This factor has the be as large as possible and their ranking of the steepest uphill climb against the tendency to for- candidates should be highly redundant. In other give all things to the powerful until it’s too late. words, many selectors should each look at candi- It may, however, be possible to preserve dates independently and rank them as plausible enough randomness to prevent fossilization, or implausible. They shouldn’t know what ranks enough expertise to prevent incompetence, and have been assigned by other selectors. Not all se- large enough numbers among the selectors to lectors should have to look at all candidates, but preserve both any wisdom the crowd might have only at as many as they had the energy to read up and prevent corruption. on properly. Candidates with multiple “pass- The thing to keep firmly in mind is that ran- es”and few or no “fails” would advance to the domness is acceptable. It’s even good. We like to next stage. tell ourselves that our selection processes, what- The selectors themselves would be chosen ever they happen to be, are set up to find the from among those in the population who had the best. And then naturally we declare the person qualifications to evaluate the backgrounds of we have found to be the best, which proves that candidates. It’s the same general idea as the se- the process works. On the evidence, this is a cir- lection of the pool of reviewers for academic cular fairy tale. A comforting one, but nonethe- journal articles. There’s a large population with less nonfunctional. known qualifications. They can opt out of the There is an element of randomness in any se- task, but they don’t have to do anything special lection process now operating, whether it’s hir- to opt in. Here again computers are probably es- ing employees, ranking songs on the web, or sential. The database of people with the back- picking the market’s stock favorites. Consider ground to select candidates for given offices elections. Many factors aren’t controlled, and al- would be huge. The database could be compiled though that’s not the same as random, it might from an amalgam of job descriptions, both em- be better if it was. For instance, who runs for ployed and self-employed, and of school records election to begin with has little to do with job showing who received which degrees. If each ap- qualifications. So we already have randomness. plication is evaluated by a few hundred people, It’s merely unplanned. then one could hope the crowd of independent I’ll give an example of a selection process just and less-than-totally ignorant people should to illustrate what I mean. Obviously it hasn’t show a bit of wisdom. been tested, and it’s only by a process of trial, er- The idea is that by having as large a pool of se- ror, and study of the evidence that a really work- lectors as is consistent with the basic knowledge able solution can be found. For low level offices needed to be one, the pitfall of ignorant selectors such as city councils or county positions, people is avoided. Possibly people would be willing to who felt they were qualified could put their participate in the process out of a sense of civic names up for consideration. They’d be expected duty and volunteerism, much as they do now on to show experience relevant to the position. If it computer help forums or in the search for star- was managerial, they’d be expected to show dust in aerogels [142] . If that’s not so, then there some talent at managing, even if the evidence could be a formal request system, rather like jury came from volunteer work managing a kinder- duty now. Qualified people would receive notifi- garten. If it required specialized knowledge, cation to evaluate, say, three applications, with a they’d be expected to show training and some ex- minimal penalty if they ignore it. perience in that field. Once the selectors had narrowed down the The selectors would not choose the actual offi- pool of candidates to those plausibly capable of cials. They would choose who among those who doing the job —and that’s all they would be doing, volunteered their names actually had plausible- they wouldn’t be ranking them — then the actual sounding qualifications. This part of the process officeholder should be selected by lottery.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 58
I know that selection by lottery sounds odd, from otherwise marginalized groups makes a but it’s not really that different from current sys- beneficial difference. tems except for two things. One is that the pool Another advantage to this system is that the of candidates would be narrowed to those who candidates would not have to be good at any- might be able to do the job. Two is that the thing except the jobs they’re doing and hope to process would not select according to criteria do (and at expressing that in their background that have no relevance to the job. Both of these materials). They wouldn’t have to be able to would be improvements. Furthermore, a lottery stomach the campaign process in order to gov- system would prevent at least some selector bias, ern. They wouldn’t have to know the right people and it would prevent the formation of impervious in order to run. They wouldn’t have to figure out elite cliques. A plain old lottery would have as which parts of themselves to sell to raise the good a chance of finding the best person for the money campaigning takes. job as most of our current methods, and a much Higher offices, those at the level of province, better chance if the pool was narrowed down at state, nation, continent, or world, would be se- the beginning to those who had a chance of com- lected in much the same way with the difference petence at the job. There would also be the added that the pool would only be open to those who advantage that we couldn’t fool ourselves into had proven themselves by, for instance, at least thinking we were so bright that the person se- five successful years on a lower rung. The time lected necessarily had to be the best. should be long enough to make sure that an offi- (This system differs in a couple of important cial couldn’t create problems and then escape the ways from random appointments in, for instance, consequences by moving up. The track record the ancient Athenian concept of democracy or needs to be complete enough to form a basis for from sortition. (Sortition? Who comes up with judgment. these terms? “Random selection” would be too Success would be defined as complaints not easy to understand, I suppose.) The random se- exceeding some low percentage (to be discussed lection operates on a not-random pool of people in the Oversight section), and, certainly, a lack of with some expertise. The offices in question are successful recall elections. It would also mean those requiring expertise to administer specific effective exercise of foresight and prevention of functions and are not to find representatives who larger consequences in problems that arose, and form a legislative body. Elections and voting are it would mean a well-managed department and still part of the process, but they function to pro- high morale among the personnel who worked vide oversight instead of to select government for that official in their lower rung capacity. officials.) This would tend to make high officials relative- In a society of the far future, when fairness ly elderly, since some time has to elapse before has been the standard for so long that all people they can put their names in for national or inter- really are equal, then the composition of the pop- national jobs. I would see that as a good thing, ulation of officeholders may cease to matter. since it introduces a natural element of term lim- We’re far from there yet. So one other use to its. Ideally, the system would not depend on rapid which a lottery system could be put is to ensure advances in anti-aging technology to fill the high- that those in office reflect the population they’re est slots. supposed to govern. The pool from which the The purpose of selectors at the higher rungs officials are chosen could be limited to those would be, again, checking the backgrounds of the coming from the necessary groups. Half the posi- officials who had expressed an interest in a high- tions could be filled from the pool of males, half er position and removing the names of those from females, and those in whatever mix of who clearly did not qualify. The selectors races, ethnicities, castes, or whatever, is relevant. shouldn’t, in this case, select who is in the pool I’m not suggesting that people from different but rather who is out of it. The idea behind that groups can’t feel for each other. But it’s a fact in is to reduce the effects of selector bias. this stupidly stratified world of ours that they of- An official’s life under this system would not ten don’t, and that having people in government be a sinecure. The following section on Oversight
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 59 will show that’s it’s even less of a walk in the of the draw. That is, after all, how we’ve selected park than it seems so far. When the perils of a po- our leaders for all of human history, but without sition are great, then the compensation has to be the benefit of requiring any evidence of qualifica- proportionate. Miserliness about the salaries of tion at all. government officials would be a big mistake. They’re being asked to perform a difficult, de- Precognitive decisions manding, and generally thankless job, and asking them to do it for peanuts is counterproductive. There’s also a cognitive aspect to decision Their jobs, since they hold the well-being of the making that any society aspiring to sustainability, population in trust, are more important than pri- and therefore rationality, must consider. I’ve vate sector jobs. As such, they ought to be com- stressed the need for informed citizenry and edu- pensated proportionately more than private sec- cation, but all of that is layered on top of much tor executives in comparable positions of respon- quicker and less conscious modes of thinking. Ra- sibility. As I’ll discuss in the chapter on Money tional decision-making requires awareness of and Work, I’m of the opinion that pay in the busi- that level, where it’s pushing, and whether that’s ness world should have some limits. With that the desired direction. I’ll go over some of the caveat, the compensation of government officials symptoms and factors involved. should exceed their business counterparts by Decisions require commitment to a given path some percentage, like 10% or 20%, over the aver- and therefore a loss of other options. Without a age (mode) in the private sector. The tendency of sense that the decision is right, the process is un- too many voters to resent any rewards for their certain and unpleasant. In the interests of avoid- public servants has to be curbed. ing that, we do what we can to feel sure, and One potential problem, even in the ideal situa- that’s where the trouble starts. tion of completely competent technocrats, is that That conviction of being right can come from nobody would think creatively. There’d be no ignorance, as in the Dunning-Kruger effect [143] great leaders, just good ones. Although that (which should be a joke, but isn’t). That research would be an improvement, it still feels like an un- showed something most people have observed: necessary compromise to renounce the outstand- the incompetent rate their own abilities more ing just to avoid the awful. highly than the skilled, precisely because they Maybe the continual and inevitable influx of don’t know enough to realize how little they outsiders in a lottery-based system would be know. Education may not fix that, because the enough for new ideas to percolate in. If that ability to absorb the information may be lacking. looked to be insufficent, then I would imagine Or the conviction can come from knowing it that the two most straightforward points to all. Confidence in being highly trained can lead to change would be the candidate pool and the ignorance of bias. Education cannot fix that. Ex- stringency of the selection process. Whether it’s amples can be found in any field requiring a high best to loosen requirements or tighten them de- level of skill where, for instance, experts hold on pends on what longitudinal studies of the results to pet theories against the evidence or where of different methods show in practice. Possibly, there is discrimination against women or minori- evidence might show other factors or other ties. In other words, all of them. I’ll mention two methods entirely are most associated with a se- examples. lection process that facilitates outstanding gov- Orchestras hired men because they played bet- erning at any given level. ter. Once hiring committees started having audi- Whatever the method, it’s important to guard tions behind screens, where the actual music was against being too clever, primarily because that’s the only information available to them, they the likeliest excuse for trying to shift the balance hired more women (Goldin & Rouse, 2000 [144] ). of power, but also for its own sake. We, meaning Recently, women actually do better than men in we humans, really aren’t that good at looking in- a blind selection process, implying that not only to each others’ souls and finding the best person were the experts wrong in their assumptions for, well, anything. It’s better to trust to the luck about men, but also that women as a whole are
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 60 more than equally good. They’re better [145] . (A modern situations that didn’t exist then. And yet not unexpected outcome when mediocre women it doesn’t feel right to go against them. In short, are less likely to attempt careers than mediocre we have a problem. men.) But it came as a big shock to many of (I know this runs contrary to much of the re- those doing the hiring that something besides cent motivational press about trusting gut feel- their superior knowledge of music was influenc- ings. That’s a welcome message because it con- ing their decisions. (I’d actually be surprised if firms what we want to do anyway. On the evi- quite a number didn’t think there was something dence, however, it does not lead to reality based wrong with blind selection rather than with their decisions. Don’t be surprised if your intuition decision-making.) Unawareness is just that. Un- says otherwise.) awareness. Saying “I know I would never do that” Either way, whether from ignorance or smug- only confirms the lack of awareness if one has ness, it’s important not to assume that people just finished doing precisely that. will make decisions based on the best available Another example is the prevalence of tall male information. They will do that when it’s the only CEOs. The hiring committees spend months on available information. Not being omniscient, we these decisions, examining all sorts of minutia. don’t necessarily know what the best is, but the Yet somehow, the end result of all the conscious totally extraneous can be easier to determine. thought is that tall is better. That’s true for a Thus, for instance, politicians’ hair styles can be chimpanzee trying to lead a troop. There’s not a confidently stated to have no predictive value for shred of evidence to say it’s true for the skills a indicating their legislative abilities. Everybody, in- CEO needs. cluding all voters, knows that. And yet, when vot- That is an important point. The emotional re- ers have that information, it becomes a big action, the “first impression,” the judgment enough factor to predict the winner. [147] . made in those first few minutes before there’s We need to consciously deprive ourselves of any chance that evidence could come into the re- the information used in “first impressions” and sult, that emotional reaction is not merely a con- force ourselves to consider evidence first, and founding factor that takes effort to discount. It then force ourselves to reconcile any large incon- takes precedence over reason. Reason then serves gruity that crops up between between intuition to justify the decision already taken. The results and evidence-based choices. We need to force tell the story, not the convictions. ourselves to be aware of the information coming And that relates directly to the “intuitive be- from intuition and to consciously examine trayal hypothesis” (Simmons & Nelson, 2006 whether it’s pushing in a fair and sensible direc- [146]), which refers to acting against intuition. The tion. “hypothesis predicts that people will be more There are some people who can examine their confident in their final decisions when they assumptions and force themselves to ignore intu- choose the intuitive option than when they ition and go purely by evidence. That’s the choose a nonintuitive alternative.” Not only is essence of scholarly work, and it takes most peo- that first impression obtained without relevant ple years of training. Even with all that training, evidence, but subsequent evidence that contra- scholars are notorious for holding to erroneous dicts it is discounted because of the confidence pet theories. Without all that training, the odds conveyed by gut feelings. The emotional confi- are much worse. So, although everyone who dence doesn’t arise when unsupported by intu- reads this will know they, personally, have no ition, so counterintuitive decisions never feel trouble discounting emotion, in the aggregate “right,” no matter how much evidence supports there are too few who can do that. Even with all them. the education in the world, rationality must be Gut feelings operate with the same level of actively and consciously given priority and extra analysis available a million years ago. That weight if it’s to have a chance of taking its opti- doesn’t make them useless. They may work bet- mum place in decision making. ter than expected for avoiding danger or finding a sex partner. But they lack the ability to parse
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 61
Laws other clear piece of writing about difficult con- The biggest breakthrough in creating an egali- cepts, and see whether people who understood tarian legal system came in the days of the an- them correctly also understood what a new law cient Romans. The laws, they said, should be said. If people who have no trouble understand- written. That way they were accessible to every- ing plain language misunderstand the new law, it one. They applied equally to everyone (officially), needs to be rewritten until it says what it’s trying and all people had the same information as to to say. Areas of the law that apply only to a spe- what they were. cialized subset of people, maritime law for in- The only part of this noble ideal that has been stance, would need to be comprehensible to the preserved, now that most people can read, is that target group, not necessarily to those who aren’t the laws are written down. To make up for that, relevant. Plain language laws are one more thing they’re incomprehensible, inaccessible to anyone that would be much easier to do in a computer- outside a select priesthood, and applied unequal- saturated society. A few hundred independent ly based on access to that priesthood. It’s an egre- readers would be plenty to get an accurate as- gious example of how to deprive people of their sessment of comprehensibility. rights without raising any alarm until it’s too Another aspect of clarity besides plain speech late. That’s not knowledge that’s been lost since is plain organization. At this point new laws the time of the ancient Romans. More recently, which are revisions of older laws which expand Thomas Jefferson [148] made the same point. on yet older laws which rest on seriously old laws I know that the official justification for legal written in an idiom so out of date they need to language is precision. If the laws were written in be translated are all tucked away in separate English then, God help us, we’d have to figure out books of law and referenced in a Gordian knot of exactly which implication out of many was in- precedents. People get degrees for their ability to tended. Yet, oddly enough, nobody seems to track laws through thickets much worse than know what the stuff written in legalese means that sentence. That situation, too, is rife with op- until it is so-called “tested in the courts.” And portunities for conferring advantage on those in then the decision handed down becomes a prece- the know. It’s not accceptable in a fair society dent, that is, an example of what that law means whose legal system cannot work better for some in practice. In order not to get lost in a forest of than for others. possible interpretations, it’s customary to follow The situation is analogous to the issues faced these precedents. Yet, officially, the reason we by programmers trying to track the changing need legalese is because otherwise there could be code of a program. They’ve come up with version different possible interpretations. control systems to handle it. A very small subset Furthermore, tell me which has the more un- of what they do is also in document management equivocal meaning: George Orwell’s piece on Poli- options that can track changes to text. As Karl Fo- tics and the English Language [149] or any legal gel [150] notes, version control has application to document you care to dig up. The whole argu- a wide range of situations in a world where many ment that legalese is somehow more precise is people make changes to the work of other peo- nothing but a smokescreen. Its precision is an il- ple. Staying for now with legal codes, a version lusion generated by the common consent of an control system identifies ingroup to exclude outsiders. The meaning of words is always a matter of common consent. who introduced or changed which item, When the meaning pertains to the laws of the whether line or paragraph or bill, land, that consent truly needs to be common, which other items it relates to, influences, and not limited to a priesthood. requires changes in, or negates Laws in a fair society would have to meet a and which items are currently proposed, be- plain language standard. There are various ways ing reviewed, or accepted into the main body to measure adequate clarity. One, for instance, of code. would be to make available Orwell’s essay above, Just the first line, showing who authored or one of Krugman’s newspaper columns, or any which bits of proposed legislation, would be a
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 62 large change from the current opaque system. In the attention of professionals as well as the gen- the software world, one way to check authorship eral public, and that would likely be a more strin- is the command “git blame.” Computer geeks gent selective process than what we have now. have a sense of humor, but it’s nonetheless true. The professionals would also have the responsi- A further improvement needs to be made to an bility of formally writing it down and checking eventual legal version control system. The the text for clarity. Redundant or superfluous branches and webs of related laws need to be laws could be weeded out at this stage, as could easy to find, search, access, and understand by ones that contradict rights or accepted laws. ordinary users with no previous training. That There are some areas of law which are neces- will take invention of new methods by experts in sarily specialized, but the modifications required the presentation of information, because as far as in this system are minor. Plain language in that I know, no such thing is available in any field yet. case means plain to the people who will be using I’ve been discussing laws as if they arrive by the law. The reviewers will be those affected by immaculate conception, which was unavoidable it. The professionals checking its wording and va- since I’ve eliminated the elected class of legisla- lidity would have the relevant specialized back- tors. Who, in this system, are the lawmakers? ground. The principle, however, remains the There are different aspects to the process of same. creating laws. Proposing a law to address an Then, last, comes the decision whether to overlooked or new problem is just one step. Then make the new law part of the active code. I see it must be checked for redundancy. If not redun- that as another matter best left to the wisdom of dant, it needs to be written clearly, then debated, a large but qualified crowd. The selectors of laws and finally passed. The checking and writing would be all those with the professional qualifi- parts are specialist functions that require skilled cations to know whether the new law agreed officials as well as general input from the public. with guaranteed rights. A quorum would be a The best originators of laws are hard to pin few hundred, and the majority favorable should down. Philosopher kings, plain old kings, and be much larger than half, such as three quarters priests have always made a mess of it, so far. or even more. Their function is to determine con- Democracies generally have settled on the idea stitutionality, and if they’re rather evenly split, that there’s really no way to know. Greengrocers that’s not a good sign. As with my other examples or dancers or doctors of law can be elected to of methods, there may be better ways to achieve office and their interest in the job is supposed to the goal of a streamlined, functional, adaptable, be a hopeful sign that they’ll write laws worth and equitable legal code. The point isn’t the having. Their aides help them with the legalistic method but the goal. bits. That system has worked better than the Moving on from the making of law to its prac- wise men system, so why not go with it all the tice, there is at least one systemic lapse that in- way? Anyone can propose a law if they see the creasingly prevents justice instead of ensuring it. need for it. The time required to reach a verdict is appropri- Again, I’m serious. Allowing anyone to propose ate only for bristlecone pine trees. Justice delayed laws is no different from allowing legislators to is justice denied, and by that measure alone be elected regardless of background for the pur- there’s very little justice to be had. This fact has pose of making laws. The only difference is that not been lost on corporations who have been us- by making the process open there’s the chance ing lawsuits as a weapon. The Intel-AMD lawsuit that the Queen and King Solomons among us comes to mind as an example. (1 [151] , 2 [152] , and may contribute. There’s the chance, of course, links in those articles.) The few decisions actually that the really stupid will also contribute, but we handed down have said that Intel did abuse its seem to be surviving their help in the national as- market position. But then Intel appeals again, or semblies of the world. Furthermore, under an they delay trial by finding new emails, or some open version control system, proposing the law is other thing. Even when it’s the US Supreme just the first step. The checking and debating (in Court, Intel disagrees with the decision and is ap- papers, or internet fora, or real ones) will have pealing. I wasn’t aware that it was possible to ap-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 63 peal a decision by the Supremes, but one thing is eminently clear. Intel continues the disputed Legal professionals are selected by the meth- practices and AMD loses by it. Meanwhile, the ods already outlined or by earning a degree. In courts labor over stalling tactics as if they meant other words, selectors can decide that some combination of legal training and experience something. (Update 2009-11-11: the endless suit has provided knowledge of the law and of was finally settled out of court. AMD settled for rights equivalent to a degree. much less than their real damages, no doubt be- cause they gave up hope of justice instead of de- Amateur juries are replaced by panels of legal- lays.) By such means a good thing, due process, is ly trained people that are chosen with input turned into its opposite. The situation is so egre- from the two sides. Each side chooses from one to three of these professionals, depending gious that, on occasion, the lawyers themselves [153] on the importance of the case or the point in point it out . the appeals process. Those professionals, call Simple cases should be decided in days or them “judges” perhaps, then agree on another weeks, medium ones in months, and complicated one to three, for a total of from three to nine ones in less than a year. The legal system needs on a panel. deadlines. It will improve, not hurt, the cause of justice if they have to focus on the merits of cas- The panel familiarize themselves with the case, hear the arguments of the advocates or the es instead of every possible minutia that can be two opposing sides if they haven’t hired tacked onto the billable hours. There is no human lawyers, ask the two sides questions, and ulti- dispute so complicated it can’t be resolved in that mately hand down a decision and a sentence, time unless there’s determined obfuscation. Even if any. The voices of the “middle” members of the US Supreme Court feels that a lawyer can ad- the panel could be weighted more heavily if equately summarize a case in half an hour. All as- necessary through a cumulative system, as in voting. Two further appeals with newly select- pects of hearing a case can be given short and ed, and maybe larger and more stringently reasonable time limits. qualified, groups would be allowed, but if they The way cases are tried in our current system, all decided the same way, then the decision with judge(s), lawyers, juries and the lot does not would stand. If they did not, the majority of de- necessarily have to work against fairness. But cisions after a further two appeals, i.e. three from what I’ve seen myself, the jury system out of five, would stand. seems rather hit or miss. The deliberations for one case I was on were surprisingly short be- requirement for professional members. cause one of the men had booked a fishing trip All aspects of the system need to be tax-fund- for the afternoon on the assumption he wouldn’t ed. Nobody can be financially beholden to either actually be called for duty. I happened to feel we of the two sides. That’s essential to reduce the in- came to the right decision as it was, but those fluence of wealth on the whole legal system. The who didn’t were definitely quashed by an agenda court apparatus and all the legal professionals, that had nothing to do with the law. There are including the lawyers for each side, must be pub- thousands of stories along those lines and they licly funded. Acquiring extra legal help based on are disturbing, but possibly they could be fixed. ability to pay doesn’t fit with a fair system. Maybe the system would also work better in a I realize that the first thing wealthier people plain language context with short trials that would do is hire somebody who calls themselves didn’t waste everyone’s time. Below is an exam- anything but a lawyer and proceed from there. ple of an alternative way to structure a judicial That has to be illegal and punishable because it system. subverts fairness for everyone. The model to fol- Even though the current system could, theo- low might be medical licensing. A license would retically, work fairly, in practice it has enough attach to being any part of the legal profession, problems to make alternate methods worth test- and one of its requirements would be to receive ing. My notion of one such alternative is in the no outside funds of any kind. Those found offer- example to the right. It retains the somewhat ing any kind of legal advice without a license random element seen in juries, and the training would be fined some multiple of whatever they received from their clients, with increasing penal-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 64 ties if they kept doing it. It really is that impor- of counteracting it. tant to keep money out of the courts. That I’ve already touched on the relation of politics should be obvious from the current state of jus- to voting districts, but there is a more general tice. sense in which the organization of a country’s — My thinking is that a system as in the exam- or the world’s — subunits can foster equal treat- ple, with ad hoc collections of professionals, ment for all. Currently, bigger is better because it would cut out much of the chaff from the legal gives the central government control over more process by obviating the charade supposedly resources, taxes, and people to conscript into needed to keep legally inexperienced jurors unbi- armies. That is really the only reason to deny ased. Yet it would preserve the presence of expert self-determination to smaller groups. The Turks assistance for each of the two sides, and even don’t want control over some of the Kurds be- add voices for them when the final deliberations cause they value their culture so much. The Chi- were in progress. Because the legal personnel are nese haven’t colonized Tibet or Uighur because assembled partly by the parties involved, a class they admire the scenery. of judges with undue personal power should not Administrative borders delimited according to develop. varying criteria would be more conducive to I know that such a minimally stodgy system self-determination and peace. There is no neces- seems very odd, very unlegal. Stodginess is such a sary minimum size for a group based on lan- constant feature in courts that it’s absence feels guage, culture, or a shared philosophy. A viable like the absence of law itself, or at least the ab- economic unit, on the other hand, requires sever- sence of due process. And yet, what we see is the al million people to have enough complexity to slow, deliberate pace being used to deny due be stable. But there is no requirement that those process, not assist it. two have to be the same unit. Small groups could The real issue, however, is that whatever form run their own schools and video stations in their the legal resolution of disputes takes, whether own languages plus the main language of the slow or not, it should have the hallmarks of fair- larger group. Small units could together form one ness. It should be equally accessible to all, it viable economic unit. Those could work together should treat everyone equally, and it should ac- for their common benefit vis-a-vis other similar complish that with a minimum of effort, anguish, large groups. and expense for all equally. In terms of borders, this is not that different from the nested sets of units within and between nations. The difference is that self-determination Administration and Taxes is not limited to the biggest units but is spread to These are the practical, boring parts of govern- the smallest units compatible with a system that ment. Nameless flunkies are supposed to just do doesn’t waste people’s taxes. Things that need to them somewhere out of sight. stay coordinated over large areas, such as trans- In many ways it’s true. They are practical and portation or roads, are wastefully inefficient boring … in the same way as bricks. If they’re when handled by many smaller units, as, for in- done wrong, the whole building comes down. stance, railroads in the US. Things that are best In a sustainable system, they need as much at- handled on a local level, such as membership in a tention as principles. It’s quite possible they need time zone, cause inefficiency when imposed from more attention because they form the actual far away, as, for instance, the single time zone in structure. They not only keep the whole edifice all of China. The bigger the unit, the less its func- standing, they’re also most people’s actual point tion is actual administration and the more it is of contact with the government. Last, and far arbitration between its members and with other from least, precisely because they’re boring similar groups. People could identify with nations they’re an easy place to start the creeping abuse or any group that suited them, but administra- of power without causing enough resistance. So, tion should devolve to the lowest level where it mundane or not, it is very important for the ad- can be accomplished efficiently. ministrative aspects to facilitate fairness instead Taxation is a supremely prickly subject, per-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 65 haps even more so than national power. The cou- many different cultures receive services and pay ple of points I’d like to make are that fairness re- that amount without feeling wronged, an quires an equal burden, and that any burden amount in that range could be considered a rule must have a limit or it becomes unfair no matter of thumb. In other words, taxes, as a matter of how equal it is. law and rights, could not go higher than a fixed An equal burden is not measured by the percentage, like 35%, and for that they would amount of tax. It is measured by the payment ca- have to provide advanced benefits. Better service pacity of the taxpayer. That should go without for less cost is, of course, always an improve- saying, but if it did we wouldn’t have people sug- ment. For each reduction in benefits, taxes would gesting that flat taxes are the “fair” solution. Pay- be reduced by law to a lower percentage. The ing a 50% tax for someone who makes government would be limited in how much mon- $10,000,000 per year will have no effect on their ey it could take in, at any given level of service. life. It’ll mean they put $5,000,000 less in the How that tax burden is distributed among busi- bank. But someone who makes $10,830 the 2009 nesses, asset owners, and income has to follow poverty level wage in the US [154] would die of the principle that the burden is shared equally starvation if they paid $5400 in taxes. The burden among people. In other words, a business is not a is just as disproportionate if the amount is 1%, al- person and its taxes would be evaluated in light though the consequences for the poor might be of how they affect the owners, workers, and cus- less vicious. I say “might” because at a 1% tax tomers. In the interests of transparency, the taxes rate government services would be near-nonexis- should be evident, not hidden in other costs. tent and there would be no safety net at all. An Last, I wanted to discuss some aspects of bu- equal burden means that the proportion of tax reaucracy. The system I’m suggesting would de- paid relative to income should have an approxi- pend heavily of technocrats, bureaucrats, profes- mately equivalent felt impact across income lev- sionals, or whatever you’d like to call them. Con- els. trolling bureaucracies is therefore essential. Un- How high a burden is too high is a matter of fortunately, there’s no clear path to follow. If opinion. As a matter of data, the countries that there’s an example of a bureaucracy, whether provide significant services for the taxes they col- public, private, military, educational, or artistic, lect — medical care, education, retirement bene- that didn’t grow until it became an end in itself, I fits, and the like — take around 40% of their GDP haven’t heard of it. on average in all taxes. (That and much other tax I’d be willing to bet there’s a very simple rea- data at the OECD [155] .) Some of the countries in son for that. It’s human nature to admire status, that situation, such as Australia, achieve 30% lev- and that accrues with numbers of people and size els. Japan reaches 27%. of budget. It does not accrue from doing an excel- (Just for comparison, the US takes about 28%, lent job with the fewest resources. And the size but only the elderly receive funded medical care and budgets of departments depend partly on the and only school children may get free education. departments themselves. The need for new hires is If the money US citizens have to spend on the determined within the bureaucracy, not outside services provided elsewhere was added in, they’d of it. The very people high enough up the scale to have the highest or near-highest tax rates of any control hiring are the ones who gain respect, pro- developed country. The per capita medical spend- motions, and better pay based on the importance ing here is $7200, college spending is around of their empire. Bureaucracies can’t be controlled $20,000 per student, which works out to around until that factor is consciously identified and $1300 per capita. Adding in only those two items counteracted. puts the US in the 46% rate, but with much If that reward structure was changed, there worse outcomes than, say, Norway, at 44%.) might be a chance of controlling bureaucratic So, speaking in round numbers, the data sug- growth. What that new structure should be is gest that a government can fulfill even very ad- something management experts have been study- vanced functions on about one third of the GDP. ing and obviously need to continue studying. Given also, that large numbers of people from There’s still a shortage of effective methods in the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 66
wild. Of course, the first hurdle is that the people instance, a breakthrough like the invention of who know how to work the current system don’t PCR meant the Patent Office would be processing want effective methods, but that’s the usual vastly more inventions based on that — then the problem of unseating vested interests. That part department would submit evidence of the change is not specific to bureaucracies as such. If it were to the equivalent of a General Accounting Office to turn out that no matter what, bureaucracies which would decide whether or how their budget can always pervert any rules and keep growing, needed to be adjusted. then my whole concept of a government of spe- From an outsider’s perspective, one big source cialists would be unworkable. Some other way of bloat in bureaucracies is management layers. than what I’m envisioning would have to be Ranks, like budgets and pay scales, should also be found to keep concentrations of power to their limited externally to the flattest structure com- optimal minimum. patible with effective management. Ranks should I’ll give an example of how I imagine limits to not be at the discretion of the department head bureaucracy might work. Again, not because this any more than staffing. is necessarily the best way but to illustrate my Forms are an ever-present aspect of bureaucra- meaning. cies and probably the main avenue of interaction First, there’s data on what proportion of ex- with them for the general public. Commenting penses are spent on administrative and infra- on such a picayune thing as forms may seem odd, structure costs in various types of organizations. but abuses start in the small stuff. Just as more For instance, Medicare has been much discussed bodies means more status for the very person do- lately. Krugman [156] notes that it has 2% adminis- ing the hiring, similarly paperwork is a way for trative costs against the private insurers’ 11%. bureaucrats to act like they’re doing a job. What Others give the figure as 3% or 6%. Among makes it bad is that they are the ones with sole non-profits, food banks have near-zero adminis- discretion about the forms they generate. In a trative costs, whereas museums, given the exact- system that expects bureaucrats to run things, ing nature of their requirements, tend to be forms will likely metastasize unless their growth around 15%. Research institutions, whether uni- and proliferation are stopped. versity, federal, industrial, or military, have ad- Paperwork is a symptom of a much larger is- ministrative and infrastructure costs in the low sue. It indicates whether government serves the 30% range [157] . As with so many things discussed citizens or the continued employment of its offi- so far, there is no one right answer. But, for a giv- cials. If bureaucrats are really to be public ser- en situation, it is possible to find out what people vants, then an important factor in their jobs is to spend on administrative personnel and infra- consult the convenience of their masters. That structure, to compare that to what the more eff- means forms must be as few in number and as ffective institutions in that class spend, and to set simple and non-repetitive to fill out as is compat- realistic limits. Those limits should probably be ible with getting the job done optimally. set somewhat higher than the best-in-class. There should be explicit limits on the number We’re not all geniuses, and the first priority is and length of forms in any given department. If a good service, not a government which is the low new form is needed, the department then has to price leader. figure out which old one is obsolete. There The limits as a percent of the budget would be should also be explicit limits on how long it takes set outside the bureaucracy in question, and a naive user to complete all the paperwork neces- based on data collected across the whole func- sary to achieve a given result. (The US govern- tionally comparable sector. The percentage ment prints estimates of how long it will take to amount would not be subject to appeal. The bu- complete its forms. No limits, just estimates. It’s reaucracy would have to account for its spend- the beginning of the right idea, but the estimates ing, but it wouldn’t be submitting budget re- are so low they can only be explained by time quests. They’d do their jobs with a fixed amount travel.) What the limits should be on the time it of money and there’d be nothing to request. takes to fill out forms is a matter of opinion. If a department’s functions changed — if, for However, if it was decided by vote, I and every-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 67 one else would always vote for zero as the appro- the line … or down to someone without enough priate amount of time. I’m not sure what the control over the decision. The person who con- fairest and most effective consensus method trols the decisionmaking is also the one who should be to decide that question, but whatever must sign off on it, and who will be held respon- it turns out to be, setting limits on forms is es- sible if fault becomes an issue. sential. Last, one of the things bureaucracies are fa- - + - mous for is ducking responsibility. As I noted in earlier chapters, leaving that loophole open is not a minor lapse. It goes right to the heart of a fair In summary, decision-making in an equitable system that requires accountability. Government and sustainable system would differ from our by committee is not compatible with fairness. current one in fundamental ways. Changes range Government by passing responsibility up to high- from the far-reaching to the mundane, from the er levels is also not compatible. Responsibility end of war and opaque laws to disciplined bu- and the control relevant to it needs to rest with reaucracies. the lowest level official who can effectively carry it. Responsibilities and control must be clearly de- + + + marcated to prevent officials from passing it up
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 68
Government 2: Oversight
Second is that elections do cause politicians to sit up and take notice. Unfortunately, when the Oversight elections occur on a schedule, the politicians only pay attention on that schedule. One essential The need to guard the guardians has been a change is a framework to call elections — in the slow concept to develop in human history. Rulers system described here that would be recall elec- had God on their side, or were gods, and it’s only tions — at any time. in the last few centuries that there’s been even a Third, and now we’re already in largely untest- concept of checks and balances. But, as usual, ed territory, is the need for finer-grained feed- the powerful find workarounds and we’re back to back. It’s essential to have ways of communicat- the point where “you can’t fight City Hall” is con- ing dissatisfaction and implementing the neces- sidered a cliché. sary corrections which are both effortless and In a sustainable system, that is, in a fair one, scalable. An escalating system of complaints that feeling couldn’t exist. Without effective over- might be a solution. sight of the government, a sustainable system Fourth, in the case of plain old criminal won’t happen. wrongdoing, there need to be criminal proceed- Real oversight depends on the independence ings, as there officially are now. and intelligence of the overseers, with the first Fifth is the need for oversight to have its own factor apparently much more important than the checks and balances. Government is a tensegrity second. The financial meltdown, the false evi- structure [158] , not a pyramid. Officials need to dence for the US to start a war in Iraq, the aston- have ways of responding to complaints. And the ishing loss of consumer control over purchased system of oversight itself must be overseen. digital products: these all depend(ed) on cozy re- Who does the overseeing is as important as lationships among the powers-that-be. Those how. Distributed — in other words, citizen — over- powerful people are, if anything, smarter than av- sight is the essential part, but citizens have other erage. So the first requirement of oversight is things to do besides track officials. There also that it has to be distributed, not concentrated need to be professional auditors whose task is among an elite. It should, furthermore, stay dis- the day-to-day minutia of oversight. They keep tributed and avoid creeping concentration from tabs on all the data provided by transparency, re-emerging. This is where current methods fall take appropriate actions as needed, and alert the down. Elections happen too rarely and voters can public to major developing problems that are be manipulated for the short periods necessary. overlooked. This is another area where profes- Lawsuits take too much time and money to be sionals are needed for the boring or technical de- more than a rearguard action. Our current feed- tails and the general public is needed to ensure back loops are far too long to work consistently. independence and functional feedback. There are a few pointers showing what will So, starting with transparency, the first thing work. Although no current government has effec- to note is what it isn’t. It is not a data dump. It is tive oversight unless officials cooperate (which not an exercise in hiding some data under a suggests the system relies more on the hope of mountain of other data. It does not mean keep- honesty than a requirement for it) many govern- ing every record for the sake of theater. It doesn’t ments do employ elements of oversight. Some mean stifling interactions by perching the things clearly work better than others. Recording Angel on everyone’s shoulders. First is that transparency prevents the worst Transparency means the optimum data for the behavior, or at least enables citizens to mobilize purpose of promoting honesty in government. In- against it. Full scale looting of public money and formation not relevant to that purpose is just dreadful decisions taken for self-serving ends re- noise that masks the signal. However, as always quire secrecy. when an optimum is required, the difficulty is
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 69
finding the right balance. If the right to know is soft focus is needed initially, followed by full dis- defined too narrowly, there’s the risk of oversight closure at some point. Maybe that could be failure. If it’s defined too broadly, official interac- achieved by a combination of contemporary sum- tions may be stifled for nothing or privacy may be maries of salient points and some years’ delay on recklessly invaded. Organizations such as Trans- the full record. The interval should be short parency International [159] have considerable data enough to ensure that if it turns out the truth on how to approach the optimal level. The more was shaded in the summaries, corrective action governments that have a commitment to provid- and eventual retribution will still be relevant. The ing clear and honest data, the more we’d learn interval would probably need to vary for different about how to achieve the most useful trans- types of activity — very short for the Office of parency with the least intrusion and effort. Elections, longer perhaps for sensitive diplomatic What we know so far is that financial data and negotiations between countries. records of contacts and meetings provide two of Presentation of information is a very impor- the clearest windows on what officials (also tant aspect of transparency, although often over- non-governmental ones) are up to. Financial data looked. This may be due to the difficulty of get- in the hands of amateurs, however, can be hard ting any accountability at all from current gov- to understand, or boring, or vulnerable to atti- ernments. We’re so grateful to get anything, we tudes that have nothing to do with the matter at don’t protest the indigestible lumps. Govern- hand. For instance, accountants have the concept ments that actually served the people would pre- that tracking amounts smaller than what it costs sent information in a way that allows easy com- to track them are not worth following. Amateurs, prehension of the overall picture. Data provided on the other hand, will notice a trail of gratu- to the public need to be organized, easily search- itous donuts but feel too bored to follow state- able, and easy to use for rank amateurs as well as ments of current income as present value of net providing deeper layers with denser data for pro- future cash flows [160] . The fact that the state- fessionals. If these ideas were being applied in a ment is Enron’s means nothing beforehand. It is society without many computers, public libraries important to ignore the easy distractions of small and educational institutions would be reposito- stuff and to notice the big stuff, especially when ries for copies of the materials. it’s so large it seems to be nothing but the back- A related point is that useful transparency has ground. a great deal to do with plain old simplicity. The There were plenty of auditors involved in the recordkeeping burden on officials should be Enron fiasco who knew better, of course. That made as simple and automatic as possible. In an wasn’t a simple matter of amateurs distracted by electronic world, for instance, any financial ignorance. However, the auditors received vast transactions could be routed to the audit arm of sums of money from the company, which simply government automatically and receive a first pass underlines the need for true independence in computer audit. Some simplicity should flow nat- oversight, including independence from member- urally from requiring only information relevant to ship in similar networks. Real transparency doing the job honestly, rather than all informa- would have made the necessary information tion. available to anyone, and would have prevented Information relevant to other purposes, such both the disaster and the pre-disaster profits, as satisfying curiosity, has nothing to do with some of which flowed to the very people suppos- transparency. Or, to put it another way, the pub- edly in oversight … which is why oversight wasn’t lic’s right to know has limits. An official’s sex life, applied in time. for instance, unless it affects his or her job, is not Records of meetings and contacts are another something that needs to be detailed for the sake important source of data about what officials are of transparency, no matter how much fun it is. doing, but that raises other problematic issues. Officials, like everyone else, do have a right to pri- People need to feel able to speak candidly. After vacy on any matter that is not public business. all, the whole point is to promote honesty, not to The professional audit arm of the government generate ever newer layers of speaking in code. A would have the job of examining all departments.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 70
The General Accounting Office fulfills some of most genuine complaints to get through. Possibly that function in the US now, but it serves Con- a two-tiered system could offer a solution: one gress primarily. In the system I’m thinking about, tier would be anonymous with some safeguards it would serve the citizenry with publication of against frivolous action, and one not anonymous data and its own summaries and reviews. It (but with bulletproof confidentiality) that could would also have the power to initiate recalls or be more heavily weighted. criminal proceedings, as needed. (More on en- The third factor is that the complaints must forcement in a moment.) actually be acted upon. That means sufficient A professional audit agency doesn’t provide staffing and funding at the audit office to process enough oversight, by itself, because of people’s them and enforce changes. Since effective feed- tendency to grow too comfortable with col- back is crucial to good government, staffing of leagues. Citizens’ ability to take action would that office is no more optional than an adequate counteract the professionals’ desire to avoid fric- police force or court system. It needs to be very tion and ignore problems. But citizen oversight, near the front of the government funding line to by itself, is also insufficient. Its main function is get the money determined by a budget office as as a backstop in case the professionals aren’t do- its due. (The budget office itself would have its ing their jobs. The day to day aspects, the “bor- funding level determined by another entity, of ing” aspects of oversight need to be in the hands course.) of people paid to pay attention. It’s to be expected that the thankless jobs of Feedback is the next big component of over- officials will generate some background level of sight, after transparency. The sternest form of complaints. Complaints below that level, which feedback is recall elections, but in the interests of can be estimated from studies of client satisfac- preventing problems while they are still small, a tion across comparable institutions, wouldn’t system that aims for stability should have many lead to action by others, such as officials in the and very easy ways to provide feedback. audit agency. An intelligent official would note The easiest way to give feedback is to com- any patterns in those complaints and make ad- plain. That route should be developed into an eff- justments as needed. If they felt the complaints ffective instrument regarding any aspect of gov- were off the mark, they might even file a note to ernment, whether it’s specific people, paperwork, that effect with the audit agency. The fact that or practices. Complaints could address any an- they were paying attention would count in their noyance, whether it’s a form asking for redun- favor if the level of complaints rose. But until dant information or it’s the head of the global De- they rose, the complaints wouldn’t receive out- partment of Transportation not doing his or her side action. job coordinating intercontinental flights. Anyone In setting that baseline level, the idea would who worked for a tax-funded salary, from janitors be to err on the low side, since expressed com- to judges, could be the subject of a complaint. plaints are likely indicative of a larger number of It’s simple enough to set up a complaints box, people who were bothered but said nothing. The whether physical or electronic, but effectiveness level also should not be the same for all grades. depends on three more factors. The first two are People are likelier to complain about low level responsibility and an absence of repercussions. workers than managers whom they don’t see. People have to be able to complain without fear Once complaints rise above what might be of retribution. On the other hand, complaints called the standard background, action should be have to be genuine in all senses of the word. They automatically triggered. Some form of automatic have to come from a specific individual, refer to a trigger is an important safeguard. One of the specific situation, and be the only reference by weakest points in all feedback systems is that that person to that problem. Anonymity is a good those with the power to ignore them, do so. That way to prevent fear of retribution. Responsibility weakness needs to be prevented before it can is necessary to make sure complaints are gen- happen. The actions triggered could start with a uine. Somehow, those two conflicting factors public warning, thus alerting watchdog groups to must be balanced at an optimum that allows the the problem as well. The next step could be a
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 71 deadline for investigation by the audit office (or of malfeasance in office. If there has been finan- the auditors of the audit office, when needed). If cial damage, it should be reimbursed first out of the volume of complaints was enormous, then the official’s assets. Nor should there be any there’s a systemic failure somewhere. Therefore, statute of limitations on negligence or problems as a last resort, some very high number of gen- generated by officials. They are hired and paid the uine complaints should automatically trigger dis- big money to pay attention. If they don’t, they missal, unelection, or repeal of a procedure. must not escape the consequences merely be- Transparency means that the volume of com- cause people are so used to letting government plaints and their subject is known to everyone, so officials get away with everything. when that point was reached would not be a se- So far, my focus has been on ways of control- cret. ling officials, and that is the larger side of the I know that in the current environment of pro- problem. But, that said, officials do need ways of tected officialdom, the feedback system outlined contesting overactive oversight, downright ha- sounds draconian. The fear might be that nobody rassment, or unjustified recalls or prosecutions. would survive. That’s not the intent. If that’s the The point of draconian oversight — draconian effect, then some other, more well-tuned system from our perspective that teflon officials are nor- of feedback is needed. But whatever it’s form, an mal — is to have public servants who live up to effective system that’s actually capable of chang- their name. They must serve the public. ing official behavior and altering policies is essen- On the other hand, they’re an odd sort of ser- tial. In a system that worked, there would be few vant because a significant part of their job is do- complaints, so they’d rarely reach the point of ing things for the public good which the public triggering automatic action. In the unattainable usually doesn’t like very much at the time. (If ideal, the selection process for officials would be that weren’t true, there’d be no need for officials so good that the complaints office would have to do them. They’d get done without help.) So, nothing to do. there are two reasons why officials must be pro- I’ve already touched on recall elections, but I’ll tected from capricious oversight. One is that ser- repeat briefly. The recall process can be initiated vants have rights. Two is that they have to be either by some form of populist action, such as a able to take necessary unpopular steps without petition, or by the government’s audit arm. After fear of reprisals. The public, after all, is as capa- a successful recall, an official should be ineligible ble of abusing power as the individuals it’s com- for public service for some period of time long posed of. enough to demonstrate that they’ve learned from Complaints are the earliest point where an their mistakes. They’d be starting at the lowest official could disagree with the public’s assess- rung, since the assumption has to be that they ment. If the complaints are caused by a necessary need to prove themselves again. but unpopular policy, the official needs to make The fourth aspect of oversight, punishment for clear why it’s necessary, and why something easi- crimes, corruption, or gross mismanagement by er won’t do. Complaints happen over time, so if officials, is currently handled correctly in theory, they’re a rising tide, that’s not something that but it needs much stricter application in practice. can come as a surprise to the responsible party. The greater the power of the people involved, the The official’s justifications would become part of more it’s become customary, at least in the U.S., the record. When complaints reach a high to let bygones be bygones after a mere resigna- enough level to be grounds for unelection or dis- tion. It’s as if one could rob a grocery store and missal, and if the official is convinced that a deci- avoid prosecution by saying, “Oh, I’m sorry. I sive proportion of the complaints is unwarrant- didn’t mean it.” Worse yet, the response to crimi- ed, they could ask for independent review. (An ex- nal officials is actually less adequate than it ample of possible specifics is given below.) would be to treat shoplifters that way. The state The audit arm of the government is another sets the tone for all of society, so crimes commit- source of oversight that an official could disagree ted by representatives of the state do more dam- with. The ability to respond to its charges would age. So there must be real penalties for any kind be built into the system. If the responses passed
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 72
solved in favor of the official only if both agreed. The official and the complainant(s) could agree As I’ve done before, I’ve provided some specific on one or more audit experts, depending on ideas about implementation not necessarily be- complexity, to review the case. If that didn’t cause those are good ways to do it, but mainly to lead to a resolution, the next step would be the illustrate my meaning. Whatever method is ap- legal process, with appeals if needed. Only de- cisions that went against an official should plied, the goal is to ensure the right of public ser- count as bad marks on their record. Simply vants to defend themselves against injustice, just feeling the need to defend oneself is not. like anyone else, and to prevent that from becom- ing an injustice itself. However, after repeated cases that go against Because of the potentially far-reaching conse- a complainant, those individuals should no quences of contesting recalls, overuse absolutely longer have standing to bring future cases of that type. A case that went against an official must be prevented. If it was the considered opin- would result in recall or firing, so repeated cas- ion of most reviewers involved that an official es wouldn’t arise. who lost a bid to prevent a recall did not have grounds to contest in the first place, then that at- muster, the case would be closed. If not, there tempt should be considered frivolous. One such could be appeals to a review board, and eventual- mistake seems like an ample allowance. ly the legal system. As in the example box, I’d see A structural weakness of oversight by the pub- this as a process with limits. lic is that officials have training, expertise, and fa- Recalls are the most far-reaching form of over- miliarity with the system. That gives them the ad- sight, and the ability to contest them the most vantage in a contest with a diffuse group of citi- dangerous to the health of the system. Contest- zens. An official’s ingroup advantage may be ing a recall should be a last resort and something smaller against an arm of the government tasked that’s applied only in exceptional cases. Normally, with oversight, but that’s not the issue. The im- if an official felt a recall was unjustified, they portant point is that citizen action is the over- should make that case during the unelection and sight of last resort so it sets the boundary condi- leave the decision to voters. However, for the ex- tions which must not fail. Since officials have the ceptional case, officials could contest a recall if upper hand in the last-resort situation, it is right they had a clear, fact-based justification for why to err on the side of protecting oversight against it had no valid basis. It would then go to review- the official’s ability to contest it. Officials must ers or a legal panel with the necessary specialized have that option, but it can’t be allowed to devel- expertise, chosen by the opposing sides as dis- op into something that stifles oversight. It’s an- cussed earlier. other balance between conflicting rights. It may The biggest difference between those review- be the most critical balance to the sustainability ers and others is that potential conflicts of inter- of a fair system, since that can’t survive without est would have to be minutely scrutinized. More honest and effective government. nebulous loyalties should be considered as well in this case. The tendency to excuse the behavior of colleagues is very strong and it’s one of the Regulation biggest problems with oversight of government by government. As with any process involving a The government’s regulatory functions flow di- balance of rights, ensuring the independence of rectly from its monopoly on force. What those the arbiters is essential. functions should be depend on the government’s To provide an additional dose of independence, purpose which, in the case being discussed here, a second review track could be composed of a is to ensure fairness. People will always strive to more diffuse pool of people with less but still ad- gain advantage, and the regulatory aspects of equate expertise, along the same lines as selec- government must channel that into fair competi- tors who determine the eligibility of candidates tion and away from immunity to the rules that for office. A matter as serious as contesting a re- apply to others. call should use both tracks at once, and be re- In an ideal world, the regulatory function
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 73 would scarcely be felt. The rules would be so well nopolies under Capital [161] in the Money and tuned that their effects would be self-regulating, Work chapter, but it is also an important example just as a heater thermostat is a set-it-and-for- of regulation that can be applied only by a gov- get-it device. More complex systems than fur- ernment, so I’ll discuss it briefly here as well. naces aren’t likely to achieve this ideal any time Logically, monopolies shouldn’t exist because soon, but I mention it to show what I see as the there ought to be a natural counterweight. goal of regulation. Like the rest of government, They’re famous for introducing pricing and man- when it’s working properly, one would hardly agement inefficiencies that ought to leave plenty know it was there. of room for competitors. But, people being what However, it is regulation that can achieve this they are, market power is used to choke off any zen-like state, not deregulation. This is true even competition which could reduce it. The natural at the simplest levels. A furnace with no thermo- counterweight can’t operate, and only forces out- stat cannot provide a comfortable temperature. side the system, such as government regulations, In more complex human systems, deregulation is can halt that process. advocated by those powerful enough to take ad- One point I’ve tried to make repeatedly is that vantage of weaker actors. (Or those who’d like to fairness is not only a nice principle. Its practical think they’re that powerful.) It can be an even effects are to provide stability and wealth. That is bigger tool for exploitation than bad regulations. no less true in the case of preventing unbalanced The vital point is that results expose motives re- market power. Imbalance leads to chaotic conse- gardless of rationalizations. If regulation, or quences during the inevitable readjustment. Hav- deregulation, promotes concentrations of power ing enough market power to tilt the field is not or takes control away from individuals, then it’s only unfair and not only expensive. It’s also un- being used as a tool for special interests and not stable, with all the social disruption that implies. in the service of a level playing field. Recognition of that fact has led to the establish- Current discussions of regulations tend to cen- ment of antitrust laws, but they tend to be ap- ter on environmental or protectionist issues, but plied long after economic power is already con- that’s because those are rather new, at least as centrated. They assume that the problem is one global phenomena. In other respects, regulations hundred percent control. are so familiar and obviously essential that most The real evidence of an imbalance is price-set- people don’t think of them as regulations at all. ting power. When a business or an industry can Remembering some of them points up how use- charge wildly in excess of their costs, that’s evi- ful this function of government is. Weights and dence of a market failure and the need for some measures have been regulated by governments form of regulation. I’ll call entities who are able for thousands of years, and that has always been to dictate prices “monopolies” for the purposes critical for commerce. Coins and money are a of discussion, even though they have only a con- special instance of uniform measures — of value trolling market share, not necessarily one hun- in this case — and even more obviously essential dred percent of it. to commerce. The validity of any measure would Some monopolies are well understood by now. be lost if it could be diddled to favor an interested The classical ones involve massive costs for party. Impartiality is essential for the wealth-pro- plants or equipment and very small costs to serve ducing effects to operate. That is so clear to additional customers. Railroads are one example. everyone at this point that cheating on weights The initial costs are high enough to prevent new and measures is considered pathetic as well as startups from providing competition. Equally criminal. And yet, the equally great value of fair- classic are natural monopolies where one suppli- ness-preserving regulation in other areas general- er can do a better job than multiple competing ly needs to be explained. ones. Utilities such as water and power are the Maintaining a level field is a primary govern- usual examples. There’d be no money saved if ment function, so undue market power is one householders had water mains from three sepa- area that needs attention. The topic overlaps rate companies who competed to supply cheap with the discussion about competition and mo- water. The duplicated infrastructure costs would
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 74 swamp any theoretical savings. be a monopoly, then it’s up to regulation to en- So far, so good. The need for regulated utilities sure that the learning curve is not a barrier to en- is well understood. Regulated transport is a bit try. iffier. The need for a state to handle the roads is Regulation that was doing its job would make accepted, even among the free market religion- sure that no single company could control, for in- ists in the US, but the need for state regulation stance, a software interface. As discussed in the and coordination of transport in general is less chapter on Creativity [80] , an inventor of a quan- widely recognized. The free marketeers here can tum improvement in usability should get the ben- be puzzled about why it takes a week to move efit of that invention just as with any other. But it things from Coast A to Coast B using the crazy cannot become a platform for gouging. Compul- uncoordinated patchwork of private railroads. sory licensing would be the obvious solution. But, on the whole, the need to enforce limits on Another new technology that’s rapidly getting pricing power, the need for standards and for co- out of hand is search. Methods of information ac- ordination is known, if not always well imple- cess aren’t just nice things to have. Without mented. them, the information might as well not be The same need for standards, coordination there. A shredded book contains the same infor- and limits on pricing holds with all other monop- mation as the regular variety; there’s just no way olies, too, but this isn’t always grasped, especially to get at it. Organizing access to information is in newer technologies. Money is not the only the function of nerves and brain. Without any startup cost that can form a barrier to entry. An way to make sense of sight or sound or to re- information industry is a recent phenomenon member it, an individual would be brainless. Nor that started with the printing press and has be- would having two or three brains improve mat- gun exponential growth after the computer. The ters. If they’re separate, any given bit of informa- main “capital cost” is not equipment but the will- tion could be in the “wrong” brain unless they all ingness of people to learn new habits. worked together. They have to work as a unit to Imagine, for instance, that Gutenberg had a be useful. Information access is a natural monop- lock on printing from left to right. All later press- oly if there ever was one. es would have had to convince people to read The fact that search is a natural monopoly right to left just so they could get the same book seems to have escaped too many people. Like a but not printed by Gutenberg. Good luck with nervous system, without it all the information in that. Similarly with the qwerty keyboard. People cyberspace might just as well not be there. The learned to use it, it turned out to be a bad layout usual answer is to pooh-pooh the problem, and from the standpoint of fingers, and we’re still us- to say anyone can come up with their own ing it over a hundred years later. Only one cohort search engine. But having multiple indexers of people would have to take the time to learn a makes as much sense as having multiple water new layout, and that just doesn’t happen. If there mains. It’s a duplication of effort that actually re- had been a modern DMCA-style copyright on that duces value at the end. layout, there’d still be nobody making keyboards That’s not to say that different methods can’t but Remington. exist side by side. Libraries, for instance, organize History shows that people simply won’t repeat information in a fundamentally different, subject- a learning curve without huge inducements. And oriented way than do search engines, and that fa- so it also has dozens of examples of companies cilitates deeper approaches to the material. Left which had the advantage of being over the learn- to itself, over time, the need for that approach ing curve and thus had a natural monopoly as would lead to the development of the more labo- solid as owning the only gold mine. Any monop- rious subject-based indexes in parallel with oly needs regulation. If it works best as a monop- tag-based ones. But that’s another danger with oly, then it has to become a regulated utility. If having a monopoly in the latter kind. Undue in- it’s important enough, it may need to be govern- fluence might not leave any parallel system to it- ment run to ensure adequate transparency and self. To put it as a very loose analogy, word-based responsiveness to the users. If it doesn’t need to methods could become so dominant that mathe-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 75 matics hardly existed. Whole sets of essential thing like that has to be under government regu- mental tools to handle information could fall into lation that enforces full transparency and equali- disuse. ty of access. On the user’s side, there’s a further factor that (None of that even touches on the privacy con- makes search a natural monopoly. Users don’t cerns related to search tools, which, in private change their habits if they can help it. (That’s hands and without thorough legal safeguards, is why there are such heated battles among busi- another locus of power that can be abused.) nesses over getting their icons on computer desk- There are two points to this digression into tops. If it’s what people are used to and it’s right the monopolies of the information age. One is in front of them, the controlling market share is that they should and can be prevented. They have safe.) Instead of pretending there is no monopoly the same anti-competitive, anti-innovative, ex- because people have the physical option to make pensive, and ultimately destabilizing effect of all an initially more effortful choice — something monopolies. And a good regulator would be people in the aggregate have shown repeatedly breaking them up or controlling them for the they won’t do — the sustainable solution comes public good before they grew so powerful that from facing facts. More than one indexer is nothing short of social destruction would ever wasteful, and people won’t use more than one in dislodge them. sufficient numbers to avoid a controlling market My second point is that monopolies may rest share. It’s a natural monopoly. So it needs to be on other things besides capital or control of nat- regulated as a public utility or even be part of the ural resources. All imbalances of market power, government itself. whether they’re due to scarce resources, scarce There are further considerations specifically time, ingrained habits, or any other cause need to related to search. Any inequality in access to be recognized for what they are and regulated ap- knowledge leads to an imbalance in a wide array propriately. of benefits and disadvantages. Further, an indexer Regulations as the term is commonly used — is the gateway to stored knowledge and therefore environmental, economic, financial, health, and potentially exercises control over what people safety — are generally viewed as the government can learn. In other words, a search engine can guaranteeing the safety, not the rights, of citizens suppress or promote ideas. to the extent possible. But that leads straight into Consider just one small example of the disap- a tangle of competing interests. How safe is safe? pearance at work. I wanted to remove intercalat- Who should be safe? Just citizens? What about ed video ads from clips on Google’s subsidiary, foreigners who may get as much or more of the Youtube. But a Google search on the topic downstream consequences? How high a price are brought up nothing useful in the first three people willing to pay for how much safety? screens’ worth of results. That despite the fact If the justification is safety, there’s no sense that there’s a Greasemonkey script [162] to do the that low-priced goods from countries with lax la- job. Searches for scripts that do other things do bor or environmental laws are a problem. Tariffs bring up Greasemonkey on Google. aren’t applied to bring them into line with sus- Whether or not an adblocker is disappeared tainable practices. The regulatory climate for down a memory hole may not be important. But someone else’s economy is not seen as a safety is- the capability to make knowledge disappear is sue. Egregious cases of slavery or child labor are vastly important. Did Google “disappear” it on frowned on, but are treated as purely ethical is- purpose? Maybe not. Maybe yes. Without access sues. Since immediate physical harm to con- to Google’s inner workings, it’s impossible to sumers is not seen as part of the package, regula- know, and that’s the problem. tion takes a back seat to other concerns. Until it We’re in the position of not realizing what ex- turns out that the pollution or CO2 or contami- ists and what doesn’t. Something like that is far nants do cause a clear and present danger, and more pernicious than straight suppression. That then people are angry that the situation was al- kind of power simply cannot rest with an entity lowed to get so far out of hand that they were that doesn’t have to answer for its actions. Any- harmed.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 76
Approaching regulations as safety issues starts quences of being fair actually benefit the US at at the wrong end. Sometimes safety can be de- least as much as Burkina Faso. (Soaking land in fined by science, but often there are plenty of herbicide is not a Good Thing for anyone.) And gray areas. Then regulations seem like a matter twenty or thirty years down the road, people of competing interests. Safety can only be an ac- both in the US and in Burkina Faso will be safer. cidental outcome of that competition unless the The things they’ll be safer from may be different people at the likely receiving end of the harm — pollution in one case, social disruption in the have the most social power. other — but that doesn’t change the fact that However, when the goal is fairness, a consis- safety oriented regulation has no grounds for ac- tent regulatory framework is much easier to tion, but fairness oriented regulation can prevent achieve. The greatest good of the greatest num- problems. ber, the least significant overall loss of rights, and Globalization is yet another example where the least harm to the greatest number is not that regulation based on fairness facilitates sustain- hard to determine in any specific instance. In a ability. Economists like to point out that global- transparent system with recall elections, officials ization can have economic benefits, and that’s who made their decisions on a narrower basis true, all other things being equal. The problem is would find themselves out of a job. And safety is other things aren’t equal, and globalization ex- a direct result, not an accidental byproduct, of poses the complications created by double stan- seeking the least harm to the greatest number. dards. If it applied equally to all, labor would Consider an example. The cotton farmers of have to be as free to move to better conditions as Burkina Faso cannot afford mechanization, so capital. (See this post [163] for a longer discus- their crop cannot compete with US cotton. Is sion.) Given equal application of the laws, global- that a safety issue? Of course not. Cotton is their ization couldn’t be used as a way of avoiding reg- single most important export crop. If the farmers ulations. Tariffs would have to factor in the cost switch to opium, is that a safety issue? Sort of. If of sustainable production, and then be spent in a the local economy collapses, and the country be- way that mitigated the lack of sustainability or comes a haven for terrorists, that’s easy to see as fairness in the country (or countries) of origin. a safety issue. A much worse threat, however, There’d be less reward for bad behavior and would be the uncontrolled spread of disease. Col- hence fewer expensive consequences, whether lapse is not just some academic talking point. those are contaminants causing disease or social The country is near the bottom of poverty lists, dislocation caused by low wages and lost work. and who knows which crisis will be the prover- Those things are only free to the companies caus- bial last straw. So, once again, is bankrupting ing the problem. their main agricultural export a safety issue? Not Enforcement must be just as good as the regu- right now. So nothing is done. lations or else they’re not worth the paper Is it, however, a fairness issue? Well, obviously. they’re printed on. The financial meltdown is a People should not be deprived of a livelihood be- stark recent example showing that good regula- cause they are too poor to buy machines. There tions are not enough. Maintaining the motivation are simple things the US could do. Provide regula- for enforcement is at least as important. In the tion so that US cotton was not causing pollution US and in many other countries, the regulations and mining land and water. The remaining differ- existed to preserve the finances of the many ence in price could be mitigated with price sup- rather than the narrow profit potential of the ports to Burkinabe cotton. The only loss is to few. In hindsight, the element missing was any short term profits of US cotton farmers, and desire to enforce those regulations. (E.g. see where that is a livelihood issue for smallholders Krugman’s blog [164] and links therein.) assistance could be provided during the readjust- Enforcement is necessarily a task performed ment. by officials, who are hired precisely to know There may be better ways of improving justice enough to use foresight so that hindsight is un- in the situation, but my point is that even an am- necessary. That’s understood everywhere, and yet ateur like me can see some solutions. The conse- enforcement is repeatedly the weak link in the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 77 chain. That’s because the responsible officials are do nothing. not really responsible. Rarely do any of them have In short, the government’s regulatory func- any personal consequences for falling down on tions should serve to maintain a fair, sustainable the job. That is the part that has to change. environment where double standards can’t devel- Officials who enable catastrophe by not doing op. Safety or low prices might be a side effect, their jobs commit dereliction of duty, something but the purpose has to be enforcing rights. that has consequences in a system emphasizing feedback and accountability. There has to be per- sonal liability for that. People are quick to under- Public Works stand something when their living depends on it. (With apologies to Upton Sinclair.) The right level This is one of the few areas where the highest of personal consequences for responsible officials expression of the art of government is more than is not only fair, it would also provide the motiva- invisibility. Some of the greatest achievements of tion to do the job right to begin with and avoid humankind come from the type of concerted ac- the problem. tion only governments can coordinate. The great For personal responsibility to be justified, the pyramids of Egypt, medieval European cathedrals, right path to take does need to be well known. and space flight were all enterprises so huge and I’m not suggesting officials be punished for lack- so profitless, at least in the beginning, that they ing clairvoyance. I’m saying that when the con- couldn’t have been carried out by any smaller en- clusions of experts exceed that 90% agreement tity. level mentioned earlier, and yet the official ig- People could — and have — questioned nores the evidence, then they’re criminally culpa- whether those projects were the best use of re- ble. Then a lack of action in the face of that con- sources, or whether some of them were worth sensus needs to be on the books as a crime, pun- the awful price in suffering. The answer to the ishable by loss of assets and even jail time, de- latter is, obviously, no. Where citizens have a pending on the magnitude of the lapse. Nor voice, they’re not likely to agree to poverty for should there be any statute of limitations on the the sake of a big idea, so that problem won’t (?) crime, because there is none on its effects. The arise. But that does leave the other questions: penalties need to be heavy enough to scare offi- What is worth doing? And who decides? cials straight, but not so heavy they’re afraid to There’s an irreducible minimum of things do their jobs. Finding the right balance is another worth doing, without which a government is area where study is needed to find optimal an- generally understood to be useless. The common swers. But regulation is a vital function of gov- example is defense, but on a daily level other ernment, so it is equally vital to make sure that functions essential to survival are more impor- it’s carried out effectively. Dereliction of duty is tant. A police force and court system to resolve no less a crime of state than abuse of power. disputes is one such function. Commerce re- Officials who are actually motivated to do quires a safe and usable transportation network their jobs are important in a system which works and reliable monetary system. In the system de- for all instead of for a few. The point of fair regu- scribed here, running the selection and recall lation, as of fairness generally, is that avoiding processes would be essential functions. And in a problems is less traumatic than recovering from egalitarian system, both basic medical care [165] them. Prevention of problems is an essential func- and basic education [166] have to be rights. It is tion of regulation. Prevention takes effort ahead fundamentally unfair to put a price on life and of time, though, when there’s still the option to health, and equally unfair to use poverty to de- be lazy, so it only happens when there’s pressure prive people of the education needed to make a on the relevant officials. That means there have living. to be penalties if they don’t take necessary steps. As discussed in the chapter on Care, the defini- It’s unreasonable to punish a lack of clairvoyance, tion of “basic” medical care depends on the and yet it’s necessary to punish officials who let a wealth of the country. (Or of the planet, in a uni- bad situation get worse because it was easier to fied world.) In the current rich countries, such as
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 78 the G20, it simply means medical care. It means Japan [155] provides all the services and benefits everything except beauty treatments. And even listed above while taking in 27% of total GDP. The those enter a gray area when deviations from low US level of services implies taxes should be normal are severe enough to cause significant so- lower, or services should be higher. The US does, cial problems. On the other hand, in a country of course, maintain a huge military which, where the majority is living on a dollar a day and among other things, redistributes federal tax dol- tax receipts are minimal, basic medical care may lars and provides some services such as educa- not be able to cover much except programs that tion and medical care to its members. If one fac- cost a tiny fraction of the money they eventually tors in the private cost of the tax-funded services save. That’s things like vaccinations, maternal elsewhere, US total tax rates would be over 50%. and neonatal care, simple emergency care, pain Given the gap between the US and other rich relief, treatments against parasites, and preven- countries, the US is wasting money somewhere tion programs like providing mosquito netting, … . clean water, and vitamin A. On the other hand a poor country, which can’t The definition of basic education likewise de- fairly have much of a tax rate, might have only pends on the social context. In a pre-technologi- 5% of an already low GDP to work with. Services cal agrarian society it might be no more than six then would be limited to the minimums dis- grades of school. In an industrial society, it has to cussed earlier. Even poor governments can pro- include university for those who have the desire vide roads, police, fire protection, commercial and the capacity to make use of it. The principle regulation to make trade simpler, basic medicine is that the level of education provided has to and education. (It should go without saying, but equal the level required to be eligible for good may not, that a poor country may not have the jobs, not just bottom tier jobs, in that society. resources to deal with disasters, and may need I’ve gone rather quickly from the irreducible outside help in those cases.) The only thing that minimum to a level of service that some in the prevents some of the world’s countries from pro- US would consider absurdly high. Who decides viding the basics now are corruption, incompe- what’s appropriate? I see that question as having tence, and/or the insistence of elites on burning an objective answer. We are, after all, talking up all available money in wars. None of those are about things that cost money. How much they essential or unavoidable. Fairness isn’t ruinously cost and how much a government receives in tax- expensive, but its opposite is. es are pretty well-known quantities. From that At any level of wealth, the receipts from fair it’s possible to deduce which level of taxes calls levels of taxes dictate given levels of service. Citi- for which level of service. zens who expect more without paying for it are The concept that a government can be held to being unfair, and governments who provide less account for a given level of service, depending on are no better. what proportion of GDP it uses in taxes, is not a There is now no widespread concept that a common one. And the application of the concept government is obligated to provide a given level is inevitably empirical. It is nonetheless interest- of service for a given amount of money. Even less ing to think about the question in those terms. is there a concept that taking too much money As I’ve pointed out [167] , there are several gov- for a given level of service is a type of crime of ernments who have total tax receipts of about a state. The government’s monopoly on force in a third of GDP and provide all the basic services might-makes-right world means that there aren’t plus full medical, educational, retirement, and even theoretical limits on stealing by the state. cultural benefits, as well as providing funds for However, when it’s the other way around and research. Hence, if a country has somewhere be- right makes might, then those limits flow logical- tween 30% to 40% of GDP in total tax receipts, it ly from what is considered a fair tax level. should be providing that level of service. If it So far, I’ve been discussing taxes and what isn’t, the citizenry is being cheated somewhere. they buy on a per-country basis which feels artifi- On a local note, yes, this does mean the US is cial in a modern world where money and infor- not doing well. Total taxes here are around 28%. mation flow without borders, and where we all
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 79 breathe the same air. A view that considers all it on, and how much to spend, those are matters people equal necessarily should take a global of opinion. Despite that, it’s not clear to me that view of what’s affordable. I haven’t discussed it the best way to decide them is by vote. People that way because it seems easier to envision in never would have voted to fund a space program, the familiar categories of nations as we have yet fifty years later they’ll pay any price for cell- them now, but there’s nothing in the principles phones and they take accurate weather forecast- of fair taxation and corresponding services that ing for granted. I and probably most people have wouldn’t scale up to a global level. no use for opera, and yet to others it’s one of the Finally, there’s the most interesting question. highest art forms. In a country — or a world like ours — which is do- Further, another problem is that budget insta- ing much better than scraping by, what awe-in- bility leads to waste. Nobody would vote for spiring projects should the government under- waste, but voter anger can have exactly that eff- take? How much money should be devoted to ffect. Jerking budgets around from year to year that? Who decides what’s interesting? Who de- wastes astronomical sums. A good example of cides what to spend? just how much that can cost is the tripling, qua- Personally, I’m of the opinion that dreams are drupling, and more of space program costs after essential, and so is following them to the extent the US Congress is done changing them every possible. I subscribe to Muslihuddin Sadi’s creed: year. Voters, on the whole, are not good at the long range planning and broad perspective that If of mortal goods you are bereft, large social projects require. I discuss a possible and from your slender store two method of selection under Advanced Education loaves [105]. Briefly, I envision a similar system to the one alone to you are left, suggested for other fields. A pool of proposals is sell one, and from the dole, vetted for validity, not value, and selection is ran- buy hyacinths to feed the soul. dom from among those proposals that make methodological sense. However it’s done, deci- Or, as another wise man once said, “The poor sions on innovation and creativity have to be in- you shall always have with you.” Spend some formed by innovative and creative visionaries money on the extraordinary. without simultaneously allowing corrupt fools to So I would answer the question of whether to rush in. spend on visionary projects with a resounding “yes.” But I’m not sure whether that’s really nec- - + - essary for everyone’s soul or just for mine. I’m not sure whether it’s a matter of what people need, and hence whether it should be baked into A fair government, like any other, has a mo- all state budgets, or whether it’s a matter of opin- nopoly on force, but that is not the source of its ion that should be decided by vote. If different strength. The equality of all its citizens, the ex- countries followed different paths in this regard, plicit avoidance of double standards in any time would tell how critical a role this really sphere, the renunciation of force except to pre- plays. vent abuse by force, short and direct feedback It seems to me inescapable that countries loops to keep all participants honest, and all of which fund interesting projects would wind up these things supported in a framework of laws — being more innovative and interesting places. those are the source of its strength. The strength Miserly countries would then either benefit from comes from respecting rights, and is destroyed in that innovation without paying for it, which the moment rights get less respect than might. wouldn’t be fair, or become boring or backward The biggest obstacle to reaching a true rule of places where fewer and fewer people wanted to law is that intuition has to be trained to under- live. Imbalances with unfortunate social conse- stand that strength is not muscle. quences would then have to be rectified. As for the ancillary questions of what to spend + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 80
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 81
Money and Work
minutes, the stuff money measures grows and shrinks from year to year. Wealth can fluctuate, The Nature of Money so measuring it is much more of an art than a science. Economists have developed deep and so- Commerce is not a function of government, phisticated ideas on how to practice that art, so and if money had nothing to do with power, there are ways to approximate the ideal of a con- there’d be no need for much government involve- sistent measurement even if it can’t be perfect. ment in commercial affairs. But money and sta- Besides fluctuation, there are other reasons tus turn into each other so fast that regulation is why one might not want to keep money perfectly essential to keep it in its place. That place, fur- consistent. Another way to describe consistency thermore, is limited to things that can be sold. is that there should be neither inflation nor defla- It’s not selling everything that can be turned into tion. A dozen eggs now should cost the same as money. A few steps will show why this is so. they did in 1750. The very idea sounds funny be- Money properly plays a role only to enable the cause the situation is so far from actual events transfer of measurable goods or services. Vegeta- it’s near-inconceivable. But only something real bles harvested, hours worked, court cases ar- can grow (or shrink) like that. It’s quite possible gued, or websites designed, these are things that to start with one tomato and end with dozens a can be measured and priced. Each of them also while later. But money isn’t like that. A bigger has intangible qualities, which can be what gives pile of money does not change the pile of toma- them their value as opposed to their price, but toes in any way. Or, to put it more generally, a they do have significant measurable components. bigger pile of money doesn’t change actual In contrast, one has to struggle to find any wealth. Neither gold nor paper nor conch shells way to measure those things which are mainly will keep you alive. Only what money buys, that intangible, and any measurement never captures is, what it measures, can actually increase what’s important about them. It’s the usual list wealth. However, because of the confusion of of all the things that really matter: love, truth, ideas, an increase in inflated money can feel like beauty, wisdom, friendship, happiness, sorrow, an increase in wealth unless its inability to buy justice. There is no way to squeeze money out of more is particularly stark, as in hyperinflation. the priceless. That’s a binary system. It’s either Inflation is therefore very handy as a feel-good priceless or worthless, and monetizing it only mechanism. It’s not just politicians who use that turns it into trash. Keeping money out of where it fact. Almost everybody who can will charge more does not belong is more than a nice idea. It’s es- for what they’ve got if they can get away with it. sential for a sustainable society because nothing There are ways to counteract that tendency, such lasts long if it’s worthless. as optimal competition, cost information, overall A second vital aspect concerns what money money supply, and other factors that economists actually is. When you come right down to it, can tell us a great deal about. The main point is money is a measure. It measures goods to make not that there are things we can do, but that it’s it easier to exchange things. That’s all. It might as essential to recognize how strong and how uni- well be a ruler, except that nobody has ever died versal is the desire not to do them. That desire for a lack of inches. But that says more about needs to be explicitly and constantly counteract- what people do with it than what money is. The ed. Otherwise money ceases to be a measure, fact remains that money is simply a measure. which is the only function it can perform to good As such, money ought to share the characteris- ends, and becomes a tool of control. tics of other measuring devices. One centimeter Tangentially, I have to discuss the concept in is always the same, for rich and poor, now and a economics that a basic level of unemployment is thousand years from now, and whether it’s used necessary to keep inflation in check. There is in London or Lagos. However, unlike inches or even an acronym for it I gather from reading one
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 82 of my favorite economists: the NAIRU [168] , the ing wealth is there. And yet that was the trap non-accelerating-inflation rate of unemployment. countries had to climb out of in the 1930s when It’s axiomatic that without enough unemploy- they were on the gold standard, but didn’t have ment (how much is subject to debate) the enough actual gold to measure their wealth. In wage-price spiral starts. In other words, unless what was recent history at the time, major coun- enough people are flat broke, other people will tries such as Germany and Russia had struggled raise prices. The fact that the system depends on with hyperinflation, and a strict gold standard a class of people with less access to life, liberty, was intended as a “never again” law. It worked as and the pursuit of happiness doesn’t get much far as it went. But without an explicit under- discussion. standing that inflation was not the problem, un- That is not acceptable if all people are equal. A reliable measurement of goods was, they fell into fair system simply cannot depend on some peo- the opposite error and allowed deflation to devel- ple being less equal than others. The demand side op. of inflation can be influenced by competition, by In the details, using money as a measure is price information, and by any number of other hugely complex. “Running out of inches” can measures that can be applied equally to every- happen when there aren’t enough “rulers,” and one, but it cannot be influenced by the involun- also when the existing money is hoarded instead tary poverty of a few. Personally, I don’t believe of used. Psychological factors — which are the that poverty is the only way to control inflation, worst kind — can be at work, or it can be a sim- that it’s impossible to find a balance between ple matter of the reward structure. For instance, equal competing interests, and I do believe that in our current economic crisis, governments nar- it’s up to economists to work out new methods rowly averted deflation by pouring money on the compatible with consistent rules. world’s financial systems. (They didn’t do it fairly, However, if my intuition is wrong, and poverty sufficiently, or well, but they did do it.) Logically, really were to prove essential, then it has to be that money should be bubbling up through the voluntary poverty. If people making less than X system at this point (late 2009). Instead it’s sitting are essential to the system, then it’s up to society in banks because the executives’ jobs depend on as a whole to facilitate their function. The gov- their banks staying in business, and their primary ernment provides the meager annual income to concern right now is surviving an audit by having the proportion of people required, and in return adequate capital reserves. So instead of lending, for having only the bare minimum to survive, they complain about bad credit risks and sit on those people don’t need to work. It may be that the money. Had a given level of lending been faced with the alternative of a whole cohort of made a condition of aid, in other words if the re- people who get a “free ride,” (the quotes are ward structure was different, then bankers would there because poverty is never a free ride) there have had to continue improving their balance will be more motivation to work out a system sheets through their business rather than taxpay- that doesn’t require poverty. er funds. There are also real, i.e. non-inflationary, rea- The complexity is at least as intricate when sons why prices change. We have much better in- merely trying to define inflation. It’s easy to say dustrial and agricultural processes now than in eggs should cost the same everywhere and every- 1750, which makes the price of eggs on an infla- when, but to someone who doesn’t eat eggs, tion-adjusted scale much lower now than then. their price doesn’t matter. This is nontrivial. One (We’ve also gone overboard with factory farming, of the big complaints about measures of infla- but even with good practices, food is now pro- tion, like the Consumer Price Index, is that it’s portionally cheaper than it was then.) Further, out of touch with reality. College tuition costs there may be completely new things that need skyrocket, medical costs skyrocket, and the CPI measuring. In 1750, you couldn’t buy a computer barely moves. That’s because those costs are at any price. mostly not part of the CPI which assumes, for in- Given that money is a measure, it’s idiotic to stance, that college is optional. That’s true, on run out of inches, as it were, when the underly- one level, but if you’re paying for it, it’s not true
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 83 on another level. True measures of inflation — of itself makes no sense. It would be like adding and their corresponding corrective measures — inches to a ruler merely because it had been used would have to take the diversity of needs and to measure something. The inches would change goals into account. One number can’t encompass size and the ruler would become useless. the different reality felt by people in different People can be paid some proportion of the walks of life. The point is that none of them new wealth created by the use of their money, should have to contend with money changing in and they can be paid for the risk of losing it, but its ability to measure the goods and services they it makes no sense to pay for the money itself. need. Fairness, after all, is for everyone. The cal- Those aren’t new thoughts and paying for risk or culations must reflect reality. Reality won’t dumb new wealth are the accepted justifications for itself down for convenience in calculation. charging interest. And yet it’s so easy to become The complexity can be addressed if economic accustomed to paying tribute to power that no- policy is explicitly geared to making sure that body measures interest rates by objective stan- everyone’s money buys the same today as it did dards. How much wealth was created can be ap- yesterday. Economists are very good at math. If proximated, and the same for how much risk was the goal is clear, the complicating factors can be incurred. And yet the only accepted controlling identified, and the calculations performed. Econ- factors on the price of money are supply and de- omists are not so good at answering the philo- mand. Which ends only in those with the supply sophical, psychological, and sociological issues making all the demands. There’s nothing “free that have to be resolved correctly first, before the market” about that. complex calculations can serve a good purpose. Before anyone objects that supply and demand Getting back to some of those philosophical is- are the only controlling factors that work, I’d like sues, the unexamined assumptions about money to add that supply and demand are steerable. have enormous impact on daily life. Money is fa- Governments currently control interest rates miliar stuff and we take it for granted. People through money supply and the interest they don’t worry about whether their attitude toward charge on funds available to banks. I’m not sure it makes sense in light of what it actually is. Judg- why the government’s function as a flywheel is ing by results, that’s no less true of treasury sec- only legitimate when applied to the biggest play- retaries, economists, and giants of finance than it ers. It could apply to everyone. An intractable is of Jane and Joe Schmoe. It may not matter problem of overcharging that isn’t solved by ac- whether ordinary citizens understand what mon- tive promotion of competition would definitely ey is, but the unexamined assumptions of policy melt away if the government provided a fairly makers affect the whole world. priced alternative. Anyone who doubts the effec- The fundamental error is thinking that infla- tiveness of such actions need only watch the pan- tion or deflation are only economic issues. They ic among the US health insurance industry at the aren’t. Money is a measure, and that makes its thought that the government might provide a constancy a matter of fairness. Economics comes fairly priced insurance option. Politically motivat- into it to figure out the numbers conducive to ed or unrealistic price controls are not effective that goal, but economics, like science in the par- for long, but that doesn’t mean prices can’t be allel situation, can’t determine purpose. Because steered within fair and realistic limits. it’s convenient to forget that, or because it simply At the extremes of high interest, there is a isn’t thought through, there’s a sense that money sense that gougers are taking advantage of the follows its own rules and all we can hope to do is situation. That’s led to usury laws and, in the ex- steer it. That’s absurd. Money is not a force of na- treme case, the Koranic prohibition against inter- ture. It is a human construct, and its effects flow est generally. Although it’s the right idea, what from human actions and regulations. They need both approaches miss is that the problem isn’t in- to flow fairly, not as methods of covert control or terest. The issue is that money is a measure and as chaotic corrections against past errors. that interest works only inside that paradigm. Al- Money as measurement has another far-reach- lowing interest charges outside of those limits ing implication. Paying interest on money in and isn’t just a problem of some people cheating oth-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 84 er people, it isn’t merely an aberration with no consequence of the established rules. There was a significance for the integrity of the system. It heartwarming can-do article about North Ivory subverts the real purpose of money for everyone Coast [169] in early 2010. Rebels held sway there, and therefore results in unsustainability. and they kept the cooperation of the population by charging no taxes. So, in North Ivory Coast, taxes (and everything they buy) were an externali- Capital ty, and people worried about how to get the traders to accept a more “normal” system after At the heart of every endeavor involving mon- reunification. In the same way, people every- ey lies the exciting skill of accounting. Seriously. where else worry about how to get corporations Without the invention of double entry bookkeep- to pay for the downstream costs of their busi- ing in the Middle Ages, the scope of capitalism ness. The only difference is we’re used to taxes would have been limited to what you could keep being on balance sheets, and we’re not used to track of in a checkbook. I’m joking only a little putting social costs there. bit. By and large, that’s true. How money is ac- Neither is impossible. It just gets done. Gov- counted for is central to using it, so if we can get ernments pass laws that people must not hold the accounting right, misuse of money can be slaves, and legal businesses stop holding slaves. If much less of a problem. taxes have to be paid, taxpayers do so. If corpora- On a simple level of personal fraud, the need tions are required to contribute to retirement or to prevent misuse led to the invention of ac- unemployment insurance, they do so. If they’re counting. But correct accounting can also pre- not required, those things turn into externalities vent much more generalized fraud. That’s impor- overnight. All of these things are not physical tant because activities related to making money laws. They’re rules made by people, and they can inherently run on self-interest, and self-interest be changed by people with the stroke of a pen. has the property of maximizing gain by any To avoid the tragedy of the commons, the only means available. Capitalism is the economic sys- change needed is to move to accounting that tem that, so far, lets the most people work ac- books the total cost of ownership. All the costs of cording to the natural template, and so capital- a product, including the downstream costs usual- ism works. All that remains is to make it work ly passed on to others, have to be included in the well. balance sheet. There can be no externalities. It’s Accounting is the tool that can do that. Con- the “you broke it, you pay for it” principle. That’s sider, for instance, one of the worst side effects only fair. Money to deal with downstream costs of an economic system founded upon the pursuit has to be paid into a fund that will deal with of self-interest: the tragedy of the commons. The those costs when they come up. term comes from the common land in villages The beginning of implementation of that idea where everyone could let their livestock graze. is already happening, but a lack of transparency That way even landless peasants didn’t have to and accountability makes it very weak. Nuclear live solely on cabbage and gruel. Since it be- power plants, for instance, pay into a fund that is longed to nobody, nobody took care of it, and it supposed to cover decommissioning costs. The became overgrazed and useless, especially after amount has been estimated based on industry in- infant mortality decreased and the number of formation rather than actual data from the few peasants grew. The same process can be seen small or partial decommissionings there have everywhere that “free” and common resources been at this point, so the costs are underestimat- are used, whether it’s air, oceans, or geostation- ed by an order of magnitude or so. Including total ary orbits. The economists call these things “ex- cost of ownership is meaningless if it is allowed ternalities” because they’re external to the trans- to turn into a charade. If transparency and ac- action. They affect someone other than those countability are not sufficient to force companies buying and selling, and they don’t need to be into honesty, then additional methods must be booked on the balance sheet. found and applied. The point is that there must The thing is, what’s on the balance sheet is a be a total cost system, and that it must be fact-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 85 and reality-based. avoidable. But the failures happen so consistently As with all things, the details are complicated. and with such vast consequences that it’s neces- Perhaps the most complicated of all is how to sary to consider whether there’s a fundamental put an estimate on future costs, and how to de- misunderstanding of what markets can do. limit where a business’s responsibility ends. But The analogy between markets and natural sys- those are not new issues. They’re solved daily by tems isn’t simply imperfect, as all analogies must companies and governments everywhere. Some- be. It is downright wrong. Markets have a struc- thing like good will is a more nebulous entity tural feature not seen in natural systems: their than anything discussed here, and yet that’s regu- components are self-aware, able to envision larly priced when companies are for sale. The on- goals, and able to alter their behavior based on ly thing that’s new is that costs which are cur- those goals. That is a game-changing difference, rently not on the books have to be put there. and means that none of the models useful in nat- Downstream benefits can be an externality ural systems, not even the most complex, can be just as costs are, but it’s a much less common applied to economics without drastic revision problem. Most such activities are already public and the addition of several new variables. or non-profit with government support, so the Economists think they are modeling a croquet beneficiaries have already contributed payment competition, as it were, and have complex calcu- for their future benefits. An example, though, of lations of the force of the mallet hitting the ball, companies who don’t see rewards commensurate trajectories, wind speeds, athlete fitness, and on with the benefit they provide are vaccine makers. and on and on. But the game they’re really mod- Whether that recognition is best given in the eling is the one the Queen ordered Alice to play in form of favorable tax treatment or by some other Wonderland where the ball was a hedgehog and method, there needs to be some way of returning the mallet a flamingo that had to be tucked some of the benefit to those creating it. just-so into the crook of her arm. By the time she External benefits are not a parallel situation to had the flamingo adjusted, the hedgehog un- external costs. There is nothing to be fixed, so curled and ambled away. When she recovered the there is no price tag on the future. The benefits hedgehog, the flamingo twisted up and fixed her often come in intangible form — good health, for with a beady glare. The pieces don’t stand still in instance, is priceless — and there would be no economics, and they all have a mind of their way to return the full benefit to the company. own. Furthermore, the people in the company already That’s an old idea by the way, even though benefit from living in a society where such intan- much ignored. For instance [170] : gibles are common. So, in important ways, they’re already repaid. That’s why external bene- “In his 1974 Nobel Prize lecture, fits can only receive token recognition, but inso- Friedrich Hayek, known for his close asso- far as they exist, that recognition should exist as ciation to the heterodox school of Austrian well. economics, attributed policy failures in The other major flaw endemic to a system economic advising to an uncritical and un- scientific propensity to imitate mathemati- based on self-interest is that there is almost no cal procedures used in the physical sci- long-term planning or overall coordination. ences. He argued that even much-studied Those things are supposed to emerge organically economic phenomena, such as labor-mar- from the properties of the market, just as the re- ket unemployment, are inherently more silience of ecosystems emerges from individuals’ complex than their counterparts in the self-interested effort to survive. When the desir- physical sciences where such methods able emergent properties don’t appear, econo- were earlier formed. Similarly, theory and data are often very imprecise and lend mists speak of market failure. themselves only to the direction of a By now, the market is failing the whole planet. change needed, not its size.” (Hayek, The assumption has been that market failures are Friedrich A. “The Pretence of Knowledge” [171] . exceptions or something that happens at the lim- Lecture to the Memory of Alfred Nobel.) its of the system where some deficiencies are un-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 86
Expecting emergent properties to work for the Wikipedia: monopolization; collusion, including best in a system whose participants are formation of cartels, price fixing, bid rigging; self-aware and able to use those properties for product bundling and tying; refusal to deal, in- their own purposes is a fallacy. It serves the inter- cluding group boycott; exclusive dealing; dividing ests of those who’d like to take advantage of the territories; conscious parallelism; predatory pric- system, but that doesn’t change the fact that it ing; misuse of patents and copyrights. doesn’t work. It reads like a summary of the high tech busi- What does work for self-aware participants ness model. There’s a reason for that. In the in- who can modify their behavior is rules that apply terests of giving US businesses a leg up against to everyone, with rewards for abiding by them their foreign competitors, the US government ig- and punishments for transgressions. That type of nored most of their own antitrust law. Biotech, regulation is the domain of law, not commerce. electronics, and software, all the new industries The rules need to favor long range planning. Us- of the last few decades, have been allowed to op- ing total cost is one such rule. Transparency and erate in a free-for-all with the usual results. There the ability of affected people to alter outcomes are now a few behemoths who spend most of are another two. Accountable regulators who can their time squelching innovation, unless they be unelected are yet another. own it, and overcharging for their products. The The forces for beneficial outcomes have to easiest example is the telcos, who were more reg- come from outside the market. Those outcomes ulated in Europe and Japan than in the US. In the cannot be an emergent property of markets. They US, average broadband download speed in 2009 is may happen occasionally by accident because said to be around 3.8mbps [174] and falling [175] , markets don’t care either way, but they’re not go- whereas in Scandinavia it’s around 5mbps [176] . (I ing to happen regularly or even often. Applying say “said to be” because mine is less than 1mbps.) the right laws is what will lead to the most vigor- Cost of broadband, however, is similar or cheaper ous markets with the most generally beneficial in the countries with faster speeds. Average effects. phone service cost in the US is around 75c per Again, these are things everyone knows even if minute [177] . In contrast, the Scandinavian rates they’re rarely articulated. The proof is in how are less than one-fifth that amount [178] . If the hard people with market power work to make more-regulated European telcos could compete in sure none of those rules can take hold. The prob- the US, how long do you think the coddled oli- lem always comes back to undue concentrations gopoly here would last? of power and the difficulty of doing anything A relatively new method of squelching com- about it for the perceived immediate payoff. As petitors is using the law, such as patent law, to I’ve said before, I don’t have new solutions for subvert the laws on competition. There is noth- how to wrest control back after it’s been lost, but ing in antitrust laws preventing much larger I do think it points up how vital it is to prevent companies from tying up their competitors in such concentrations to begin with. lawsuits, which, because money is a factor, hurt Preventing concentrations of market power is small players much more than large ones. Instead as important a function of government as the of competing on price and performance, compa- maintenance of a fair monetary system. I’ve nies compete on lawyers, defensively filing for as touched on it in the sixth chapter under Govern- many patents as possible. Then when the suits ment 2: Regulation [172] . Current practice already start, one can countersue with one’s own arse- recognizes that extreme concentrations benefit nal. There’s even a new term to describe compa- only a few at the expense of everyone else. Econ- nies whose entire business model is extortion us- omists even view unbalanced market power as a ing the law: patent trolls. The market no longer symptom of market failure. Given that they know works to provide good products at the best price. it’s a malfunction, you’d think they’d be more The law no longer works to provide equal justice concerned about why it’s so pervasive. for all. And the situation continues to devolve be- And pervasive it is. For a quick selection of an- cause doing anything about it is an uphill strug- ti-competitive practices [173] here’s a list from gle against some of the largest corporations in
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 87 the world. compete against anyone who would provide it, As I’ll argue in a moment, I see strict enforce- and this way they can feed in useful features as ment of competition as the primary tool to pre- slowly as possible.) A real total cost approach vent excessive market share. However, the evi- would take into account the vast downstream dence shows that significantly larger size than effects, and thus would never provide a justifica- competitors, by itself, is enough to tilt the play- tion for unlimited, cancerous market growths. ing field. So fallback rules to restrain size are also Free market proponents also object to “re- necessary in case competition can’t manage the straint of trade,” as if that’s a bad thing. On some task alone. Whenever there’s talk of using more level, it’s essential because market motivations than competition to restrain business, a typical don’t relate to larger or long term social benefits. set of objections emerges. However, even free marketeers see that. All ex- One of the commonest arguments against cept the wild-eyed extremists understand the down-regulating a company rapidly acquiring need for some antitrust, pro-competition regula- majority market share — at least in the US — is tion. The very heart of capitalism, the stock and that the others are losing out because they just commodity markets, are the most stringently and don’t compete as well. Suppressing the winner minutely regulated businesses on the planet. only enables inefficient producers. Free marke- (That doesn’t stop anyone from trying to work teers make the same argument in each new situ- each new loophole as it comes up, such as high ation no matter how often concentrations of frequency trading [179] , which proves how essen- market power lead to inefficiency. They pretend tial unflagging regulation is.) that a snapshot in time of a vigorous growing But there’s also another, and larger, point company is indicative of how that company will about restraint of trade. Markets are just as capa- behave once it has dominance. It doesn’t seem to ble of it as governments. Restraint by market par- matter that there’s a 100% consistent pattern of ticipants isn’t somehow better than government using dominance to throttle competition instead restraint, even though it has no softhearted good of increasing innovation. Promoting market pow- intentions. It’s precisely to prevent market re- er in the face of that evidence is neither rational straint that government restraint is necessary. In- nor sustainable. It is competition that leads to terestingly, the loudest objections to government vigorous competitors, not the lack of it. involvement generally come from those who Another argument is that cost of intervention hope to take advantage of their market position. exceeds benefits to consumers, so using the total All that said, the opponents of market re- cost approach that I favor so much, it does more straint do have a point. Restraint as an attempt harm than good. However, I’ve never seen this to manipulate the market is not valid no matter approach applied to the real total cost. It’s ap- who does it. It can only be used to keep the field plied to the snapshot in time where, right this in- level. stant, Widget A would be X amount cheaper for That implies protectionism, as one type of consumers, but the cost to the government and market restraint, should never be applied. By and industry in implementing the change would be large, that’s true, but only when protectionism is more-than-X. It’s irrelevant to them, for some rea- correctly delimited. Equalizing prices to compen- son, that in a few years when the company in sate for bad practices is not protectionist even question is too big to control the price will go up though, for instance, the World Trade Organiza- and stay there. Plus it leads to an even bigger loss tion currently assumes it is. WTO’s thinking is of value as innovation suffers. (Just as one small based on a fallacy. Equalizing prices does not pro- example, consider cell phones in the US, yet tect industries that can’t compete in terms of again. We could, at this point, all have phones their actual business. Instead, industries that try that move seamlessly between voip, wifi, and to compete by sloughing off real costs are penal- cell, that use voice-to-text and visual voicemail, ized. Nullifying cheating is not the same as pro- and we could have that at a small fraction of the tectionism. costs we pay. We don’t because the four large There is one instance when true protectionism companies that own the US market don’t have to is justified: in the case of a much weaker party
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 88 who would otherwise suffer significant social dis- a sober business decision not to leave money on ruption. The situation can arise because of past the table. imbalances, such as former colonial powers and Now let’s say the regulators had shut down the former colonies, or because of small size and the frothy housing price appreciation. It would intrinsic resource poverty. In the former case the have been simple. All they needed to do was en- adjustment would be temporary, in the latter force the income and asset rules required to get possibly permanent. Ideally, of course, every re- loans, and enforce accurate risk assessments on gion could sooner or later find its niche and not new financial instruments. Those two things, by require that kind of assistance. But it’s not hard themselves, would have made the whole repack- to imagine, for instance, a hunter-gatherer cul- aging and resale of mortgages a much more staid ture which could never compete economically business. With known and sober risk assess- with a factory-based one. Yet it’s also not hard to ments, there would have been far fewer investors imagine that preserving diversity could one day able to buy. The mortgage derivatives would have mean the survival of our species in the face of been too risky for pension funds and municipali- overwhelming disaster. ties and the trillions of dollars they control. Getting back to competition itself, it’s interest- With fewer buyers, the sellers who thought ing how hard it is to maintain in spite of all the they were going to make a profit of $300,000 on rules supporting it. If current rules were applied, their house were now going to make, maybe, market distortion would be much less of a prob- $25,000. Can you see them being happy about it? lem than it is. It’s not rules we lack. It’s enforce- Not easily. Any regulator who did them out of ment. $275,000 would have been skewered. And so The first question therefore becomes which would any politician who supported him or her. factors work against enforcement and how to There is little protection in the current system for counteract them. The best rules imaginable making unpopular but necessary decisions. won’t help if they’re not enforced. Any number of It was only after the bubble burst that people factors working against enforcement can be iden- would have been glad of a gain, any gain, instead tified, but there is one which, by itself, is always of the losses they got. It was only after the bub- sufficient to cause the problem. People will al- ble burst that it was all the bankers’ fault. People ways try to gain what advantage they can. And transformed almost overnight from savvy finan- while they’re in the process of gaining it, whoev- cial mavens into innocent victims. er tries to halt the fun is reviled. That isn’t to say it was not the bankers’ fault. Consider one current example. Now that the It was. And the regulators. But the point I’m try- housing market has done what was once un- ing to make is that it was also everyone else’s thinkable and caused losses, there’s fury that fault. There were no loud voices — either in the bankers were so greedy, that financiers invented media or in the neighborhood — who wanted the instruments whose risks they could pass on to party to stop. others, and that regulators didn’t stop the excess- So the problem has two sides. One is that peo- es. ple always take what advantage they can. That’s And yet, I don’t remember anyone even joking hard enough to stop when it’s a matter of power about what a wild ride we were having at the and people are trying to ignore that they’re losing height of the fever. I lived in one of the centers of by it even as it happens. But the other side is that it, in southern California. Everywhere you went, when it comes to money, people don’t feel in superrmarket aisles, at the next table in restau- they’re losing by it. The accumulative phases feel rants, in the dentist’s waiting room, you heard like gains to most people, not losses. Party poop- people discussing the latest house they bought, ers are not wanted. their low monthly payments, the huge profit they It’s vital to recognize how unpopular it is to were going to make, the good deal they got on a down-regulate gains and how inevitable that un- second mortgage and how they were going to popularity is always going to be. A disaster before put their money to work by trading up. The re- it happens is nothing, and it is the nature of pre- turn on investment was enormous. It was simply vention that disasters do not happen. So how it
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 89 feels at the time is that money is taken off the volved. The right to benefit is not the same as a table for nothing. That always breeds resent- “right” to manipulate markets. A creator has the ment. That always breeds a thousand arguments inalienable right to receive payment for their in- why the best idea is to go for broke. vention for the term of the copyright or patent, I think the force of these gut-level convictions but not the right to absolute market power. The is so strong that brain-level reasoning will be rules of competition still hold. In other words, bent to it sooner or later. Very rational govern- the creator must be paid, but they must also li- ments may be able to avoid some disasters, but cense their creation if requested. Compulsory li- convincing excuses will overwhelm reason often censing should include the retention of what’s enough that disasters will still happen. Recogniz- called “moral rights” in the fiction industry — ing that emotional dynamic, any government control over usage the creator considers inappro- which is sincere about regulation for the greater priate — but compulsory licensing has to be a long term good will need to employ automatic component of a system dependent on competi- triggers for the most unpopular and necessary tion. regulations. There is just no way we can rely on Whether a company needs utility status or our rationality to see us through when there’s competition, the point is that a business answer- money to be made. able only to private interests cannot be allowed Automatic triggers mean that when a compa- to acquire game-changing levels of market power. ny grows beyond a certain market share, say 50%, Moving on from the failsafes guaranteeing in any part of its business then down-regulation competition to the day-to-day rules promoting it, takes effect. No excuses. I’m thinking, for in- the ideal would be for them to work so well that stance, of the national interest argument used in the failsafes are never actually needed. the US to “help” the nascent high tech industry. Transparency and short feedback loops should It seemed so rational, but in the long run (which go a long way toward achieving sustainable com- turned out to be a mere decade or two) it actual- petition. By transparency I mean easily accessi- ly turned out to be against the interests of the ble, true cost and reliability information. A Con- nation and its citizens. The reason for the caveat sumer Reports-style listing and explanation needs about “any part of the business” is that vertical to be one component. That type of review is not integration can’t be used to acquire a chokehold costless, and it should be funded from a tax on all on a critical process, but to then argue that there businesses. It is, after all, the extreme likelihood is less than 50% market share overall. of biased and deficient information coming from It’s important to stress that automatic triggers vendors that creates the need for independent re- are the last resort, a backstop. Regulatory scruti- view in the first place. Ease of access also means ny and downsizing would generally be appropri- that, when possible, information shouldn’t re- ate before that level is hit. Prevention of prob- quire separate access at all. For instance, cost of lems is the goal, and that means preventing the production could be a subscript to the listed development of market-altering market share to price. If there are other downstream payments, begin with. The purpose of an automatic trigger the total cost would also have to be listed. is to compensate for the inevitable lack of regula- Picture that for something like the iPhone in tory perfection. the US. Cost of production for this coolest-gad- If, on the other hand, the business is one get-on-the-planet when introduced in 2007 was where monopoly makes sense, such as water around $220 [180] ; minimum cost with texting supply or internet search, then the business over the two year contract when introduced was needs to be transformed into a regulated utility. around $2445 [181] . The price listing required in all Another instance of justified monopoly is intellec- ads and other information would be: $599, $220, tual rights. (I’ll discuss them in more detail in the $2445. (Sale price, cost of production, total price.) last chapter.) The whole point to copyrights and I think the information factor would generate patents is to give creators the benefits of their in- pressure for fair pricing. Coupled with compulso- ventions. However, I think we’ve slipped a vital ry licensing, the pressure would also have a way cog in the understanding of which rights are in- to take effect.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 90
When they can, vendors have done their best alistic either by an independent ad hoc panel of to suppress that type of information, probably be- knowledgeable people or by a regulator. If inde- cause it works. There was a very useful service pendent comments accumulated on one side or that popped up a few years back which would the other, the call should be withdrawn or the tell you how many minutes were left on your cell offending company should modify its practices. If phone plan(s). Once it caught on, the telcos had the outcome of comments was insufficient to it shut down by refusing to provide the necessary cause action, there could be appeal for review by data, even though the users had explicitly told regulators whose decision would be binding. If ei- the service to access their own data. (Similar ser- ther party disagreed with it, then the last stage vices have since popped back up — it is, after all, could be the legal process. Especially in fast mov- a rather basic idea that should be part of the ing tech markets, which side gets the benefit of phone plan to begin with — but the US telcos injunctions pending a decision can amount to a seem to successfully keep them in the fragment- de facto decision in itself. As in other areas, when ed startup stage.) Given that unused minutes are the merits of the case are less than obvious, the the biggest reason why US users are paying decision should favor the weaker party. Since in around 75c per minute without realizing it, it be- the system envisioned here money is not a major comes very clear why the service had to be factor at any point, larger companies should not quashed, even though it did nothing but put in- have an advantage by their size alone. Further- formation in users’ hands. Information, by itself, more, there are time limits both on regulatory can be a powerful force, and depriving people of and legal processes. Those have to be set low it is another example of using small, unnoticed enough so that decisions are still relevant by the actions to grab anti-competitive advantage. time they’re made. In a computer-saturated society, there are fur- One inevitable question in any system of ther ways to provide customers with information checks is what provides the balance. What is to across all vendors that make buying decisions prevent competitors from using the law as ha- even more transparent. Air travel has several sites rassment? There need to be safeguards at every like that, but also points up the shortcomings of step. From the first step, the call for comment, a haphazard, private facility. Some carriers aren’t the accused company has the right to present its included, so the comparative power falls short, side. If the call really is harassment, it shouldn’t and there are no guarantees of truth or objectivi- get past the first step of vetting for plausibility. If ty. it does, the public will have no sense of injury The solution to those problems in this subset and there would be few comments. If the accuser of search functions is the same as in the larger escalates to regulatory or even legal review, and set: searching either has to be a government that for something which has already appeared function or a regulated public utility subject to baseless at earlier stages, then there needs to be rules that require transparency, objectivity, and some form of sanction. The most direct might be ease of use. to rescind the right to complain about anti-com- The other major tool to promote competition petitive practices for some period of years. Mone- is to give all competitors an equally effective tary damages, however, need to be applied spar- voice. The most alert enforcers against anti-com- ingly if at all. It is more important to protect the petitive practices will always be the smaller com- right to contest anti-competitive behavior than it petitors who suffer the most from them. Short is to punish all abuses. and effective feedback loops promote economic As always, the regulators play a crucial role. fairness just as much as any other kind. Their function is to prevent abuses by either side Feedback should consist of a series of mea- and to keep things running so smoothly the legal sures that escalate in the level of compulsion. system has nothing to do. Equally obviously, they The first tier could be a public call for comment, will almost never be able to perform to that stan- referenced where the product or company in- dard because where money is to be made, no- volved is advertised or listed. The call would have body will be happy. There are many safeguards in to have a documented basis and be considered re- the system to keep the regulators honest: trans-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 91 parency, complaints, recalls, and legal action. In enforcement consistent. I would expect that this case particularly, though, it’s to be expected transparency, the rules for competition, and ex- that people will make an extra effort to game the plicit limits on size and market share would be system using complaints. Protection of regulators sufficient to prevent backsliding on enforcement. from frivolous or vengeful complaints should al- However, if it proves otherwise in reality, then ways be robust, but that protection may need an means have to be found to prevent unsustainable extra layer or two for financial regulators. financial situations, not merely to fix them after If I’m correctly imagining some of the com- the fact. ments on these ideas, they’ll have started with Enforcement of sustainable and equitable rules skepticism that market power can be consistent- in the financial world is always likely to be diffi- ly contained. After seeing the sections on pro- cult. The very close relation of money and power moting competition, the objections change to, is one big reason. The overwhelming desire to be- “Well, of course, if you do it that way, but people lieve in unbelievable deals is another. It’s not that will never go for it.” I (obviously) disagree. People people don’t know those deals are too good to be do whatever they have to do. There was a time true. It’s that they don’t want to know. when it was equally inconceivable that govern- I’ll give an example of how complexity is used ments would consist of elected officials. As I keep to achieve ignorance since it’s a method seen saying, I have no good ideas on how to get con- most commonly in finance. It was particularly in trol that’s been lost, but people have figured out evidence in our last go-round of inventing new fi- how to do that over and over again. They’ll do it nancial instruments and a whole new shadow eventually in the economic sphere as they’ve banking system that was free of regulation. done in the political one. Once that’s happened, The idea was that these new instruments were then what I’m hoping to do is help in the quest totally different from the old ones, and hence for sustainability so that we avoid the heart- couldn’t be regulated by the old methods. They breaking regressions we keep going through. also weren’t regulated by any new methods, but that bothered few people while the things were ostensibly making money. On the rare occasions Finance when there was talk of regulation, the objection The world of finance — stock markets, banks, was that these things were so new nobody knew commodity markets, and the like — has few regu- how to regulate them. However, that was okay latory problems, contrary to intuition. Those are because markets worked in the interests of their some of the most tightly regulated activities in participants, not against them. When it turned commerce, which is ironic given the public phi- out not to be okay, even someone with the finan- losophy of some of the players. At the heart of cial credentials of Alan Greenspan said he was in the free market is an intensely levelled playing “a state of shocked disbelief [182] .” field. The necessary regulatory environment for That’s nonsense. If I, a financial amateur, finance is well understood, and insofar as addi- could see the outlines of what was happening, tional measures are needed they’re not a funda- then there is no chance the high financiers mental rethinking of the principles involved. The didn’t. They knew enough to know perfectly well principles are fine: market information must be that they didn’t know how the risks were being equally available to all, all transactions happen in evaluated. That, by itself, is normally a red flag in an open environment where all participants are financial circles. equal, and the only variables are supposed to be Just to underline how easy it was to under- price, performance, and quality. stand the essentials, I’ll give a quick summary The deficiency in high finance is enforcement. here. Mortgages were divided into packages of After financial catastrophes, enforcement ratch- good ones and not-so-good ones and sold as ets up a bit, followed by new methods of avoid- packages. Some of them carried very high yields ing it that then inevitably lead to the next cata- and yet were rated to have low risk. That’s a clas- strophe. The primary mission in the world of big sic too-good-to-be-true scenario. money has to be finding sufficient tools to make The packages were a mix so it was hard to tell
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 92 how risky they really were. The hugely complicat- quences. Military procurement is perhaps the one ed calculations to assess the risk of the mix were area where the broader implications of one as- passed to computer programs whose workings pect of sourcing are already recognized, but very few people understood. That’s a classic that’s only one specialized domain. The scale of Garbage In, Garbage Out scenario. You don’t need enterprises has many general social implications to understand the programs or the instruments that markets won’t take into account without to know that. government attention. The potentially GIGO risk was insured by com- Theoretically, trade allows everyone to benefit panies that had only a few percent of the capital from different natural advantages. But situations needed to cover any eventual failures. Logically, where everyone benefits from resources beyond they should have been terrified of losses, since human control are not the same as situations en- they had so little capital to cover them, and gineered by humans to benefit some at the ex- should have erred on the side of setting risk esti- pense of others. mates too high. Instead the risks came in so low The clearest example is labor. Money can scour even pension funds could buy the packages. They the world for the cheapest workers, but workers were sold by the trillion, and everybody collected can’t search the planet for the best money. That fees on the sales all up and down the line. sets up an imbalance which has nothing natural If that doesn’t smell of a scam to you, then about it. It’s based on government regulations you have an enviably trusting mind. Everybody in about nationality and immigration that are out- finance knew it was a house of cards. There is no side the markets. It’s simply dishonest to pretend need to understand the intricacies of risk assess- that globalization (in the current common mean- ment to know that. People didn’t care because ing of the word) is successful because it is superi- they were making money on it, but that is not or on economic grounds when the whole thing the same as not knowing. Pleading ignorance is would collapse tomorrow without external regu- just an excuse. lations that give one side asymmetric power. It’s been said that the only people who can be (I’m not arguing, as a practical matter, that in- conned are the ones who want to be, and that’s finitely mobile labor is a good idea or even com- the problem with financial enforcement. Now patible with maintaining social cohesion. The that the party is over, the best minds [183] in fi- point is that capital and labor must have similar nance are pointing out that the excess complexity bargaining power with respect to each other in a led to lack of transparency, and that it’s impor- sustainable system. If labor can’t be infinitely tant to reduce the complexity if it isn’t to happen mobile, neither can money.) again. But even the complexity is only a symp- Globalization, for all the rhetoric about tom. The cause of the disease is the desire to be- spreading wealth, has manifested the usual con- lieve in the scam. sequences of concentrated power. As is often the Somehow, enforcement has to be immune to case with money, that feels good to some people the desire for the latest get rich quick scheme, to begin with. For instance, price dumping can be and immune to everyone’s, including the experts’, part of establishing monopoly and can seem like willingness to believe they’re on to a winning su- a good deal to consumers for a while. Once mar- per-deal. It’s my hope that a clear-eyed awareness ket power is established, the good deal evapo- of the root cause and a matching legal frame- rates. But that’s not the end of the costs to the work to stop flimflam before it starts will be one-time winners. Nobody is immune to exploita- enough to free people from the predictable cycle tion. Expensive US labor loses to Mexican labor, of asymmetrical advantages and subsequent which loses to cheaper Philippine labor, which crashes. loses to Lesotho labor, which loses to Guang- dong, which loses to Western China. There are any number of specific paths, but the ability of Scale of business capital to move much faster than workers leaves Whether an enterprise is global or local, dis- the same trail of job loss and social disruption tributed or concentrated, can have social conse- everywhere. That’s an absurd price to pay for a
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 93 few decades’ worth of cheap T-shirts. nor are there any rules to make them do so. So The solution I see to this problem — and reali- once the wealth actually spreads a bit and the ty-based economists may know of better and cheaper location becomes less cheap, the compa- more elegant ones — is pricing in line with the ny moves to the next place with better pickings. cost of production under equitable constraints. There are people who argue that chasing the That seems as if it would largely solve the whole cheapest buck doesn’t matter because another issue. There is no point chasing cheap labor or lax company will be along in a minute. But continu- environmental regulation if doing so only triggers ous job loss and job search dependent on large compensatory fees and doesn’t give any advan- corporations over which there is no local control tage against the competition. is not a recipe for security, independence, or sus- Inclusion of real costs would cancel out more tainable development. This has been evident, for than inequities in the “colonies.” It would also instance, in Africa [184] . (Also, (Phalatse, 2000 [185] make transport play its proper role. Now the (paywall). Other instances: Jordan, 2002, Wash- enormous explicit and hidden fossil fuel subsidies ington Post [186] ; Silver, 1993 [187] .) The fact that make it economically feasible to transport pint exploitation coexists with wealth for a few does size bottles of drinking water half way around not prove the success of globalization. It proves the globe. It seems quite mad, but our crazy quilt that those who start with comparatively better of subsidies and inequities has made it a rational advantages are better able to profit from the situ- business decision. If realistic pricing were ap- ation in which they find themselves. Or, once plied, the unsustainability of such practices again, “thems that has, gets.” That is not equi- would be reflected in their cost. table and, as we’re finding while the world spi- Obviously, no single nation could make others rals toward disaster, not sustainable either. act fairly by itself in this fragmented world of Another social reason to limit trade is preser- ours. As with all rules that promote fairness, they vation of a way of life. Sometimes, as in the Swiss can only work if everyone abides by them. On a support for their dairy farmers, the motivation is planetary scale, we’ve refused to understand the to save another industry and to present tourists huge benefit of doing so, although on a national with the views of alpine cows that they came to level some people have. It’s worth noting that the see. Sometimes, as in the Japanese support for lo- more commitment a nation has to equitability, cal small-scale rice farming or in Inuit whaling, the richer they are, even when resource poor. the motivation is to preserve an activity seen as They are not losing by forging ahead with fair- culturally vital. Of course, it’s easy for arguments ness, counterintuitive as that might be. Nor is it a about a way of life to shade into protectionism matter that countries are rich first and therefore with no redeeming features, the kind protecting a have the luxury of fairness. Saudi Arabia is rich local business when there are better mutually and continues to be grossly unfair. Germany after beneficial alternatives and when the real obstacle the World War II had next-to-nothing. It was not is the cost of the transition for a few people. the Marshall Plan by itself that saved them. It However, just because bad protectionism exists, was how they used it. Sooner or later (later, I and just because it can be hard to distinguish would guess, based on current trajectories) the from the necessary kind when they overlap, that screamingly obvious benefits of fairness will start doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to give up and avoid to be understood across national boundaries as making the distinction. The alternative is to lose well as within (some of) them. whole chunks of human diversity in exchange for One of the early arguments in favor of global- not much. The cheap stuff coming in from over- ization was that it would spread the wealth. By seas doesn’t stay cheap forever, but lost ways of selling goods in more expensive markets, compa- life never come back. nies could pay higher wages to laborers who Many examples of the benefits of local produc- were used to working cheap. That would lift the tion come from food, which is easily the clearest standard of living everywhere. The only problem case of diseconomies of scale. Food which has to with this rosy scenario is that no specific compa- be shipped long distances loses taste (if it had ny feels under an obligation to spread wealth, any to begin with after being bred to ship well),
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 94 is stored for much longer, loses nutritional value, ed, and when efficiency is held to be the highest and often is subjected to processing to cover up good. That’s a laughable assumption to everyone for those defects. It’s another of the many in- except the shareholders making money on it. stances where cheap is not a bargain if the prod- All that said, though, I want to stress that al- uct has no value. And that’s the best case sce- though efficiency isn’t the only factor, it is a fac- nario. tor. In some cases, size really does bring enough The worst case scenario develops the situation benefit to justify making exceptions. Ore much further. Huge agribusinesses process food smelters, for instance, would not work best as into a near-addictive non-nutritive substance that Mom and Pop operations. Other examples of rela- creates obesity and disease. At least in the US, tively large optimum size are heavy industries, in- the production end is hugely subsidized through dustries that require very expensive equipment, various farm bills. With the 2010 health insurance and industries with pollution problems that are reform bill, as Pollan [188] says, “the government better mitigated as point sources. The optimum, is putting itself in the uncomfortable position of as always, balances many factors. The goal is the subsidizing both the costs of treating Type 2 dia- smallest size consistent with optimum efficiency betes and the consumption of high-fructose corn that takes into account all social factors. Maxi- syrup.” That way lies madness. And bankruptcy. mum efficiency at any cost is only another name In the same NY Times article, Pollan notes that for getting someone else to pay the price. experts at MIT and Columbia designed a food pro- gram to counteract obesity and were surprised to Corporations as bodies discover “that promoting the concept of a ‘food- shed’ — a diversified, regional food economy — Confusion of concepts and reality can lead to could be the key to improving the American diet.” bizarre actions like jumping from a third floor Had they done their background reading, they window on the idea that one can fly. When many would have known that they’d re-discovered the people share the confusion, whole societies can wheel. The value of locally produced fresh food fall. A real world example is the strange confla- has been discussed for decades. Perhaps the best tion of corporations (a word based on the Latin known in the US is Frances Moore Lappé’s book, corpus, or body) and real biological bodies. Diet for a Small Planet [189] , published in 1971, but That point has been brought home recently by the tradition goes back to the biodynamic agri- the US Supreme Court’s weird decision [190] in the culture movement of the early 1900s. At least in 2010 Citizens United case. Corporations, said agriculture, even considered only from the nar- some of the men [191] of the Court, have the same row standpoint of the final product, leaving aside rights as real people even though they don’t the social consequences, it’s not hard to see that share any of the characteristics that rights are small scale works better than large. supposed to protect. Corporations can’t be The smallest, most distributed ways of doing stabbed, they don’t bleed, they don’t starve, they business generally provide the most benefit com- can’t be jailed. They have none of the responsibil- pared to larger ones. They spread the wealth ities and vulnerabilities that go with rights. without the application of brute force, which is Except for a few rarae aves in the legal system, always desirable in an equitable society, and they that’s been obvious to everyone, including me. prevent many of the problems of undue market The following repeats a post I wrote on the topic power from ever developing. Each of those is an [192] several years ago. enormous social good. The only thing small scale The history of the delusion shows that, as usu- enterprises can’t do is provide the lowest possible al, people had some help before they started be- price if bigger businesses are given a free ride for lieving in it. What helped was money. Wikipedia the social costs they generate. [193] provides a potted summary. In the mid-1800s, Efficiency is often given as the counter-argu- ment to the desirability of small-scale enterpris- “Corporate law at the time was focused es. As far as I can see, the argument only works on protection of the public interest, and when no downstream or social costs are includ- not on the interests of corporate share-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 95
holders. Corporate charters were closely pay fines, even when they’re shareholder people. regulated by the states. Forming a corpora- Only people can go to jail. And the individuals in tion usually required an act of legislature. question can always argue that the crime wasn’t Investors generally had to be given an equal say in corporate governance, and theirs because it was committed by a much larg- corporations were required to comply with er group of people. So the individual’s right to the purposes expressed in their charters. … equal protection under the law means that no- Eventually, state governments began to re- body is punished and the crimes continue. alize the greater corporate registration rev- Giving special privileges to wealth and escap- enues available by providing more permis- ing accountability are both the antithesis of jus- sive corporate laws.” tice. There can be no corporate personhood in a fair or sustainable system. Corporations are busi- So the corporation as we know it was born. ness entities, not people. Trying to fool people in- They were group entities — body business rather to believing otherwise is just a way to give a few than body politic, so to speak — but it didn’t take rich people an excuse to trample everyone else. long for bright wits to realize that real bodies had Nice for them; bad for everyone else; and the rea- more rights than business bodies did. They want- son why it’s such a durable piece of flimflam. ed some of that. So they spread the notion that Anything that helps the rich and powerful has this was unfair. All people are created equal, huge staying power. aren’t they? However, just because corporations aren’t Astonishingly enough, they found judges who people doesn’t mean they can’t be legal entities [194] fell for it . who exist under given rules. And, since the peo- ple who run corporations really are people, they In 1922, the Supreme Court ruled that have the responsibility of making sure their cor- the Pennsylvania Coal Co. was entitled to porations follow those rules. Responsibility must “just compensation” under the Fifth be matched to control, so it cannot rest on share- Amendment because a state law, designed holders. It’s another ridiculous legal fiction that to keep houses from collapsing as mining they control anything. The people actually mak- companies tunneled under them, limited how much coal it could extract. … [In the ing the decisions must be the ones facing person- mid-1990s a] federal appellate court struck al consequences if they break the law, the same down a Vermont law requiring that milk way any other criminal does. If that principle from cows treated with bovine growth were actually applied, corporate executives hormone be so labeled. Dairy producers would either straighten out or (and I’m being on- had a First Amendment right “not to ly slightly facetious) we’d have to fine them speak,” the court said. enough to pay for all the new jails we’d be build- ing. However, these odd “rights” don’t extend to the responsibilites that real people have. Sludge dumpers argue that their rights to due process Advertising and equal protection under the law are violated I need to spend some time on a tangent about when towns prevent them from dumping, but advertising. The issues surrounding it are largely when real bodies are harmed by the toxic waste ignored at this point, but they have huge effects somehow that’s nobody’s fault and somebody that make it the business of government. The else’s problem. This is not the way it works for re- right to freedom from intrusion [195] by others al people with real rights. To begin with, I can’t has been discussed, and there is also the informa- dump toxic waste in your garden. To go on with, tion function [196] which relates to education. In if I did, I’d be liable for the ensuing damages. this chapter, the relevant problem is that free If corporations are persons, then why aren’t markets are based on the premise of rational they persons all the way? They get the rights, but choices, but advertising works largely by trying to they don’t get the consequences of their wrongs. short circuit rationality. But then again, how could they? Only people can In effect, advertising is a way of not playing by
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 96 the rules and of not appealing to reason. The fact wine preferred one type over the other by three that people say they don’t care doesn’t change to one depending on which nation’s music was the problematic nature. The difficulty with any piped over the sound system. On being ques- form of cheating, the reason why it’s cheating tioned later, only one in forty had even noticed and not just another way to play the game, is the music [198] to say nothing of noticing its eff- that it can’t be applied by everyone equally with- ffect on them. A 2008 study of web advertising [88] out implosion. It depends on there being a few found that “upon exposure to Web ads, con- manipulators, and many who are manipulated. sumers experience priming caused by implicit There is also the problem that people don’t memory and build a more favorable attitude to- consent to manipulation. When there was first ward the advertised brand regardless of the levels talk of using subliminal advertising — such as of attention they paid to the advertisements.” messages to drink soda flashed on a movie screen Advertising for financial services companies too fast to see consciously — people were in- boosts consumer confidence in them [199] even censed at the thought of having their strings though all the ads have done is make people feel pulled. Such advertising was quickly abandoned the name is familiar. That’s enough for a suffi- partly because of the backlash and no doubt also cient number of people to place money with the because research showed it wasn’t terribly effec- company, which more than pays for the advertis- tive. But when it comes to ordinary advertising, ing. Think about that. People are willing to hand the kind that’s not trying to hide, people are con- over money based on an artificially induced sense vinced that it has no effect on them. It’s their of familiarity. Yet if asked, I’d bet all those people choice whether to pay attention to it or not, and say they tune the ads out. (The comments to the if advertisers want to throw billions of dollars at article, for instance, express contempt.) They cer- the hope that they might make an impression, let tainly wouldn’t admit to basing investment deci- them. It doesn’t matter. sions on them. But in the aggregate, regardless of That is manifest nonsense. Armies of profes- what any given individual thinks, that’s exactly sionals don’t throw billions at the same thing for what they’re doing. decades if it doesn’t provide a good return on in- So far, from the standpoint of government, the vestment. There’s a body of research accumulat- examples indicate the need to rethink what con- ing that shows why. Advertising, it turns out, is stitutes permissible advertising. It gets worse, effective because people tune it out. From a 1999 though. Advertising is as successful at steering paper on “When an Ad’s Influence Is Beyond Our political choices [200] as it is at steering consump- Conscious Control” [73] : tion. An interested party, Americans for Cam- paign Reform, has actually done the hard labor of Further, all four studies provide strong plowing through years’ worth of data on spend- evidence that the response bias caused by ing for and winning US Representatives’ seats be- incidental ad exposure is due to uncon- tween 1992 and 2006. What they don’t make ex- scious influences—advertised products plicit in “Does Money Buy Elections?” [201] is that were more likely to be included in a con- most of the money is spent on advertising, aka sideration set even when subjects were ex- “wholesale mass media communication,” and plicitly trying to avoid choosing products that were depicted in the ads. that “name recognition” means only the same fuzzy feeling of familiarity noted above. It does not mean awareness of a candidate’s past actions Note that. “More likely [to be considered] … even or their implications for the future. when subjects were explicitly trying to avoid choos- ing products that were depicted in the ads.” For the typical non-incumbent candi- That is not an isolated finding. Parents are un- [197] date, pursuing a combination of retail aware of how much their children steer their grassroots campaigning and wholesale buying choices. (And you can bet your last dollar mass media communication is the only vi- that the children aren’t spending time paying at- able means of obtaining the level of name tention to the effect of ads on them.) People who recognition that is required for voters to were deciding between buying French or German
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 97
take note. … But few non-incumbent candi- political process. Voter information: yes. Debates dates ever reach the competitive threshold (real ones): yes. Advertising: no. This is true in a [of spending]. [Pegged at $700,000]. Incum- system with elections, but it’s no less true for a bents, by contrast, enjoy a range of institu- tional advantages … [and] require relatively system with unelections. In politics, negative ad- less campaign spending than non-incum- vertising works better than positive, so ads could bents to mount a credible campaign, even have an even more pernicious effect where the as their demonstrated ability to raise funds voters’ function is essentially negative. A system far exceeds that of the average challenger. of government premised on rational choice has to run on appeals to reason, not on fake familiari- Likewise and even more starkly, they look at ty or manufactured adrenalin spikes. all New York State races in 2000 [202] . Interesting- But even outside of government, advertising ly, ACR comes to the conclusion that campaigns works, which means it’s a problem. It’s assumed should receive funding so that everyone can to do nothing but draw attention to choices peo- reach the competitive threshold. The obvious im- ple would have made anyway, maybe more slow- plication that advertising influences voting is too ly. It is assumed, in effect, that it does not work. distasteful to be addressed. But in a market system based on rational choice, However, Da Silveira and De Mello (2008) [203] that is the very thing ads undercut. That makes it (pdf) look at the relationship directly. They use a form of market manipulation. It is not playing Brazilian data which allows easier comparison of by the rules. And that makes even non-political amounts and effects due to their campaign fund- advertising very much the business of govern- ing laws. The correlation is so consistent they ment. were able to put numbers on it: “We find that a That said, and although market manipulation one percentage point increase in TV time causes is categorically off-limits, it’s hard to say what ex- a 0.247 percentage point increase in votes.” actly is the appropriate place for advertising in Da Silveira and De Mello also destroy the com- commerce. There’s nothing wrong with drawing forting thought that correlation does not demon- attention to products. But there is something strate causation in this case. It is the only vari- wrong with stepping over that line and pulling able that changes between general and runoff people’s strings. Finding that line requires much elections that involve the same candidates and more research than we currently have on adver- the same voters a few weeks later. tising and degrees of subrational manipulation. Contrary to that finding, Meg Whitman’s high Although there are mountains of research on ad- profile attempt to buy the California governor- vertising, most of it studies effectiveness from ship in 2010 through advertising is certainly one the standpoint of advertisers rather than fairness. attempt that failed. Despite spending over one Standards for what it means to be non-manipula- hundred sixty million dollars of her own fortune, tive would have to be identified. They’d have to she lost against Jerry Brown’s thirty million or so. include all the various quasi-ads such as sponsor- As a California voter myself, I feel that’s down to ship, product placement, trial products, as well our general intelligence. More seriously, the real as ordinary paid ads. message is that the occasional contrasting data Even without research, some of the more egre- point doesn’t change the overwhelming direction gious practices are rather obviously unaccept- of the evidence. able. One example is a business model pushing The first step to dealing with the problem of “free” products in return for ad-induced mind advertising is acknowledging that there is one, no share. That model simply wouldn’t pay off with- matter how much that hurts the need to feel out manipulating consumers. If it did, there we’re in control. The fact is that plain old brain- would be no need for companies like Google to less repetition, especially if there’s also a reso- expend the energy they do tracking every single nant feeling, will generate enough votes to swing user click forever, or, worse yet, invading privacy enough districts to make democracy meaning- to have an even larger pool of data for targeted less. ads. Information is the same regardless who’s Advertising simply cannot be any part of the looking at it, but suggestion only works on the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 98 suggestible. A model that depends on manipula- ment about whether income inequality causes tion is not legitimate in a fair society. bad things or bad things cause inequality. That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the processes at work. Societies are organic struc- Prices and Incomes tures, not linear and mechanical. Everything in At the extremes of low and high, the amount them works together and simultaneously. paid for both goods and work can reflect market Whether corruption causes inequality or vice ver- power rather than worth. I’ll discuss minimum sa is immaterial. Once started (and they can start and living wages in the last section. The govern- by any route), they’ll reinforce each other, and ment also has a role in counteracting pricing or the cure can come from any side. Ideally, it incomes that are based on taking whatever some- comes from all sides at once. Arguing that the one will pay for it. Contrary to popular belief, process should consider equalization of incomes that is not a simple matter of supply and de- last, if at all, is almost always symptomatic of mand. Except in the case of some entertainment wanting wealth more than justice. celebrities (which includes sports), stratospheric Economically, vast compensation is associated compensation almost always depends on the with reduced performance [205] . Interestingly, ability to set — or at least heavily influence — those results are evident [206] even when the one’s own pay. Disproportionate prices of con- comparison includes only other executives, i.e. sumer goods almost always depend on excessive “industry standard” peer groups, which ignores market share or some monopoly-related practice. the already inflated industry averages in the US. A Both of these are a departure from the level play- more useful comparison is to workers’ wages. A ing field markets are supposed to depend on, and 2002 NPR report [207] , showed that executive both therefore need government regulation. salaries 11 to 20 times larger than workers’ wages Paying ridiculously high compensation can’t are considered ample in most of the developed be justified on either philosophical or practical world. Then there’s the US, which approaches grounds, even though it’s true that some people 500 times. That multiple did nothing but grow af- are worth vastly more than others to the rest of ter 2002 until these worth-any-price executives humanity. People like Mother Teresa, Bishop Tu- had to be bailed out by the government. tu, the Dalai Lama, Shirin Ebadi, Einstein, Ros- Incomes need to be capped for the greater alind Franklyn, P. G. Wodehouse, Mother Jones, good just as company size needs to be limited for Wycyslava Szymborska, in different ways and for the same reason. Excessive incomes are a sign of different reasons really do have more to offer structural imbalance. What, exactly, is “exces- than the rest of us. But that has almost nothing sive” can be approximated based on research and to do with how much money they make. In terms practice. If upper echelon total compensation is of the sorts of things that can be measured and paid tied to worker pay then the incentives are in for, nobody is worth hundreds of times more place for sustained equitability. than anyone else. The skills of an outstanding The incentive structure is vitally important manager are worth more to a company than and must be continually and critically reevaluat- those of a mail room clerk, but only somewhat ed. For instance, an obscure rule change by the more. SEC in 1993 limited to $1 million the deductibility Severe financial inequality accompanies corro- of executive pay as a cost to the corporation, un- sive social consequences. Large income inequality less the compensation was performance-related. is associated with decreased social cohesion, in- A sensible rule, since otherwise all profits could creased corruption, and poorly run governments. simply be “disappeared” into executive pay. And The evidence is everywhere, whether the compar- yet, it resulted in an avalanche of payment meth- ison is between countries or within them. (Just ods defined as performance-related not-salary one source, Conscience of a Liberal, Krugman, when neither was true. These forms of compen- 2007 [204] , with reference to a library’s worth of sation had a good deal to do with some of the fi- others.) nancial exotica that led to the crash. In a system At this point it’s customary to get into an argu- with enough transparency to make such prac-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 99 tices publicly visible and actionable, and with than 95%. (If the cost of government and its pro- alert regulators who could be recalled if they’re grams is about 33% overall, and if one agrees that asleep on the job, it’s to be hoped that issues like poorer people pay a proportionately smaller this would be handled within a year or two of ap- share, then it follows that the top rate for busi- pearing. If those factors aren’t enough, further nesses or people would be around 60%, if the measures need to be put into place to prevent cost of government was the only factor.) Thus, problems from growing. the one way to be ridiculously rich is to create The final line of defense against excessive in- something that many people want or need. Possi- come inequality is a progressive tax system. At bly, that means there would be lots of would-be the upper reaches, taxes at 95% will prevent the artists and inventors in the fair world I’m imagin- most acquisitive from making much headway. ing. Some of them might even produce some- Yes, that will reduce the desire to “work hard” to thing worthwhile. make more money. That’s the whole point. That Estate taxes are a significant way of spreading desire at that level has corrosive consequences the wealth in some countries, but they are hard for other people and, it could be argued, also for to justify. Taxes have already been paid on the ac- the individuals themselves. cumulated wealth, so further taxes are double However, don’t get me wrong. I’m a great be- taxation of the same person, even if they are now liever in the value of having plenty of people of dead. Instead, taxes should be calculated from independent means in a society. Most of them the standpoint of recipients, that is, based on may be Bertie Woosters [208] , but a few of them what their new financial standing is. A very large are Charles Darwins, Lady Ada Lovelaces [209] , or sum left to one person would be subject to a high George Hales [210] . Their contributions are im- tax because the person would suddenly have a mense and likely wouldn’t have happened if huge income. (Whether earned or unearned, the they’d needed somebody else’s approval for amount is what matters.) However, a large sum funds. So I emphatically do not think that taxa- divided among many people would be taxed tion should make it impossible to live on un- based on what they owe, which would vary based earned income. I do think that it should be high on their wealth. Again, trying to deal with this is- enough to prevent unearned income from grow- sue fairly leads to incentives that would tend to ing without limits or from exceeding the top ac- spread the wealth, which is a good thing. ceptable compensation for high earners such as Prices of goods, as opposed to people’s work, executives. Having independent means is fine; be- is another area where the amount paid can be far ing a billionaire is socially corrosive. The idea over or under what’s dictated purely by market throughout is that some income inequality is forces. okay, but only within limits, and that those limits Subsidies are one distorting influence. They should be enforced by making it structurally diffi- get built into the price of the product and further cult to exceed them, by taxation and/or by what- skew the price of competing products until all ever works most effectively with the least fric- purchase decisions have to be irrational to make tion. money. Decisions based on factors other than re- I see one exception to the rule that incomes ality are not sustainable. Take energy, for exam- should not grow without limits. People whose ple. Nuclear energy has many subsidies, explicit contributions to others are incalculable should and implicit. Without just one of them, the gov- benefit by their deeds. In other words, inventors, ernment guarantee and limitation of their insur- artists, entertainers, and similar people whom ance liabilities, the companies making the deci- the public pays as it enjoys the result of their sions would be exposed to the inherent risks. De- work aren’t in the same class as the rest of us. cision-making about whether to use nuclear pow- Progressive taxation should still apply, but the er would suddenly become much more reality top rate would not be used to promote an equi- based. Fossil fuels get a huge implicit subsidy table ceiling. It would be based only on carrying a from the military expense of acquiring and de- fair share of government costs, something that fending access to the raw materials. Housing would be in the neighborhood of 50-60% rather subsidies in the US benefit owners but not
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 100 renters. The mortgage interest deduction is so thoroughly baked into house prices at this point that cancelling it would lead to (another) implo- Pricing of basics sion in house prices. Meanwhile, the inflated price makes it that much more difficult for Necessities are in a class by themselves, more renters should they want to become buyers. A or less the converse of ultra-luxury goods. Every- fair government can certainly help people, but it body depends on them and access to them is very can’t help some people at the expense of others. much a matter of fairness. Some of them, like Nor should it or anyone else distort the market light and air, we don’t think of in terms of money away from level. (yet). They’re part of the commons, but as an un- Pricing can be drastically irrational in some examined assumption rather than as policy. If very limited areas that don’t concern most peo- someone figures out how to monetize them, ple. Artwork, custom made goods, ultra-luxury there’s nothing to stop them, no matter how goods, all sorts of things that most people never wrong it feels. And it is wrong. Demanding mon- buy, are outside the scope of this discussion. Pay- ey in exchange for not choking off life can never ing thousands of dollars for diamond-studded be right. phones and the like may be foolish, but the First, what are the necessities? Light, air, and things are more akin to jewelry than to consumer water are the easy ones. In the natural state, goods in the ordinary sense. Their prices affect they’re usable without any processing, so they only a few volunteers, so to speak, and don’t must be free. Nobody can rightfully ruin them or have much to do with fairness. limit them and then charge others for access to I see information as a major tool toward the usable form. In some far future world, no- achieving fair pricing. (Together with the fact body could put up solar screens in space and that advertising has to have a circumscribed role then charge regions for sunlight. In a not-so-fu- as discussed in that section, and could not be ture world, breathing stations necessitated by used to gin up irrational demand.) I’ve mentioned bad air pollution would have to be provided free, that the cost of production has to be listed with paid for by the people ruining the air. price at all times. I’ve also mentioned that find- It can never be acceptable to allow a resource ing comparative information should be as simple to be ruined, and then to charge for not ruining as the process of buying a product. Armed with it, whether or not the underlying thing is essen- both information and the rules promoting com- tial to life or not. For example, airlines make seat petition, unjustifiably high prices should not be a sizes too small to allow normal movement, and problem. then charge for enough space to accommodate Unjustifiably low prices, however, might be. If the passenger’s knees. Or the similarly odious, too many people enter what seems to be a lucra- but as-yet unrealized, concept of allowing cell- tive opportunity at once and competition be- phones and then charging people to avoid the comes so strong that everyone is operating on noise pollution of those creating it. (Even worse: paper-thin margins, then nobody can make a rea- charging for the privilege to use cellphones and sonable living. To prevent that, just as the prac- charging others to sit as far away as possible.) tice of “dumping” by underpricing goods is illegal That sort of thing is nothing but a variant on the now, likewise selling goods or services for less gangster practice of demanding money not to than will yield a living in the long term should be break someone’s bones. It’s criminal for them, illegal also. That’s necessarily another approxi- and it’s criminal for everyone else. mated number, but as with all of them, the best Water is a vital resource that holds a position estimate is better than no estimate. If sellers can halfway between the free essentials and the ones show a regulator that their prices are lower than we’re used to paying for because it generally that because they’ve found better ways of operat- needs to be delivered to the point of use. A deliv- ing, that is they can make a living at the lower ery price can be charged at cost, but a substance prices, then the estimate gets lowered instead of which is a daily necessity for everyone and which the price being raised. cannot be stored in significant quantities by most
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 101 people cannot become a source of profit. No- stipulating that the guilty party’s assets are first body’s life can be bought and sold, either directly in line for any recovery of damages should be or indirectly by acquiring a chokehold on an es- even more motivating toward acting for the sential. Chokeholds cannot be applied without greatest good of the greatest number. Any citizen double standards. could bring a suit to that end, since it affects a Nor is there any way to have a sustainable basic right. They would only have to show that competitive free market in absolute necessities the regulator acted contrary to the knowledge- like air and water. Controlling that kind of neces- able consensus at the time of the beneficial sity confers a completely unbalanced amount of course of action. power, and sooner or later somebody will take The biggest changes would be in real estate advantage of it. The only solution is to keep these and housing. Those are now entirely market com- things out of markets altogether. They cannot be modities, but that framework makes sense only bought and sold. They can be municipal utilities at the upper end of the market. Land, for in- if they need to be delivered, such as air on a stance, is a resource more like air and sunlight space station, but they cannot be traded. than food or housing. Human labor doesn’t pro- Which brings the discussion to food and hous- duce it. Except in terms of improving top soil, we ing. At the basic level, they’re absolute necessi- don’t create it. It differs only in its scarcity, but ties. But they also have to be produced by some- that, unfortunately, is enough. one as well as distributed. And it’s not self-evi- There is a finite amount of land to go around, dent where to draw the line for less-than-basic so there has to be a way to distribute it. For thou- levels of these things. The situation is unavoid- sands of years that’s been done by buying, selling, ably self-contradictory: food and housing have to and holding title. There’s nothing wrong with cost something in money or labor, and yet it is that so long as the first consideration is fair access the deepest kind of unfairness to let anyone die rather than market forces, as is appropriate for for lack of them. an essential and pre-existing resource. At the Where and how to draw the lines with respect smallholder end of the scale, the distribution to both food and housing is something that re- model needs to be more like a public water utility quires input from experts and social decisions than a stock market. The underlying substance about how far above bare survival the basic ac- doesn’t have a price. The charges don’t include ceptable minimum lies. The important point here profits. The cost is the living wages for the people is that the line exists, which means the prices of administering the equitable distribution of the re- some types of housing and food are not just a source. concern of markets. They have more to do with The basis of a right to land is not, emphatically fairness than markets at the very basic level of not, that everyone gets their slice of the Earth’s the right to live. acreage. It’s that land is primarily an unownable The fairness component of access to basic ne- resource, and that people have a right to enough cessities has several implications for government of it to live. They can’t be charged for something action. The price ceiling for basic food and hous- that nobody had a right to put fences on to begin ing would be subject to special scrutiny by regu- with. In case my meaning isn’t clear, imagine an lators that other goods wouldn’t have. That ceil- analogous case with air. If someone sucked all ing would have to be identified and, if need be, the air off the planet, and then charged each of enforced. Profiteering would be a crime at all us to feed it back, we’d feel they had no right to times, not just during war or disaster. do that. And they don’t. It’s the same with land. It also means the government, that is, the reg- Using it to live doesn’t give anyone the right to ulators in it, have the responsibility of ensuring more than they need, or to sell their “share” to an economy where nobody suffers hunger or somebody who needs more, or to ruin it. It homelessness (barring natural disasters). Regula- means only that in the same way as we take air tors who egregiously allowed structural imbal- for granted and expect to have enough to ances to develop that condemned some people to breathe, we should be able to take our right to the edge of survival would be fired. The clause land for granted and expect to have enough to
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 102 live. even an allusion to any kind of under the table The clause about having no right to ruin the compensation, then the bribed party would be land is important. Also, since the right derives awarded triple that amount out of the briber’s as- from the right to live, it has to actually be used sets. for that purpose in order to have a right to it. So, The fact that smallholder land is handled like a one has a right to the plot of land around one’s public utility instead of a commodity would have primary house, or to an allotment (community the most far-reaching consequences in countries garden in the US), or to a subsistence farm. One where subsistence or small-scale agriculture was doesn’t have a right to a farm if one isn’t a important. A right to enough land to live on farmer. One doesn’t have a right to an allotment would help to make life more secure there. In ar- if one doesn’t use it. And people who do use land, eas where most people are not farmers, the right whether as suburbanites or growers, must keep it to land has less direct application. It would mean in at least the same condition as when they start- the land under someone’s primary house couldn’t ed. Those are basically the rules that govern allot- be priced higher based on its location. The prima- ments, at least in Great Britain, and something ry determinant of the price of housing becomes similar to that should be generalized. the building, which is not unlike the current situ- The point about using land well needs to be ation in many parts of developed countries. stressed. Zimbabwe has recently taught everyone Unlike land, labor is by far the largest factor in what happens when it isn’t. They redistributed producing housing. On the one hand that makes land from large farmers to landless citizens. In it tradeable, like other measurable goods pro- principle, it needed to be done (although they duced by people. On the other hand shelter is an didn’t ease the transition for the large farmers absolute necessity, like food, so even though it’s nearly enough, but that’s another topic). Then it tradeable, it has to have strict ceilings at the low turned out that many of the newly minted farm- end. At the level of basic needs it’s a right, not a ers didn’t want to be farmers. They just wanted market commodity. At the opposite end of the ownership and/or money. Some did want to farm, scale, it can fall into the same class as diamond- but no longer knew how, or knew but had no studded watches. Where to draw the line for ba- tools. Available help, such as tractors or fertilizer sic housing, “normal” housing, and luxury is, as I sat in warehouses. Meanwhile, ministers snapped mentioned earlier, something that needs expert up land at bargain basement prices from the new study and social decisions appropriate to local owners who wanted money, not farms. The re- levels of technology and custom. sult was that in the span of a few years a very fer- In one respect, housing is unlike food. It regu- tile country didn’t produce enough food to feed larly goes through boom and bust cycles, where- itself. Obviously, that is not the idea behind hav- as food tends to do that only during famine or ing a right to land. The point is to have some- war. We’re so used to seeing speculation on real thing like the allotment system, writ large. estate, it feels normal. But it shouldn’t. Specula- If smallholder land can only be transferred at tion in a life necessity is profiteering, and it’s not the price of the administrative costs, then the right at any time. Thus, even though luxury hous- biggest threat to the system is likely to be cheat- ing, like museum pieces, would fall outside the ing. People will start demanding undercover pay- usual scrutiny of price, all other classes would ments. The penalties for cheating have to be dra- not. Housing is a right for all people. Even though conian enough to overmatch the desire for short- society is not under an obligation to provide cuts. Markets in organs for transplant, for in- more-than-adequate shelter, it is under an obliga- stance, are suppressed with serious and enforced tion to prevent structural changes which could penalties. The same would have to be true of threaten basic rights. Speculation in housing sets smallholder land. An example of a possible pre- up precisely that kind of instability and cannot be ventive measure might be to allow surreptitious allowed. recording of land transfer negotiations. The nego- Preventing speculation is not difficult. For in- tiators wouldn’t know whether their words were stance, tax treatment of gains or losses on sec- being preserved for posterity or not. If there was ond houses, or on those sold within a few years
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 103 of purchase, is enough to tamp down much of lished by Los Angeles for airport workers was ap- the excitement by itself. Commercial real estate proximately $23,400 in 2009 ($11.25 per hour) is, by definition, not a luxury since it’s involved in raised to $29,640 ($14.25) in 2010 . people’s livings, so it would be bound by the However, if you add up the expected expenses same rules. for a person in the area, taken, for instance, from Markets cannot be laws unto themselves in an the amounts the IRS [213] will allow a delinquent equitable society. They must participate in the taxpayer and fair market rent [214] tables available same framework of rights that delimit acceptable from HUD, even $29,000 a year is low. The costs behavior in all fields. That implies perhaps the are approximately $14,000 for rent for a one-bed- largest departure from current practice when it room or studio apartment; $2400 for utilities; comes to the pricing and distribution of goods $6300 for food, personal care, and clothing; trans- necessary for basic needs. portation is $6000 (which assumes paying off or saving for a new car on an ongoing basis since there is no public transportation worthy of the Labor name here); medical, dental, and vision expenses are $720 a year. That’s $29,420 so far, for one per- Pay and hours worked are vital to everyone, son. That person has to have this amount after even when the rest of economics or finance taxes, which means making around $35,000 be- seems remote and theoretical. It’s another area fore taxes. where regulation (or the lack of it) and market That sum doesn’t include any expenses for a forces interact. Pay depends on supply and de- dependent child, such as food, medical costs, mand, but it also depends on regulation. If there school fees, clothing, nor does it include phone are minimum wage laws, businesses pay at least costs or internet access, if any. Allowances for a the minimum wage (unless they can skirt the child, for instance according to USDA calcula- [215] law). If there are no labor laws, people are quite tions for the LA area, are near $12,000 per capable of making others work constantly from year for one child. To have $42,000 after taxes re- the earliest age. If there are laws, businesses find quires a wage of around $50,000 before taxes. [214] themselves able to make a profit with less ex- The Universal Living Wage organization ploitation. They say they can’t — all the way back uses slightly less round numbers than I do and to Dickens’ Bounderby they’ve been saying they estimates the local living wage at $46488. The ex- can’t — and then after the new regulation is ample is from the area where I live, and I can passed, they make more money than ever. All vouch for the fact that it would require careful that twaddle needs to be ignored. A more useful attention to the pennies not to go over the procedure is to figure out what’s right, then amounts listed. You’ll notice that the estimates what’s possible, and to see where they overlap. don’t include money for toys, books, movies, or What’s right isn’t difficult. It’s in Roosevelt’s the occasional holiday. $50,000 ($24/hr) is what it Second Bill of Rights [211] , and it’s in the UN Dec- takes for one parent and one child to live without laration of Human Rights [212] . Everybody has the extravagance and without money worries in ur- right to freedom from want, and sufficient means ban southern California. If you’re shocked at how to develop and fulfill their own potential to the far away we are from a living wage, you should extent they desire. The first takes a basic level of be. money, the second also takes time. In the low-cost rural parts of the country, Calculations of living wages are easy to find where a minority lives, a living wage can be as for many cities, mainly because cities have real- low as $8 per hour. Remember that the federal ized that the costs fall on their budget when em- minimum wage is supposed to be enough to sup- ployers can pay workers too little to live. That port a family of four, not one. Even in rural areas, means cities have to estimate living wages so except for singles, it doesn’t approach a living they can pass ordinances requiring them. Thus, wage. The US national average living wage is said [216] for example, the current federal US minimum to be around $12/hr for one person working wage is $15080 per year, but a living wage estab- 40 hours per week.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 104
For those wondering about the effect on busi- regulations to stagger parents’ hours on request, ness of paying a lot more than minimum wage, a 24-hour work week would solve many child actual studies don’t find damage, let alone care issues in two parent families without either threats to survival. For instance, a study [217] at parent being run ragged. That is not a minor mat- San Francisco’s airport, where wages jumped to ter. Parental involvement is the single biggest fac- $10/hr, an increase of 30% or more, found that tor in a child’s eventual growth into a contented turnover was much reduced and improved work- and productive adult. It has huge social implica- er morale led to measurably greater work effort. tions, and it’s main facilitating factor is time. Any The result was that the cost to employers of the society that cares about sustainability will make much higher wages was 0.7% of revenue. sure that the parents among them have that The next question is how much time it should time. It also solves some child care issues with- take to make a living. What’s customary is not out assuming the presence of a third class of peo- necessarily the best yardstick. In 1850, it was nor- ple, such as grandmothers or nannies. In a coun- mal to work about 11 hours per day, 6 days per try with true living wages, nannies would be far week [218] . In the US, improvement stopped in the too expensive for almost everybody in any case. 1950s and the work week has been 40 hours per The flexibility of hours per work day could also week ever since. In France, it is currently 35 be useful in jobs that require constant and per- hours per week. Hunter-gatherer tribes have been fect focus, which is impossible to maintain for estimated to spend about 24 hours per week [219] eight hours. For jobs such as air traffic con- keeping body and soul together. There is much trollers, it would be better for everyone if shifts dispute about that, since it’s hard to define were four hours long (with the requisite break(s) “work” in a comparable way for hunter-gather- within the shift). ers. However, the quibbles are on the order of a One likely consequence of a 24-hour work few hours here or there. There seems to be broad week is that plenty of people would try to have agreement that they work much less than more two or even three jobs. However, a system of developed societies. shorter hours and higher pay means that in- Since longer work weeks are already well comes would be more equal than they are now. known, the 24 hour work week is interesting to That would mean only a few people could have think about. Speaking somewhat facetiously (but double jobs without depriving others of work. So, only somewhat!) we should be able to do better while there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with than hunter-gatherers or else how can we claim people working themselves silly, assuming they progress? don’t have children, it can’t come at the expense Twenty four hours, specifically, not 25 or 26, of a livelihood for others. Acquiring double or has advantages because the number is divisible even triple jobs should only be permitted when so many ways. That could allow for great flexibili- there’s enough of a labor shortage that there are ty in scheduling. Four, six, eight, twelve hour days no other people to fill the positions. are all possible in work weeks of six, four, three, Having envisioned the levels of wages and or two days. That would allow individuals to have work time that are consistent with the imple- many options, always desirable in a society trying mentation of the right to a living and the pursuit to preserve the maximum freedom compatible of happiness, the next step is to see how close we with the same degree in others. can come to that in the realm of the possible. It would allow people to continue their educa- One thought experiment is to see what the tions and have other interests besides work. For hourly wage would be if income were distributed many people, that might result in nothing more completely equally. Perfect equality is never going than an expanded social life — in itself a good to happen and is not even desirable because peo- thing — but a few would do interesting and other ple have different goals and abilities, but it does socially enriching things with their time. Having show the highest income level an economy could time is at least as important as money for the support for everyone equally under current con- flowering of creativity. ditions. If the living wage is higher than that, it Perhaps most important, assuming there are would bankrupt the economy. If lower, it might
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 105 redistribute income, but it is not impractical. wage is $0.58 per hour [225] (approx. $1200 per I’ll use the US as an example again. Figures are year). If there’s a similar relationship between readily available [220] . In 2007, there were 139.3 minimum and living wages there as in the US, million tax returns filed [221] and the reported the amount needs to be quadrupled or quintu- amount earned by all was around 7.9 trillion. pled. So, a living wage might be around $6000, or That includes government payments like unem- $5/hr in a 24-hour workweek. That’s much less ployment, as well as rental income and unearned than $14,000. There is plenty left over to allow income from interest, dividends, and capital some people to be richer than others. gains. That works out to $56,712 per taxpayer if They’ve managed that despite being hard hit the income wealth of the country were spread by the AIDS epidemic. The government, not just evenly among all earners. That would be a na- charities or the medical profession, have tried to tional average of $45.44/hr for a 24 hour work take action against it [226] (pdf). Given the scale of week. the disaster, it shows that coordinated and rea- A national average living wage of $20/hr for a sonable government action makes a big differ- 24 hour week, or $25,000 per person per year, is ence. less than half of the theoretical equal distribu- Although I’m using Botswana as an example, tion. It would come nowhere near bankrupting I’m not saying the people there are saints. There’s the economy. It would even allow plenty of room plenty of sexism, up to and including ignored lev- for some people to earn far more than others. els of gender violence, and other problems. They There’s no question that a living wage earned are not totally unlike their neighbors. What they over 24 hours per week would require different show is the level of dividends paid by any priorities than our current ones and that it would progress toward justice, even when it’s not per- redistribute income, but that’s different from say- fect. ing it’s impossible. In that, it’s just like so many The biggest problems in very poor countries, other characteristics of a fair society: It’s so far those where ensuring better-than-starvation in- from our current situation, it looks unreal. comes for all people is literally beyond the scope It goes without saying, but I’ll say it anyway, of the economy, are corruption and fighting [227] . that the amount of money needs to be trans- Consider Kenya [228] as a not-too-extreme exam- posed to a lower or higher key depending on lo- ple. They have resources, fertile land, and a large cal economic conditions — at least until the and generally educated population. But the na- whole planet has one smoothly running econo- tional income, evenly spread, could not provide my. Poorer countries have lower costs of living even $3 per day per person ($1095 per year). And and lower pay, but if income is not concentrated yet, forty years ago they were one of the richer in a tiny elite, not-rich does not equal poverty- countries in Africa. Kenya is far from the worst stricken. Take Botswana [222] , as an interesting ex- country in the world when it comes to corrup- ample. They have some mineral wealth (e.g. dia- tion and war, and yet it’s been enough to beggar monds), but then, so does Congo [223] (DRC) them. I know colonialism didn’t help. But oppres- whose GDP (using purchasing power parity per sion or the extraction of resources is not the capita) is about 2% of Botswana’s. About three hardest thing to recover from. The hardest thing quarters of Botswana is the Kalahari desert. It’s a is catching the corrupting illusion that raw pow- small country with some resources, not a lot, er, whether military or financial, brings benefits that doesn’t trade oil or drugs. What they do have and that justice is a loser’s game. Whereas in re- going for them is low levels of corruption [224] . ality it’s the other way around. The country was one of the poorest at inde- The point I’d like to stress is that even in coun- pendence nearly 50 years ago. Now they have a tries without great wealth, the resources of the GDP in purchasing power equivalents of $25 bil- people can give all citizens a life free from abject lion and a population of two million. Assuming poverty, preventable disease, and job-disqualify- the same proportion of earners and income as a ing ignorance. It just requires a lot less greed and proportion of GDP as the US, equally distributed corruption on the part of the elites. In other income would be $14,000 per year. The minimum words, the problems in poor countries are not
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 106 different from the ones in rich countries. The or a national guard, or something like the Civilian consequences of the same basic cause are just Conservation Corps. Most of the people working more stark. in it would be ordinary workers, but because it is Last, there’s the issue of people who aren’t a government agency, it could also serve as the working. They fall into three categories that need place for people who were unemployable on the different approaches. The temporarily unem- open market. (It’s much the same de facto pat- ployed are easily addressed using much the same tern as the military has now.) methods as are already familiar. A tax (or insur- A civilian work corps could take on the tasks ance, if you want to call it that) is subtracted perennially in need of labor: planting trees, deliv- from all earnings, and paid out as the need arises. ering meals-on-wheels, maintaining city parks, Likewise, we already know how to address the in- and so on. On the principle that anything which ability to work due to physical or mental disabili- can be voluntary should be, people in the pro- ty. They’re paid the same way as retirees, which gram could volunteer, to the extent possible, for I’ll discuss in the chapter on Care [229] . The last the jobs congenial to them. The work week group is the problem. There are people, and would be the same length as for everyone, which they’re common enough that almost everybody would leave time for voluntary training pro- knows someone in the category, who are normal grams. Such programs would allow people who in every way except the ability to support them- might have simply not found their niche in life to selves. The shiftless are not unemployed. They’re do so. The civilian work corps could have a range unemployable. There’s a difference, and attempt- of options for housing, from the ordinary situa- ing to pretend their situation is temporary wastes tion of people living on their own and coming in everyone’s money and energy. to work, to halfway houses, to dormitories and However, no matter how true that is, it goes meals in cafeterias. People wouldn’t have to have against the grain for almost everybody to pay the trouble organizing their lives to choose the latter shiftless a guaranteed annual income and not options, but they’d be there for those who did. worry about it. Possibly, if there’s a real need for There would inevitably be some people whose a non-zero proportion of people with bare sur- labor was so worthless it didn’t even cover the vival incomes to keep inflation down, then the cost of their room and board, or who were more non-workers could be that group. That’s also sim- trouble to oversee than they were worth. That’s ilar to the current system, except that I see it as why this has to be a government function: to being explicit and the members of that group support those who can’t hold up their own end. take on the poverty because they prefer it to As to how people take part in this program, I working. However, assuming true full employ- think most of it would be self-sorting. People ment is not in fact incompatible with a non-infla- who need extra structure in their lives, tend to tionary economy, then the problem of non-work- gravitate to the situations that provide it. Those ers who don’t want employment remains. who didn’t, those who kept being thrown out for Religious orders and the military have tradi- nonpayment of rent, who were picked up repeat- tionally been the social service agencies for peo- edly for being intoxicated in public places, who ple who need outside discipline to manage their one way or another made themselves a burden lives. The military would no longer be large on others with no record of subsequently making enough, unfocused enough, or unskilled enough amends, they could be “drafted,” as it were, and in the world I’m envisioning to serve that pur- prevented from being as much of a burden in the pose. Religious orders are outside the scope of future. government and couldn’t be relied on to solve so- cial problems. But an institution whose explicit - + - purpose is to provide a regulated environment in exchange for work could well be a facet of gov- ernment. The role of government in the economy is the A government always needs a work corps, same as everywhere else: to ensure there are no whether they use the military for that purpose, abuses of power and therefore no concentrations of power, and to ensure there are no double stan-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 107 dards. The consequences of consistently applying ed, if not lost. The rewards for human happiness those principles to money and work require big would be incalculable. Applying fairness to changes compared to all current systems, from economies depends largely on whether people much stricter regulation of inflation, deflation, want money or goods, in the literal meaning of interest, and competition, to a living wage that the word. requires a more equitable distribution of income. The ability to make vast fortunes would be limit- + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 108
Care
There are many questions about the extent of the whole group. I’d argue that means all human- people’s duty to care for each other, but the exis- ity, but we don’t have coordination on a plane- tence of the duty is a foregone conclusion. Al- tary scale yet. The largest group currently able to most nobody, now or in the past, abandons ill or distribute benefits and costs consistently is the disabled members of their group. If they do, nation. It’s simple fairness to extend care to the they’re viewed as despicable subhumans. whole group because anything else requires a Scientists, with their intense belief in the ab- double standard: one rule for me and another sence of a free lunch, explain that behavior by rule for others. Everybody in a position to do so noting that overall group survival must be im- takes whatever help they need if they’re facing proved. That’s a bit like saying water is wet. If a disease or death. Everybody, at the time, feels costly trait, like helping others, does not help sur- help is a human right. If it’s a human right for vival, those creatures who have it die out. If it one, it’s a human right for all. does help, well, then they survive long enough to There’s also a practical reason why care should be around when scientists are studying the issue. be a function of government. The larger the The other evidence that it’s good for the group group over which the burden of care can be dis- is that countries with the most solid safety nets, tributed, the smaller the cost borne by any one the OECD ex-US, are also the wealthiest and individual. The proportion of GDP paid in taxes is best-run. Far from impoverishing the people be- actually lower in some countries with medical cause they’re wasting money on non-producers, care for their citizens (e.g. Australia, UK [230] ) it somehow enriches them. The clearest example than is the equivalent per capita expense in, for is perhaps Botswana, discussed in the previous instance, the US, where citizens pay more per chapter, which went from poor with no safety capita for those services and yet have poorer out- net to richer with a better safety net. In the rela- comes. (A reference [231] summarizing the previ- tionship between wealth and social safety nets, ous link.) The government is a more efficient dis- the point is not which comes first. If care comes tributor of social insurance than, in effect, requir- first, apparently that increases wealth. If wealth ing each family or small town to be its own in- comes first, providing care certainly doesn’t re- surer. It’s an analogous case to mass transit. A vil- duce it and does make life richer. lage would be crushed by the expense of building I’d argue, together with major moral philoso- a complete modern mass transit system for phers, that we also have a moral duty to each themselves alone, but when everyone pays into it other. It’s not only that our souls are hardwired the costs per individual are small and the benefits or that there’s utility to security for all. We’re so- are much greater. cial animals. Our very lives depend on the func- Providing care works best as a coordinated, tioning of our group, which makes it more than distributed, non-profit system, which is exactly churlish to refuse assistance when a unit of that the type of endeavor government is designed to group is in need. It’s cheating, a form of stealing, undertake. (Unlike defense, however, government to refuse to reciprocate for benefits already re- doesn’t have to have a monopoly on care.) ceived. I’ll spend a moment on the concept of moral The sticking point is the delimitation of the hazard (as I have in an earlier post [232] ) since it group we’re willing to care for. Everybody in- has some followers at least in the US. The idea is cludes their families. Most people include their that if someone else is paying, the normal limits immediate circle of friends and neighbors to on overspending are lifted and much money will some extent. Large numbers of people extend it be wasted. A recent example occurred in the fi- to all citizens of their countries, but even larger nancial industry. Institutions peddled much riski- numbers don’t. And some feel that way about all er instruments than they would have on their of humanity. own account because they assumed that taxpay- As a matter of fairness, care needs to extend to ers would carry major losses should they occur.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 109
Much money was wasted. So moral hazard is a early. Untreated medical problems, except when real problem. It’s just not a real problem in the they lead to immediate death, are always more realm of social insurance. expensive to treat later. Thus, it is more expensive Social insurance is for things people would to discourage people from spending other peo- rather avoid, even if someone else pays for them. ple’s money to go to doctors, counterintuitive as Nobody gets old for fun. Very few people go to that might seem. doctors by choice (unless it’s for elective cosmet- Common sense dictates the opposite because ic treatments, and those aren’t covered in any it seems obvious that paying for medical care will system). Medical visits are a chore at best, and cost more than not paying for it. So any care has one most of us avoid no matter who’s paying for to cost more than no care. And that is indeed it. Nobody says, “Gee, I think I’ll check into the true. But it misses a crucial point: it’s very hard to hospital instead of going to the beach.” So the watch people die in the street. Refusing to spend motivation to spend other people’s money is sim- any money on care for others is only cheaper if ply not there on the part of the patients. The doc- one is willing to follow it through all the way to tors can be another story [233] , but that problem the logical conclusion. Without care, some peo- is created largely by faulty reward systems. At ple will die in inconvenient places. If you can’t this point, ways of fixing those are known if peo- stand the sight and send the dying to hospital, ple actually want to end the problem rather than somebody will wind up paying. The amount will profit from it. far exceed what it would have cost to prevent the It’s also worth pointing out that the consumer problem in the first place. model of medicine is as much of a fantasy as the The common sense intuition that it’s cheaper freeloader. When people need treatment it’s not not to pay for care depends on being willing to usually a planned and researched event. Some- live in a world where people suffer and die times it’s even a desperate event. Very few pa- around you. Such places require psychological tients know which treatments are available for coping processes, mainly the invention of reasons them or which are best for their condition. There why the victims deserved their fate so that one is no way, in that case, to “shop” for the best op- can feel safer in a terrifying world. The process tion. It’s a complete misapplication of a market- necessarily feeds on itself and further blunts un- place model, which presupposes equal informa- derstanding — whether of people, of situations, tion among rational and independent actors. Pa- or of effective solutions — until there’s none left. tients are not in a position to be choosy and are The real moral hazard of social insurance is not in a dependent relationship to vastly more knowl- spending money and losing some of if it. The real edgeable experts. Basing actions on fantasy is, to hazard is withholding it and losing everything use the metaphor one more time, like jumping else. from a third floor window on the assumption one can fly. It does not end well. Two classes of patients who do cost more than Medical Care they should are hypochondriacs and malingerers. Doctors are quite good at spotting the latter, and Given that there’s a duty to care for others, the former are a microscopic expense compared how big is it? Does it have priority over all other to the costs of trying to stop them from using the needs? Would that serve any purpose? system. The answer is, of course not. The duty extends There is a simple reason for that, and it’s not to what can feasibly be provided without destroy- just because of all the expensive bureaucratic ing other essential aspects of life, given local gatekeepers. The main reason is people don’t al- technology and funds. If funds are limited, and ways know when they’re ill or how serious it is. they always are, some types of care have to be That’s why they go to the doctor. Because they given priority over others. don’t know. That means any attempt to make it Since social insurance involves spending other difficult or costly to get medical attention results people’s money, the first criterion should be us- in a significant number of people who don’t get it ing it where it brings better downstream bene-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 110
fits. That one rule indicates a well-known series people no longer feel that lethal communicable of actions that all return hundreds of times their diseases are their problem. So, it has to be under- initial cost in subsequent benefits, both to the stood that the right not to catch diseases from economy as well as to their citizens’ quality of others is of the same order as not to be harmed life. Those include maternal and neonatal care, by others generally. The powers-that-be have the clean water, safe toilet facilities, bednets in right to enforce whatever measures are needed malarial regions, vaccinations, prevention and to safeguard the public health. treatment of parasitic diseases, and preventing That said, although the mandate to safeguard disease-producing vitamin A, B and protein defi- the public health is an ethical issue, how it’s done ciencies. Using public funds to avoid much larger is a scientific and medical one. Effectiveness expenditures later is a clear case for investment, must be the primary determinant of action. Even in the literal meaning of that word. though the government has the right to compel The next tier of public health is provision of adherence to public health measures like vaccina- emergency services, then basic hospital care, and tion or quarantine, if compulsion is not effective, then full-blown medical care. Spending money on the very mandate to safeguard the public means all of these saves money down the road, but the that compulsion should not be applied. more initially expensive services may nonetheless The fact is that medical compulsion makes be out of reach for the poorest countries, even sense only under rare and unusual circum- with intelligent priorities. That is a clear signal stances, generally when there’s imminent danger for international aid, I would argue, and not only of infection for others from specific individuals for moral reasons but also for the purely practical who are uninterested in or incapable of taking one that health and disease don’t stop at borders. the necessary steps to prevent transmission. That Effective treatment of TB anywhere, for instance, situation can arise in any potentially epidemic is prevention of TB everywhere. disease, such as tuberculosis [234] or AIDS [235] . As Palliative care for the terminally ill has no fi- Bayer & Dupuis note in the linked article on TB, nancial downstream benefits, but a system with- there’s a range of effective measures from direct- out double standards will always provide it, re- ly observed ingestion of medication all the way gardless of the nation’s poverty level. An absence up to involuntary detention. The deprivation of of double standards dictates that available treat- rights must be proportional to the degree of ments to alleviate suffering must be provided. threat. So far, I’ve been discussing government in- Public health is best served when people are volvement that people welcome, even when they willing participants in the process of preventing don’t welcome paying for it. But when public disease, and the best way to enlist cooperation is health measures are compulsory, that’s much less to give them what they want. At the simplest lev- popular. A compulsory component is, however, el, that’s information, and at the most complex, essential. The right to be free from harm comes it’s treatment for the disease and assistance with very near the top in the hierarchy of rights, and a any tangential consequences. The importance of careless disease carrier can certainly spread helping rather than forcing patients is evident in harm. any public health document. For instance, the It’s become acceptable to respect people’s CDC sheet on tuberculosis treatment [236] men- rights to their own beliefs over the right to be tions coercion only in the context of increased free from harm, which shows confusion over the treatment failure due to noncompliance. Also, as relative rank of the two. Ranking a right to belief, should be obvious, high voluntary treatment ad- even when it’s not counterfactual, above the herence leads to lower costs [237] . right to be secure in one’s person will end in all Common sense plays us false again by insist- rights being meaningless … including the right to ing that it must be more expensive to persuade one’s own beliefs. Freedom isn’t possible if free- people than to dispense with all the extras and dom from harm is not assured. That’s generally just force them to shut up and take their medi- obvious to people when the threat is immediate, cine. The fallacy in that is clear with a moment’s and the confusion arises only because so many thought. A person facing what amounts to im-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 111 prisonment, or any other negative consequences, als. All of these avenues need to respect the truth. will hide their disease — and spread it — as long Requiring respect for the truth may sound like as possible. It’s far more expensive to treat an interference with the right to free speech, but I epidemic in a whole population than it is to give strongly disagree. On the contrary, necessary re- even the most expensive treatment to the few strictions actually support free speech by improv- people who start it. A person who can expect ing the signal to noise ratio. My argument is in every possible assistance will go to be tested as the chapter on Rights [103] , but the short form is quickly as possible, which costs less by orders of that people are not entitled to their own facts, magnitude than dealing with an epidemic. and that facts differ from beliefs and opinions be- (There’s also, of course, the benefit that far fewer cause they’re objectively verifiable to an accept- people take time off work, suffer, or die.) able standard of certainty. Respect for the facts Vaccination has different obstacles, but ones and its converse, a relative absence of misinfor- which it’s equally important for concerted gov- mation, together with useful information in ernment action to overcome in the interests of school that is later reinforced by wider social public health. For vaccination to be effective in messages, clears the air enough to enable people preventing epidemics of highly infectious dis- to make reality-based decisions when the need eases (as opposed to conferring individual immu- arises. Those who persist in counterfactual be- nity), a high proportion of the population must liefs become a small enough population that be immunized. The number varies based on infec- workarounds are possible. tivity and mode of transmission, but it’s on the Getting back to vaccination, specifically, the order of 95%. Then, if the disease infects a sus- question was how to handle the small minority ceptible person, the chances are it will find only of people for whom immunity is not required on immune people around that individual and be un- grounds of public health. Exemptions could be able to spread. given to those who want them, up to the maxi- That sets up an interesting dichotomy. If vacci- mum that is safe for epidemiological purposes. If nations are compulsory for the purpose of public demand is larger than that, the exemptions could health, fairness requires the rule to apply to be distributed randomly within that pool. (And it everyone equally. However, as a matter of practi- would indicate that education efforts need to be cal fact, it doesn’t matter if a few people avoid it. stepped up.) How communities handle this depends to some Other public health measures need to follow extent on how angry it makes them if some peo- the same principle. Compliance can be compulso- ple can be exceptions. The most important factor, ry when that is essential to prevent harm to oth- however, is the practical concerns around en- ers, but given the nature of people and diseases, couraging maximum cooperation. The sight of the system will work better and more cheaply if people being dragged off to be vaccinated does most compliance is willing. That means the vast nothing to educate people that immunization is majority of efforts need to be channeled toward actually a good thing to do. I would argue that ensuring that people understand the benefits of the practical considerations indicate approaching public health measures, even when they involve the issue of exceptions as tolerantly as possible, personal inconvenience or hardship. Compulsion and only employing compulsion when the public needs to be reserved for cases of criminal negli- health is endangered. In other words, education gence and endangerment. It needs to be the last about the benefits is more important than en- resort, not the first, and it needs to be limited to forcement against people who don’t get it, unless the very few actually abusing the system, not the the latter group is actually endangering others. larger number who are only afraid of it. Education about vaccination — or any other Although not usually understood as medicine, fact-based issue of public significance — has to be there are many functions of government with di- understood in its broadest sense. It’s the sum of rect effects on health. Agricultural subsidies, ur- inputs people get on the topic, whether from ban planning, and mass transit all come to mind. news reports, ads, stories, school, or, last and Urban planning may sound odd, but the layout of least, government-produced information materi- neighborhoods, the proximity of stores, the ease
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 112
of walking to mass transit, the availability of thing of the past. The decision whether or not to car-free bike routes, and the presence of parks, all be tested is still a difficult one, but also a purely have a large effect on how much walking or oth- personal one. The government’s responsibility er exercise [238] people do just in the course of ends at making sure that all tests have the pa- everyday life. That’s starting to look like an un- tient, not profit, as their focus. An adequate med- derappreciated factor [239] in maintaining public ical system would require access to useful follow health. Direct government support of exercise fa- up counseling for all tests. Allowing testing with- cilities is another example of a public health mea- out comprehension is allowing some companies sure that’s not usually included in that category. to use people’s fears to part them from their Those facilities could be public playgrounds, money. It’s hard to see how it differs from less swimming pools, playing fields, gyms, dance technical scams. schools, or just about anything that facilitates The most problematic implication of genetic movement rather than sitting. testing is that improved information about risk A problem with the current implementation of undermines the premise behind private insur- government policies that affect public health is a ance. The general idea behind insurance is that narrow definition of the field. As a result, the rel- bad things don’t happen to most people most of evance of health to policies is overlooked. An ob- the time. By taking a little bit of money from vious example in the US is corn-related subsidies. everybody, there’s enough money to tide over a They were started to get corn-state votes (not few specific people who have problems. The big- their official reason, of course), and had the eff- ger the group, the better this works. ffect of making high calorie corn-based ingredi- However, private insurance companies neces- ents cheap, which has contributed to a rise in sarily insure only a subset of the population. If calories consumed [240] , obesity, and associated the risk pool is smaller than everybody, then the diseases. Separate from the issue of whether buy- best thing a company can do to improve profits is ing corn state votes with taxpayer funds is a good to get rid of bad risks. Hence, the better the tools idea, it’s definitely a bad idea to make people sick and the more accurate the risk assessment, the in the process. Any aspect of government with a less private insurance will actually function as in- public health component needs to be examined surance, i.e. as a way of diluting risk. We can try for public health implications and implemented to patch that with regulations and fixes, but the accordingly. underlying gravity will always work in the same Moving from matters too mundane to be con- direction. Insurance companies will use testing sidered medical to those too new for their impli- to slough off bad risks. They have so much to cations to be generally appreciated, the increas- gain from a more accurate assessment of risk, ing availability of genomic information raises that I’d be willing to bet they’ll be among the ear- some fairness issues. (Discussed here [241] earlier.) liest adopters of diagnostic genome scans. In The vision is that as we learn more, we can places with private medical insurance, it won’t take preventive steps and avoid the ills we’re heir just be former cancer patients who are uninsur- to. In the ads for the first crop of genetic testing able. companies, the knowledge about disease suscep- The inescapable implication is that genetic tibility is used to apply treatment and lifestyle knowledge works to the individual’s benefit only choices that avert the worst. That’s not a hard in a national or supranational health care system. sell. Anything less, any ability to exclude some people But there are many other aspects to testing from the pool will, with improved knowledge, that are less benign. Some are personal, and end in so many exclusions that there is no pool hence not a direct concern here. For instance, and hence no real insurance. Thus, there’s yet an- what about diseases for which there is no treat- other practical reason why a national medical ment? In a system with true individual control system is not only a good idea, but a necessary over their own data (discussed under privacy [242] one. in the second chapter), concerns about informa- The most difficult question is testing for dis- tion falling into unwanted hands should be a eases which do have treatments. They force a
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 113 choice about who controls treatment decisions. real choice because any system of public univer- The obvious answer — the patient decides — is sal health care will naturally tend toward preven- easy when all parties agree. But in many cases tive measures. In a private system, the incentives they don’t. Assuming a national medical system promote the exclusion of riskier members and a funded by taxpayers, there’s a mandate not to focus on diseases because that’s where the profi- waste money. Then assume genetic testing that fits are. (Discussed at more length here [243] ). In a can accurately predict, say, heart disease risk. public system, exclusion is not an option and pre- (We’re not there yet, but we’ll inevitably get vention is cheaper than cure, so the focus is on, there some day, barring a collapse of civilization.) or will tend to, preventing disease in the first Exercise is a demonstrated way to improve heart place. That’s a very good thing, except if it’s al- health. So, should everybody exercise to save tax- lowed to run amok and trample crucial rights to payers (i.e. everybody) money? Should exercise be self-determination in the process. So, again, it’s compulsory only for those in the riskiest quintile? important not to force preventive measures on Or the riskiest half? How much exercise? Which people even though the system is — rightly — fo- exercise? Will those who refuse be given lesser cused on prevention. benefits? Or what of drugs, such as statins, that However, just because preventive measures for reduce some cardiovascular risks? If people are non-infectious diseases can’t be forced, that forced to take them, what does that do to the doesn’t mean prevention can’t be promoted. As I right to control one’s own body? And that doesn’t discussed under vaccination, fact-based informa- even touch on who’s liable if there are eventual tion can certainly be presented. Education and side effects. More broadly, do we have the right social planning that facilitate healthy living have to tell some people to lead more restrictive, to be the tools to promote prevention. healthier lives because their genes aren’t as good? What level of genetic load has to be pre- sent before prevention becomes an obligation? Retirement What happens when the medical wisdom changes about what constitutes prevention? Care of the elderly is another major area of so- The questions, all by themselves, show how cial responsibility. From one perspective, it’s the impossible the choices are. Add to that how disabilities of age that require help, which would counterproductive compulsion is in medicine, make retirement a subset of assistance to the dis- and it becomes clear that the idea of vesting abled generally. In other ways, however, retire- treatment control in anyone but the individual is ment is supposed to be a deserved rest after absurd. many decades working. Those are two separate That does mean taxpayers have to foot the bill issues. for the stupid behaviors of others, but there are The main difference between them is that two reasons why that’s a better choice than the helping the disabled is a universal social obliga- alternative. The first is that everyone, for them- tion, but providing a reward for a life well spent selves, wants to be free to live life as they see fit. really isn’t. That kind of reward also raises some Fairness demands that others be treated as we fairness issues. If the reward is a right, and rights ourselves want to be treated, so control needs to apply to everyone equally, then everyone should rest with the individual on that basis alone. The get that reward. But life span is not a known second is that the choice is not between wasting quantity. There’s no way to calculate a universally some money on the unwise or saving it for the applicable number of years’ rest per number more deserving. The choice is between wasting lived. A method that relies on the luck of the some money on the unwise or wasting vastly draw to get one’s rights may work after a fash- more on an unwieldy system of oversight. The ion, but can hardly be called fair. ridiculous endpoint is a webcam in every refriger- Retirement based on the proceeds from invest- ator and cars that won’t start if the seat senses ments is not the topic here. Obviously, anyone the driver has gained too much weight. can invest money and try to acquire independent It’s important to remember the nature of the means, but that’s not an option for everyone.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 114
Considerable starting capital is needed, or the fferent from what it is today, except for the most ability to save large sums of money over a period elderly. Much younger people in chronic poor of decades. That’s especially true in a system health could elect to retire early with medical ap- where interest rates are limited by degree of risk proval. Much older people could keep working if and wealth creation. For instance, assuming a 3% they wanted to. Mandatory retirement would not rate, one would need around $800,000 to receive be a factor, which is as it should if individual $25,000 per year, if that was the living wage [86] . A self-determination is important. person making $25,000 who had no starting capi- Retirement also does not have to be an all or tal and received 3% interest would have to save nothing system. Hours worked could be reduced somewhat over $10,000 per year to have a large gradually. People who no longer have the capabil- enough nest egg after some 40 years. Although ity to work full time could reduce their hours, that’s perhaps not physically impossible, it would and pension payments could make up the differ- preclude a family or any other interests. It is, in ence to a living wage. Where possible, there any case, not the sort of sacrifice that people should also be rules to enforce accommodation would generally choose for themselves. On the for workers who need it. That applies not only to other hand, if a person has somewhat over the elderly, but also to the disabled and to par- $200,000 to start with, then a rather high savings ents who need alternating shifts. level of $1800 per year (for retirement alone) over The proportion of people drawing pensions in 40 years will also yield $800,000. Not everyone a flexible system oriented to individual health has $200,000 to start with, and even fewer don’t might increase or decrease compared to our cur- have other pressing needs for the money before rent situation. Without access to the necessary reaching retirement. detailed information, it’s hard to tell. My guess is Self-funded, investment-based retirement is that it would reduce it quite a bit. Furthermore, available only to people with money, who can unlike a 40-hour work week, a 24-hour week [86] certainly try to follow that course. From a gov- would not exceed the stamina of a much larger ernment perspective though, when rights are the number of people. So the proportion of retirees concern, retirement based on individual invest- supported by the working population might be ment is irrelevant because it can’t be universal. smaller than under the current system. Given that there’s no social obligation to pay a I suspect that a big part of eventual resistance guaranteed annual income to able younger peo- to retirement benefits based on reduced stamina ple, it’s hard to see why there should be one to would come from the feeling that after decades able older people. However, a number of factors as wage slaves, people deserve some time of their muddy the issue. Older workers are less desirable own. In other words, it’s based on the retire- in work requiring speed or stamina. That can lead ment-as-reward model. However, I also suspect to real issues in keeping or finding work as peo- that the shorter work week would reduce the ple get older, since any job, physical or not, re- power of that model considerably. A 24-hour quires some stamina. At a certain point, and the week leaves enough time for interests besides point varies with the individual, it’s better for work and means that unsatisfying jobs occupy everyone if retirement is an option. less of one’s life. That may mean less need to re- Recognition of the reduced employability of tire just to escape a bad job or to “have a life.” the elderly could be expressed in much looser Mandatory age-specific retirement does have “disability” standards as people get older. Given one useful social function. It forces change. It that people differ, it should be a gradual scale, prevents ossified codgers from taking up valuable with a reduction in standards beginning, say, at space people require for other purposes. And, if forty and reaching completely self-defined dis- done right, it’s also good for the codgers by shak- ability at five years less than average life ex- ing them out of ruts. I’m not aware of studies pectance. In other words, the older one gets, the proving that the leavening effect of retirement is more weight is given to one’s own assessment of necessary for social health, but my guess is it’s ability to work and the less to medical input. good for us. Retirement in that system would be very diff- I suspect that would be even truer if and when
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 115 we have longer life spans. Nobody could stay ac- doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect them to tive, creative, interested, or even polite, in the save more and cushion their own transition. The same job for a hundred years. Something like the process would be much the same as the way peo- academic tradition of sabbaticals would be neces- ple plan now for lower incomes in retirement. sary for everyone. In the popular misconception, In summary, retirement under a system that those are long vacations, but in reality they in- tries to apply equally to all would look a bit diff- volve different duties rather than time off. In this fferent. Disability would be the primary determi- case it would be a time to reorient and to look nant of age at retirement, but with rules for de- for work in a new field, or for a different job in termining disability adapted to the realities of old one’s old field. With a 24-hour work week, there age. Mandatory retirement at a specific age can’t is enough time to take a few years for retraining be applied equally, but having some mechanism ahead of the required transition. If the rule was that requires job changes is probably necessary to take a year off after every thirty, in a type of for social health. A year “sabbatical” every thirty socially funded temporary “retirement,” and to years or so to facilitate and reinforce the shift to return to a new situation, there’s no question it new work should be funded as a form of retire- would have a leavening effect. ment in the broad sense. There is a question about how it could work in practice. People starting a new career after leav- ing another at the top would have lower salaries. Disability There’s generally huge resistance to any change involving less money. Those at the top of the tree The obligation to care for people with disabili- could easily game the system. For instance, the ties covers a wide spectrum. At one end it means Russian limit on Presidents is two terms, so Putin nondiscrimination and the requirement to pro- came back as Prime Minister instead, at the be- vide simple accommodations as needed. At the hest of his cronies. The U.S. military, to give one other end are those who require 24-hour nursing example, approaches both problems — people care. That spans a range of services, starting with serving too long or gaming the system — by hav- simple information, and continuing through in- ing the option of retirement after 20 years of ser- creasing levels of assistance as needed. From a vice and no option to return to similar rank. government perspective the issue is coordinating However, I doubt very much that any society very different functions so that they’re matched could afford fair pensions, i.e. ones that equalled to variable individual needs without waste. The a living wage, for everyone after 20 years of work. social and medical science of delivering care is, of The leavening effect would have to come from course, far more complex, and is beyond the fo- changes to other jobs. cus here. I see the financial aspect of the requirement to Waste can arise because people overuse the switch jobs as follows, although what actually system, and that problem gets popular attention. works would have to be determined as the ideas It can also arise from management inefficiences were applied. People who haven’t had a major that don’t properly match services to needs, job change in 30 years (i.e. a change other than which is a much more boring topic. The money promotions or transfers) would prepare for it wasted is, as usual, orders of magnitude greater much as they do now with retirement. They’d re- in the boring zone. The good news, however, is train ahead of time, if they wanted, and they’d that since much of the waste is caused by the save some money over the years to cushion the government’s lack of responsiveness to the needs transition. For average earners, interest payments of the disabled, it would be amenable to solution wouldn’t equal a living wage, but they’d help in a system with transparency, effective feedback ease a lower starting salary in a new job. Further, methods, and administrative accountability. Med- [86] given flatter salary differences , a lower start- ical and social science, as well as the disabled ing income would likely still fall within the range themselves, can determine which aid is needed of middle class pay. Those for whom the differ- and when. The government’s job is to streamline ence is large would be the high earners, and it distribution and delivery of services so that
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 116 they’re matched to the individual’s current needs that the state somehow takes over child care. It rather than the government’s administrative means what the word “support” always means: ones. help is provided when and where parents and As with all other aspects of social care, the ex- children can use it. It’s another task involving pense of the assistance that can be provided de- long term coordination among all citizens for a pends on a country’s wealth. Accommodation, goal without immediate profit, precisely the type home help to enable the disabled to live outside of task for which government is designed. institutions, and any devices to assist indepen- The state’s responsibility to children extends dent living, are not expensive and return a great from supporting orphans and protecting children deal of value to the disabled themselves and to from abuse up to more general provisions for the everyone else by retaining more productive mem- growth and development of its youngest mem- bers of society. Expensive medical treatments bers. might be out of reach in some situations, but if Barring overwhelming natural disasters, there government were doing everything possible to are no situations where it’s impossible for adults coordinate an easier life for the disabled in other to organize care for children. There is no country respects it would be a big step forward from in the world, no matter how poor, that doesn’t where we are now. have sufficient resources to care for orphans. That’s a question of will and allocating resources. For instance, there is no country with orphans Child Care that has no standing army. There is no country with orphans without any wealthy people. People [This section benefited a great deal from comments by make decisions about what is important, and Caroljean Rodesch, MSW, and child therapist. Errors and spend money on it. But that’s not the same as be- bizarre ideas are, of course, mine.] ing unable to afford care for orphans. Judging by people’s actions when directly con- Facilitating child care is directly relevant to so- fronted with suffering children, few people cial survival, and it’s not hard to make the case would disagree about the duty to care for them. that it’s society’s most important function. Logi- But on a less immediate and more chronic level, cally, that should mean children (and their par- distribution of the actual money doesn’t match ents) get all the social support they need. In prac- either instinct or good intentions. As with every- tice, the amount of support follows the usual thing else, meeting obligations depends on rules rule of thumb in the absence of explicit rules: that require them to be met. Otherwise the pow- those with enough power get support, and those erless have no recourse, and there are few groups without, don’t. more powerless than children. Defense, the other social survival function, can Children’s right to care parallels the adult right provide useful insights into how to think about to a living, but it also has important additional child care. Placing the burden of child care solely aspects beyond the satisfaction of the physical on the family and, more often than not, on the needs. Children have a right to normal develop- women in the family, is equivalent to making de- ment, which means a right to those things on fense devolve to tiny groups. It’s equivalent to a which it depends. Furthermore, individuals vary, quasi-gang warfare model that can’t begin to so the needs for nutrition, exercise, medicine, compete with more equitably distributed forms. and education need to be adjusted for individual When it comes to defense, it’s clear that effec- children. Specifically with respect to education, tiveness is best served by distributing the burden children have the right to enough, tailored to equally in everyone’s taxes. That is no less true of their talents and predilections, to make a median rearing the next generation, which is even less middle class living a likely option. optional for social survival. Provision of care is a big enough task that the Just as having a police and defense force discussion often stops there. I’ll address care it- doesn’t mean that people can’t resolve disputes self in a moment, but first there’s a vital practical among themselves, likewise having social sup- factor. Effective child advocates are essential to port where needed for children doesn’t mean
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 117 ensure that the right to good care is more than I don’t see these same constraints — outside words. Children with parents presumably have oversight of and by advocates and the eventual backers to make sure they get what they need. possibility of legal retribution — as necessary for For orphans, or those whose parents don’t fulfill parents, whether birth or adoptive. In the case of their duties, there need to be child advocates, criminal negligence or abuse, the usual laws people with the power to insist on better treat- would apply and parents could expect the punish- ment when there are inadequacies. ment for criminal behavior. But there isn’t the Advocacy needs to be the only task of the ad- need for the same level of feedback about subtler vocates. If they are also paid care providers, ad- neglect because parents aren’t likely to decide ministrators, or have other responsibilities in the that it’s five o’clock on a Friday, so they’ll forget state’s care of children then there is an inevitable about their kids until some more convenient conflict of interest. If a child’s interests are being time. Paid government functionaries, on the oth- shortchanged, the people doing it are necessarily er hand, could be expected to often consider their adults, possibly even the advocate him- or herself own convenience ahead of the child’s unless giv- in their other role. Given the social weight of en real motivation to do otherwise. The mixture adults versus children, the child’s needs are the of rewards and penalties suggested here is just likeliest to be ignored if there’s any divergence of that, a suggestion. Research might show that focus. In order for the advocates to truly repre- other inducements or penalties were best at mo- sent the children under their oversight, they can- tivating good care for children. However it’s ac- not have conflicting priorities. complished, the point is to ensure good care. Another essential element for good advocacy There’s nothing new in the idea of child advo- is a light enough case load that real understand- cates. They’re part of the legal system now. But ing of a child’s situation and real advocacy is pos- they’re woefully overworked and under-resourced sible. Given a 24-hour work week, that might be which limits their effectiveness at their job. In a some ten children per advocate. system with realistic case loads and built-in feed- The advocates are public servants and, as back, implementation should be more effective. such, would be answerable to their clients just It’s very important to get the advocacy compo- like any other public servants. Other adults, or nent right, because even the best laws are useless even the child as she or he gets older and be- if they’re not applied. Children are not in a posi- comes capable of it, can call the child’s represen- tion to insist on their rights. tative on shoddy work. However, since the clients Child advocates have another important func- are children, contemporaneous feedback is un- tion. A point I made earlier in Chapter 4 on Sex likely to ensure that the advocates always do and Children [244] is that one of the most impor- their jobs properly. An added incentive should be tant rights for children, practically speaking, is that children can use the benefit of hindsight if the right to leave a damaging family situation. the advocate has been irresponsible. In other Application of that right is likely to be problemat- words, children who are not adequately cared for ic whether because children don’t leave situa- by the state can take the responsible representa- tions when they should, or because they want to tives to court, including the advocates who ne- leave when they shouldn’t. Adult input is going to glected them, and call for the appropriate punish- be necessary for the optimum application of chil- ment. Thus, being a child advocate would carry dren’s rights. The child advocates would be in the much responsibility, as it should, in spite of the front lines of performing this function. Any adult light workload. in contact with the child could do it, but it would Given the potential for legal retribution, the be part of the official duties of the advocates. expectations for what constitutes good care need They would assess the situation, call in second to be stipulated clearly for all paid carers. If the opinions as needed, and support the child’s re- state provides the types of care shown to have quest, or not, depending on the situation. similar outcomes to families, and if the carers The definition of adequate care meets with a meet their obligations, that would be an ade- lot of argument. For some, only family placement quate defense in eventual suits. is adequate, even when there are no families
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 118
available. The consequence, at least as I’ve seen it sense of control over one’s situation. This is why in the U.S., is to cycle children in and out of fos- even bad situations can seem preferable to a ter homes like rental furniture. Somehow, that’s change. The change involves a switch to a new deemed better than institutional care. and unfamiliar set of conditions, the same behav- The definition of adequate care by the state ior no longer leads to the expected consequences, has to take into account the reality of what the and there’s a terrifying sense of loss of control state can buy with well-spent money. Nobody, and of predictability. That’s bad enough for an not even a government, can buy love. So it is adult with experience and perspective. For a child pointless to insist that adequate care must in- with no context into which to place events, it’s clude a loving environment, no matter how desir- literally the end of the world. able such an environment is. That simply can’t be I haven’t found sociological studies that place legislated. the question of foster care in the context of a What can be legislated is a system of orphan- child’s sense of loss of control because it’s ax- ages and assistance for families who want to iomatic that children are powerless. I’m saying adopt. The word “orphanage” tends to raise vi- that they shouldn’t be. sions of Dickensian horrors crippling children for Given that children, like adults, need stability life. Orphanages don’t have to be that bad. and a sense of control in their lives, there are im- The studies I’ve seen showing the damaging plications for what it means to have child-centric long term neurological and behavioral effects of laws. Children have rights, and rights are funda- foster and institutional care don’t separate the mentally rules that give one control over one’s effects of non-parental care from the effects of own situation compatible with the same degree unpredictable caregivers, anxiety-inducing uncer- of control for others. There have to be some diff- tainty about one’s future, neglect, bad care, and fferences in implementation because of children’s downright abuse. Bad factors are more common lack of experience, but the fundamental idea that in non-parental care, and bad factors are, well, children have the right to control some funda- bad. It’s not surprising studies would show such mental aspects of their own lives must be re- care is not good for children. spected. That means children should not be sepa- An adequate standard of care would meet a rated from people they care about, and that they child’s basic needs, and those are not totally diff- should be able to separate from those who are fferent from an adult’s. Children need a sense of causing serious problems for them. safety, of comfort in their situation. Stability, With the very basic level of control of being which families generally provide, is an important able to leave damaging situations, children’s component, and that’s one reason family situa- main need is for stability in a benign environ- tions are supposed to be better than institutions. ment with someone they care about. They don’t But stability, by itself, is only slightly preferable to actually need their birth parents. They only seem chaos in the same way as prison is preferable to a to because birth parents are usually the best at war zone. providing that environment. If they don’t, and At least as important as stability — possibly the somebody else does, children are far better off main reason stability feels comfortable — is the with the somebody else rather than dad or mom, feeling of control it provides. Having no idea no matter what the birth parents want. Child- what will happen next, which is a very funda- centric laws would give more weight to the mental feeling of powerlessness, causes fear, child’s needs in that situation than the parent’s. frustration, and anger in everyone, at any age. The current focus on keeping children with their That is where birth families have a natural ad- birth families under any and all circumstances is vantage. Since the child was born into that situa- misguided. The focus should be on keeping chil- tion, it feels normal and isn’t questioned. So long dren with the people they, the children, care for as things continue as they were, the world seems the most. to operate on consistent rules, one knows what Specific people may be beyond the state’s pow- to expect, one can behave in predictable ways to er to provide due to death, disaster or abandon- achieve predictable results, and there’s some ment, but a stable benign environment can be
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 119 achieved. One way is by facilitating adoption. The If the child is not the one triggering a review other is by providing a consistent, stable, and be- of the parents’ rights, then the decision on nign institutional environment. whether to revoke becomes as difficult as it is If there are relatives or another family where now, if not more so. the child wants to stay and where the adults are The child’s needs, including what the child happy to care for the child, then that transition her- or himself actually wants, have to be the pri- should be facilitated. The child should be able to mary deciding factor. Even dubious situations, live there without delays. The child advocate barring actual mental or physical abuse, have to would have a few days, by law, to make an initial be decided according to what the child genuinely check of the new carers, and during that time the wants. It may go without saying that discovering child could stay in the facilities for orphans. The the child’s wishes requires competent counselors longer official process of vetting the new family to spend time with the child. Also, since the child and making the adoption official would then, by has rights, she or he could ask for another coun- law, have to take place within weeks, not years. selor if they didn’t do well with the first one. On- There also needs to be a fallback solution if no ly in cases of actual abuse could the child be tak- family situation is available. Likewise, there en out of a situation even without their request. needs to be a place for children who have to The reason for that is probably obvious: abuse, leave their families and have no other adults who whether of adults or children, tends to make the can care for them. In my very limited personal ex- victim feel too helpless and depressed to leave. perience, systems that mimic family situations Physical condition of the home would not be a seem to work about as well as ordinary families reason to place children elsewhere. It would be a do. I’ve seen that in the Tibetan Children’s Vil- reason to send in a professional to help with lages. They’re set up as units with a consistent home care, but not one to separate families. caregiver for a small group of children (about five or six). By providing decent working conditions and good salaries, turnover among caregivers is Care of infants reduced and reasonably consistent care is possi- ble to achieve. There’s a systemic problem when the input of It’s not the cheapest way to provide care, but children is part of the process of enforcing their saving money is a lower priority than enabling rights. Those who can’t articulate any input, such children to grow into healthy adults. Longitudinal as infants, require special rules. I’ll discuss that, studies of outcomes may show that other which in some respects includes disabled chil- arrangements work even better. My point is that dren with similar mental capacity, and then re- there are situations with paid caregivers and con- turn to the care of children generally. sistent environments that seem to work well. The Infants have a number of special needs. They solutions that are shown to work, those with a can’t stand up for themselves in any way, so they similar level of success as families at allowing must have others who stand up for them. Their children to grow into stable and competent physical development is such that incorrect han- adults, are the standard of care the state can pro- dling, even when it would be physically harmless vide, and therefore should provide. for an older child, can lead to permanent disabili- The problem of dysfunctional parents leads to ty. And they’re at such an early stage of develop- the difficult question of revoking parental rights. ment that bad care causes increasing down- In a system where children have rights and can stream harm. So they need skill in their carers. initiate separation from dysfunctional families, The harm caused is permanent, so preventing it border line cases become easier to decide. If it’s has to be the first priority, one that trumps not a good situation, and the child wants to parental rights. leave, the child can leave. The situation does not That last may seem particularly harsh in the have to reach the more appalling level seen when current view where children have no rights. the impetus to remove the child comes from the However, as discussed in the second chapter, outside, as it always does now. rights have to be balanced according to the total harm and benefit to all parties. The right to be
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 120 free from interference ends at the point where ing. Offspring have been born to parents with no harm begins. Harm to infants and children is a previous training for over five hundred million more serious matter than harm to adults — more years. However, in a small minority of human serious because children are more powerless and parents, the lack of knowledge and practice will because the downstream consequences are likeli- lead to children who become a greater social bur- er to keep increasing — and the adult’s rights end den. That costs money, so it’s only fair to make where their concept of care or discipline harms a those who cause the problem to share in its con- child. The child doesn’t have more rights than an sequences. Yearly fines should be levied on those adult in this respect, only the same rights. The ex- who have children without passing the parenting tent to which the reduction in parental rights class, until they do so. The assessment should be seems harsh is a measure only of how much chil- heavy enough, i.e. proportional to the ability to dren are truly viewed as chattel. pay, that it forms a real inducement to just take Prevention is always better than cure, but in the class. The amount, like other top priority the case of infants it’s also the only real alterna- fines, would be garnished from wages, govern- tive. There is no cure for a ruined a future. The ment payments, or assets, and would apply to good news is that there are a number of proven both biological parents. If one parent makes the measures that reduce the incidence of neglected effort, but the other doesn’t, the fines would still or damaged children. Almost nobody sets out to apply to the recalcitrant one even if they’re an have a child on purpose in order to abuse him or absent parent. her, so the human desire to do the right thing is Not everyone learns much in classes, even already there. It’s only necessary to make it easy when they pass them, so there would no doubt to act on it. For that, people need knowledge, be a residual group of parents who find them- time, and help in case of extreme stress. All of selves dealing badly with infants. For that case, these can be provided. there needs to be an added layer of help to pro- A semester’s worth of parenting class must be tect infants. One program that has been shown an absolute requirement in high school. Students to work is pairing a mentor with parent(s) who who miss it could take a similar class in adult ed- need one. Those programs come in different ucation. It should teach the basic practical skills, forms and go by different names, such as Shared such as diapering, feeding, clothing, correct han- Family Care in Scandinavia, Nurse-Family Partner- dling, and anger management. There should be ship [245] in the US, and similar programs (e.g. 1 brief and to the point introductions about what [246], 2 [247] , 3 [248] ). Parents could ask for that can be expected of infants cognitively and emo- help, which would obviously be the preferred sit- tionally, and when. There should be programs uation, or any concerned person, including older that allow students who want more extensive children, could anonymously alert the local child hands-on experience to volunteer to work with advocates to look into a specific situation. Profes- children. And for those who come to this re- sionals who notice a problem would be under an quired class with plenty of life experience on the obligation to report, as discussed below and in subject — through having been the eldest in an Chapter 4 [244] . extended family, for instance — they could act as Time is a big factor in successful parenting, in student-teaching assistants in those areas where many ways even bigger than knowledge. A fair they were proficient. Nobody, however, should be society with an equitable distribution of money, excused or everybody would claim adequate expe- work, and leisure that results in a parent-friendly rience. It’s an odd thing about people, how work week [86] , such as one of 24 hours, would near-universal the drive is toward parenthood presumably go a long way toward enabling peo- and yet how common the desire is to avoid actu- ple to actually care for their children. In two-par- al parenting. ent or extended families, alternating shifts would Since having the class is a prerequisite to hav- make it easier for at least one of the parents to ing a child, there need to be sanctions for those be there for the children at all times. who insist on ignoring it. On average the likeliest Caring for infants, however, is full time work consequence of skipping the class will be noth- in the literal meaning of the term. There is no
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 121 time for anything else. So parental leave needs to point one member of the eventual panel, and, as be considered a given. The amount of time best with other legal proceedings [98] , decisions could allotted could still bear some study, but judging be appealed. One difference is that quick resolu- by the experience of countries with leave policies, tion is even more essential when infants are in- somewhere between one and two years is appro- volved than in other legal cases. priate. The time would be included in planning by Finally, who decides on the fate of an infant so employers, as they do now in a number of OECD badly damaged by abuse that they’ve been severe- countries, or the same way they accommodate ly disabled? This is not as uncommon a situation reservists’ time in the military. Those without as one might think because it doesn’t necessarily children who want to use the benefit could take require much malicious intent. An angry parent leave to work with children or on projects direct- who shakes a baby can cause permanent and se- ly for children. vere brain damage. Parents without a grasp of Statistics from countries with good parental nutrition can cause malnourishment that leads leave policies, with economic and medical sys- to retardation. If the worst has happened, then tems that reduce fear of poverty and disease, and should those same parents be the ones to decide with some concept of women’s rights, show that on the child’s future? The answer is obviously infant abuse or neglect is a much smaller prob- not, at least not in any system where children lem than in countries without those benefits. aren’t chattel. The parents would have their However, even in the best situations, there will parental rights revoked (besides being subject to still be individuals who find themselves stressed legal proceedings for criminal abuse), and deci- beyond their ability to cope. The system of care sions about the child’s care would be given to a needs to include emergency assistance along the court-appointed child advocate. If the infant is so lines of suicide hot lines — call them desperation damaged they’ve lost higher brain functions and hot lines — where immediate and effective help would actually suffer less if treatment were with- can be forthcoming on demand. drawn, then a panel of child advocates should Which brings me to the horrible question of make the decision. what to do when all prevention fails and abuse or neglect of infants occurs. The early warning sys- - + - tem of concerned neighbors, relatives, or friends needs to be encouraged with appropriate public health education campaigns, so that people know When a child can leave a family and move ei- what the signs of actual abuse are and so that ther to another one or to state care facilities, a the social discomfort of “meddling” is known to gray area develops. Since it will inevitably take be less important than protecting infants. All pro- some time for the official situation to catch up to fessionals in contact with the child, whether day- the real one, responsibilities for care decisions care workers, pediatricians, nurses, clergy, or and financial support need to be made explicit. others, would have a legal obligation to alert There is a spectrum of parental rights and diff- child advocates to potential problems. Then the fferent degrees of separation. The situation is advocates could look into it, and take steps to re- more analogous to divorce than to death, and move the infant to one of the children’s villages needs similar official nuances to match it. In the before permanent damage occurred. If the par- earliest stages of separation, day-to-day care deci- ent(s) wanted to retain custody, they would need sions would have to rest with the actual care- to demonstrate a willingness to learn what the givers, but longer-term decisions could be put off problem was, to correct it, and to retain a men- until the situation clarified. If the relationship be- tor until the infant was out of danger. tween child and parents deteriorated rather than Revocation of parental rights is a very serious improved, the child advocate(s) would find it nec- step which might be necessary after review by essary to transfer more decision-making to the child advocates and other involved professionals. new caregivers until in the end full rights would To ensure that the parent(s)’ side was represent- be transferred. None of it would be easy, the spe- ed, each of the two parents concerned could ap- cific decisions would always depend on the indi- vidual situations, but that doesn’t mean it’s im-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 122 possible. These things can be worked out. They for the child. can be arranged between divorcing adults, and State care of and for children runs into money. the situation with children who need a separa- Child advocates, orphanages, and the bureaucra- tion is not fundamentally different. The main cy to handle payments and disputes all need to point is that the child should have some input into be staffed, or built and maintained. The right of a and sense of control over their own fate. child to a fair start in life is one of the obligations In the case where a child has left a problemat- that must be met, like having a system of law or ic home and the parent(s) are still living, the funding elections. It has to come near the top of question of child support arises. In the very short the list of priorities, not the bottom. In terms of term, the parents would be liable for reasonable actual money, taking care of children without a payments for food, in the longer term for a realis- home is not nearly as expensive as, say, maintain- tic amount that covers all expenses. Once a child ing a standing army. No country seems to have had left home, that amount would be paid to the conceptual difficulties paying for the latter, so government’s children’s bureau who would then with the right priorities, they’d have no difficulty disburse it to the child’s actual caregivers. An with the former either. arrangement via a responsible and powerful in- General social support for parents is a less termediary is necessary since the child is unable acute subject than care of orphans, but it has an to insist on payment and since it isn’t right to effect on almost everyone’s quality of life. Social burden the caregivers with financial or legal bat- support implies that when nothing more than tles with the parents in addition to their care of some flexibility and accommodation is needed, the child. Since payment goes to a government there’s an obligation to provide it. Parents who agency, non-payment would have much the same need flexible hours or alternating shifts should be consequences as non-payment of taxes. The accommodated to the extent compatible with do- amounts would be deducted from wages or other ing their jobs. Different employers might need to assets. coordinate with each other in some cases. If the An issue that arises repeatedly whenever mon- systems are in place to do it, that wouldn’t be ey is involved is that money, rather than the difficult. Another example is breastfeeding in child, becomes the focus. In current custody bat- public. Breastfeeding can be done unobtrusively, tles, it’s not unknown for one parent to demand and it is simple facilitation of basic parenting to some level of custody mainly so as to save or get avoid unnecessary restrictions on it. money. And yet, some form of support payments When parents need time off to deal with child- need to be made. It’s hardly fair for parents to get related emergencies, rather more effort is in- away scot-free, so to speak, when they’re the volved for those who have to pick up the slack. ones who created the problem that drove the Unlike parental leave for newborns, but like any child to another home. I’m not sure how that family emergency, this is not a predictable block contradiction can best be resolved. It’s easy of time. Family leave for emergencies needs to be enough, when caregivers are personal acquain- built in to the work calendar for everyone, plus tances, to see which of them are concerned recognition that those with children or elderly about the children and which of them are mainly dependent relatives are going to need more time. interested in the check. Possibly, the difference As with parental leave, those without a personal would be evident to child advocates or other pro- need for it who would nonetheless like to take it fessionals who could include it in the record. can use the same amount of time to work direct- More important, children have rights in this sys- ly with children or the elderly. tem, they can contest poor treatment, and they Parental and family leave are social obligations have accountable advocates whose only job is to borne by everyone, so the funding should reflect make sure they get good treatment. Possibly, that that. Employers, including the self-employed, would keep the brakes on the more mercenary would be reimbursed out of taxes for the neces- caregivers. If it doesn’t, better methods have to sary wages, at a living wage level. Employers be found. The point is to approach as closely as could, of course, elect to add to that sum, but the possible the goal of a stable benign environment taxpayers responsibility doesn’t extend to replac-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 123 ing high wages, only to providing the same and could look like. In the Money and Work chapter I adequate standard of support to all. also said that unemployable people should be The need for child care in the sense of day care able to live in the equivalent of “on base,” as in may well be alleviated by a parent-friendly the military, except that in the world I’m envi- 24-hour work week. However, there is still bound sioning that would be a social and public work to be some need for it since children require con- corps, not an army corps. stant watching, and since some parents are sin- There’s a common theme, which is that the gle. Day care service could run the gamut from government needs living facilities for a number government-provided crèches where parents can of people with different needs. The obligation to drop off infants or toddlers on an as-needed basis care for the elderly, the disabled, children, the ill, (a service available to some in Australia, for in- and the mentally incapable, all mean that there stance) to nothing more than a government role need to be an array of state-funded facilities to in providing coordination for parents to form provide that care. There’s also the aforemen- their own child care groups. tioned work corps, some of whom will need liv- (I know that in the US the immediate objec- ing quarters. tion to the latter will be how to determine liabili- These facilities are probably best not viewed in ty. The US has gone so liability-mad that ordinary isolation. Some of them would probably even be life is becoming impossible. There always has to improved if compatible functions were combined be someone to sue and there always have to be in a mixed use environment. For instance, child bulletproof defenses against suits. I see nothing care, the elderly, the disabled, and the work corps fair in that and don’t see it as part of a fair soci- can all benefit from contact among the groups, ety. Criminal negligence — an example in this even if that contact is only for some hours of the context might be undertaking child care and then day. It’s known, for instance, that children and gabbling on a phone while the children choke on the elderly both benefit from each others’ society small objects — would be pursued like any other (in reasonable quantities). A “campus,” as it crime. Vetting carers ahead of time, and the were, that included the many different facilities knowledge that crimes will be met with criminal might be the best way to deliver services effi- penalties, are the tools to prevent criminal behav- ciently with the greatest convenience to the ior, just as similar constraints operate in other users. Increasing diversity and choice is always a work. Like other crimes, damages are not part of goal in a system that prizes individual rights. the picture. Punishment is. If harm requiring medical treatment happened, that would be cov- ered by general medical care.) Anti-Poverty Measures The government’s responsibility to inspect and certify increases with the formality of the I haven’t discussed transition methods much arrangement. Who and what is certified, and in this work since the idea is to point toward a which aspects need vetting by individuals need to goal rather than accomplish the more difficult be explicitly stated. Costs to the taxpayers vary task of getting there. Outright poverty would pre- with degree of government involvement. At the sumably not be an issue in a society with a fair low end, the government acts as a coordinator of distribution of resources. However, outright volunteers, and has minimal responsibility, some- poverty is a big issue in almost every society now, thing even very poor countries can afford. At the and there are some simple measures that can be high end are government run day care and taken against it which are worth mentioning. preschool centers that are designed to contribute The simplest way to alleviate poverty is to give to the child’s healthy growth and education. the poor money [249] . I know that P. J. O’Rourke said the opposite, but in his case it was supposed to be an insightful witticism based on his own in- Care Facilities sight and wit. Actual study and experience prove otherwise. I’ve mentioned what facilities for children The concept of alleviating poverty by giving
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 124 the poor money seems silly only because psycho- move toward justice and alleviate poverty is to logical coping mechanisms among the non-poor provide an allowance to mothers with children, require blaming the poor for their own fate. Their contingent on staying current with vaccinations poverty must be due to something they’re doing, and school work if that seems necessary. with the corollary that therefore it’s not some- thing that can happen to me. And what they must be doing is wasting money. Otherwise why Medical Research would they lack it? And if they waste money, it’s crazy to give them more without very stringent Support for basic research relates to acade- controls. mics and is discussed in the next chapter [105] , but The fallacy lies in the assumption that the there are other research-related issues with direct poor cause their own condition. That is not al- impact on care. Applied research, especially on ways true. Some of the poor are money manager locally important conditions, can improve care or miracles, squeezing more out of a penny than reduce costs. Research programs also function to more liberally endowed people can even con- retain creative members of the medical profes- ceive. Nor do they lack energy. It’s just that, as de sion, precisely those people who are likeliest to Kooning put it, being poor takes all one’s time. come up with solutions to problems. That is no The result is that without any resources, time, or less true in poor countries, who tend to consider money, the poor have no way to work themselves all research a luxury. Some of that feeling may be out of the trough they’re in. due to the very expensive programs in rich coun- Now comes the part that’s really hard to con- tries, but research does not always have to be ceive. Evidence is accumulating from several na- costly. A few thousand dollars applied intelligent- tional programs in Brazil, in Mexico, in India, that ly to local problems can return multiples of hun- there’s a large gender disparity in who wastes dreds on the investment. As for expensive re- [250] money and who doesn’t. Women spend it on search, a country without the infrastructure their children, on feeding them and on sending could still make a conscious decision to provide them to school. Men are less reliable. National some support. It could participate by supporting [251] programs (e.g. Brazil , pdf) which have given field work in partnership with other institutions, money to poor women have been very successful. or by supporting travel for medical scientists (Just to be clear, I doubt this is genetic. Women, working on specific projects. I would argue that as a disadvantaged class, don’t see themselves as some support of research is always appropriate being worth more than others, whereas men see because of its stimulating effect on the rest of their own needs first. Whether women would the system. still be good guardians of cash if they had a high- Another aspect of research is its context, er opinion of themselves remains to be seen. For which tends to promote some questions and now and the foreseeable future, poor women are therefore to preclude whole sets of answers to is- good guardians.) sues that are not addressed. Consider the current Also, as the linked sources and an accumulat- state of medical research as an example. Finding ing number of others point out, reducing the cures is much more spectacular than, for in- middlemen who handle aid money is a critical stance, preventing disease by laying down sewer component of success. One reason giving the pipes. Nobody ever got a Nobel Prize for sewer poor money may not seem to work is that the pipes. Yet they’ve saved more lives than any med- stringent controls people like to implement re- ical cure so far. So, despite the utility of preven- quire plenty of overseers. These middlemen, like tion, there’s a bias toward cures [104] . Add to that people everywhere, tend to freeze onto any mon- a profit motive, where far more money can be ey near them, and so less gets to its final goal. made from cures than prevention, and research This can be due to outright corruption, but the questions regarding prevention won’t even be bigger expenses are more subtle than that. Either asked, let alone answered. way, the fewer intermediaries, the better. A recent development in medicine has opened The take-home message for a country trying to another field in which profit motives hold back
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 125 rather than promote progress. Genomics has skew research toward glamorous or profitable made explicit something that has always been questions. The structural problems now are that obvious to practicing medical personnel: people preventive and individual medicine are under- vary in their reactions to treatment. Sometimes, served, but in another time the biases might be as with some recent cancer drugs, the variation precluding other questions. Government should is so great that the difference is between a cure act, as always, to counteract tendencies that and complete uselessness. But profits are made don’t serve the public good. by selling to millions, not to a few dozen folk scattered across the globe. So, despite the fact - + - that some intractable diseases require individual- ized treatments, pharmaceutical companies aren’t very interested in bringing the fruits of The concept of care follows the same princi- that academic research to market. They keep ples as all the other aspects of society: spread the searching for one-size-fits-all blockbuster drugs benefits as widely as possible and the burdens as instead of what works. In effect, profits are cost- thinly as possible without shortchanging some at ing us cures [243] . the expense of others. Do all this within evenly The government can put its finger on the scale applied limits imposed by technology and wealth. here. It can provide grants for the questions of It’s the same “one for all, and all for one” idea greater benefit to society. It can provide lucrative that’s supposed to guide the internal relations of prizes for the best work. (It’s amazing how fast human groups in general. When it doesn’t, it’s be- status follows lucrative prizes in science.) It can cause people fear they’ll lose by it … or hope they, endow a few strategic professorships. The cost of personally, will gain by depriving someone else. all these things is minute compared to the social The experience of countries with good social care and eventual financial benefits. systems shows that in fact the opposite is true. A function of government in the area of med- Either everyone wins or everyone loses. ical and social research should be to keep an eye on the context and to counteract tendencies to + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 126
Education
much more than merely making some informa- tion available before an election. They include ac- Social Implications cessibility, in all senses of the word, of informa- tion at all times. They include enough education I don’t remember the actual details of a ques- to understand the information. They include a tion Ray Bradbury was once asked. It was some- sufficiently quiet environment, in a cognitive thing like what would be the most significant as- sense, so that the information can be heard. pect of the future. Faster than light travel? Im- Education has to be defined correctly if it’s to mortality? Brain-computer interfaces? Limitless fulfill its vital functions in society. In a narrow power from quantum foam? Those were mere de- sense, education is about learning a specific body tails, he said. The gist of his answer is what I re- of subjects, such as math or history, in a formal member. Pay attention to the first grade teachers. setting. In the broad sense, and in the one rele- They hold the keys to real progress. vant to a discussion of social implications, educa- There really is no way to overstate the signifi- tion is any avenue by which people absorb infor- cance of education to the survival of any ad- mation. That includes formal institutions, but it vanced society. More precisely, it’s critical to the also includes media, advertising, stories, games, survival of any advanced society worth living in. and news. Survival of equitable and sustainable countries — All of those things inform people one way or or worlds — depends on education. It is not a lux- another, so all of them can play a role in making ury that’s interesting only when there is nothing a society more or less useful to all its citizens. Be- else to worry about. Without it, crises are guaran- cause these tools are so powerful in their cumu- teed and the wisdom to avoid them or solve them lative effect, it’s important for them to adhere, will be gone. without exceptions, to the principles of a free Further, important as survival is, it’s not the and fair society. If they do, they’re likely to facili- only reason a fair society has to make education tate that society. If they don’t, they can destroy a priority. Given that there’s a right to a living, ed- it. ucation is also a bedrock necessity toward It’s because information and education in the putting that right into practice. No human being broadest sense are so powerful that they have the can make a living without learning how to do so. potential for such a striking Jekyll-and-Hyde eff- Last, there’s the plain political fact that an in- ffect. An informed and knowledgeable citizenry is formed citizenry is an essential component of the vital element of a free, fair, and sustainable democracy. Without it, there can be no democra- society. A misinformed one is toxic. Unless that is cy because the whole system depends on in- recognized, and unless misinformation is actively formed decisions, and without the tools to un- fought, a well-informed electorate is not possible derstand the issues, it’s a logical impossibility for and neither is democracy. There will always be voters to make fact-based decisions. people who stand to gain by shading the truth, Having said that education is the most impor- and it will always be necessary to counteract tant factor for democracy, a reminder of the them. caveat. As discussed in decision making [252] in That means limits on noise are critical to pre- the fifth chapter, there are very strong intuitive vent information from being drowned out. The influences on decisions that operate well before distinction between the two is covered in free the slow conscious mind catches up. They bias speech vs. noise [103] in the chapter on Rights. I’ll the results. No amount of education will prevent repeat briefly in the next few paragraphs. those influences unless decision making situa- First, the right to free speech has to protect all tions are explicitly set up to promote rational ele- matters of belief and opinion, as it does now. ments ahead of intuitive ones. Statements about politics, religion, or any other The tools provided by education have to be subjective matter, are protected.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 127
Factual matters, on the other hand, can be ob- Because untruths are toxic to the rationality jectively evaluated. There’s an effective tool for on which a fair and sustainable society is based, that called the scientific method, and once there and untruths repeated 24/7/365 are especially tox- is a high degree of certainty, it’s just plain silly to ic, it is essential to dial back the noise. It is not make up one’s own “facts.” It’s even worse than enough to provide analysis or responses after the silly to push untruth to advance an agenda. fact. The model needs to be truth in advertising The rules can err on the side of free speech laws. They don’t suggest education campaigns af- rather than suppressing misinformation because ter someone has promised immortality in a bottle protection against counterfactual babble is not and made millions. By then, the damage has been quite as critical as protection for opinions and be- done. It doesn’t matter how soberly anyone re- liefs. An occasional untruth has little impact, just futes bogus claims. Too few will listen and the as tiny doses of arsenic don’t do much. Repeat scam will work. The lies have to be prevented, doses and large doses, however, damage the body not bleated at after the fact. It has to be illegal to politic. The brain is wired to accept repetition as push falsehoods, and even more illegal to push evidence of what to expect in the future, in other them repeatedly. (In free speech vs. noise [103] I words as evidence of something real. Nor is that discuss how this might be done.) wrong when dealing only with Mother Nature. The idea of limiting free speech in any way is (References for that effect are legion. It was part generally anathema because the dominant phi- of the textbooks all the way back in 1920 [253] . It’s losophy holds that silencing is the only problem. also evident in the close correlation between So long as nobody at all is ever suppressed, then numbers of ad buys and numbers of votes seen in ultimately the truth will out and everything will Da Silveira and De Mello, 2008 [203] .) be fine. Furthermore, and this is the most damaging I agree that silencing is bad and cannot be tol- aspect, it doesn’t matter whether one is paying erated. But drowning out free speech is no less eff- attention or not. There’s even evidence that the ffective at stopping it from being heard. Both ways effect of repeated messages is stronger [73] if they of destroying free speech are toxic. A drowned are “tuned out.” That way they avoid conscious voice is lost just as surely as a silenced one. The processing altogether, which is a good thing for truth will indeed eventually prevail, but unless those trying to manipulate attitudes. our actions are aligned with it, its inevitable tri- Discussion of the extent of manipulation by re- umph only means that we’ll be dead. It’s a com- peated messages tends to meet with disbelief. plete fantasy to imagine that people live in some The reaction is some variant of “Well, it doesn’t universe where they have all the information and work on me.” Partly, this is because the whole all the time to study it, and that they’ll carefully point of manipulative messaging is to fly under check through all the inputs available regardless the radar of conscious thought, so it’s hardly sur- of cost or time or status and identify the best. prising that people don’t notice it in action. (And Call that the myth of the Rational Information after the fact, the tendency is to insist that pref- Consumer to match its equally preposterous erences are based on pure reason.) Partly, it’s be- twin, the Rational Economic Actor. cause it indeed does not work on all people all of I’ve stressed the importance of reducing coun- the time. It’s designed to work on enough people, terfactual noise before discussing education itself and that’s all you need to manipulate whole soci- because no matter how good or well-funded eties. learning is, it’ll fail in the face of a miasma of Manipulation is a very bad thing in a society misinformation. Seductive lies are just that, se- predicated on rational choices and therefore on ductive. Telling people they “should” be critical freedom from it. Nor is manipulation tolerable in and they “shouldn’t” be swayed is a lazy refusal a system without double standards. It requires a to deal with the problem posed by objective un- perpetrator and subject(s). It would be ineffective truth. It’s like telling people they “shouldn’t” without two classes of people, unlike reasoned catch colds on an airplane. The real solution is to arguments which can be applied equally by every- filter the air well enough to prevent infection, one. not to put the burden on individuals to spend the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 128
flight in surgical masks and rubber gloves. Like- marginal cost to the total. The social good of in- wise when it comes to education, it’s not up to creased choices for all far outweighs the small ex- individuals to take out the garbage before they tra outlay. can begin to find the information in the pile. It’s Anyone who might be thinking that a nation up to the people fouling the place to stop it. couldn’t possibly afford all that, on top of the So, an important part of the function of the other government obligations, should remember government in education is a negative one. It’s that the better-run countries do afford all that, administering the methods used to claim false- and they afford it at around a third of their GDP hood, administering the evaluation of those taken in taxes. These better-run countries don’t claims, and applying the appropriate corrective have large armies. It’s a question of priorities. action in the case of repeat offenders (as per the Moving on to the positive aspects of educa- discussion in the Rights chapter). tion, and starting with the most specific case, Effectively administering dispute resolution that of informing citizens, there are a number of takes money. All of education takes money and, government functions to cover. The most basic of as I’ll try to show in a moment, cheap education all is election-specific voter information, al- is the most expensive option of all. Who is re- though even that has its own complexities. sponsible for providing that money? Since educa- Consider California voter information booklets tion is a right and a social good that requires con- as an example. They’re reasonably good. For each siderable coordinated action for no immediate re- issue they include the arguments of supporters, turn, it falls squarely into the functions of gov- opponents, lists of supporting organizations, and ernment. a summary by a legislative analyst. Unfortunate- Citizens have a right to enough know-how to ly, the only simple and effective way to fight make a living. Schools, obviously, should be pub- through the verbiage is to note which are the licly funded. Any advanced society will need more sponsoring organizations, and even that takes skills than a general education, so taxpayers some inside knowledge. Without any truth-in-la- should also fund students obtaining that certifi- beling laws for politics, who’s to know whether cation, which takes place in technical schools “Citizens for Tax Reform” promote flat taxes or and universities. The research activities of univer- corporate taxes or taxes on the importation of ex- sities also provide social benefits, sometimes in- otic parrots? calculable social benefits, almost always without Further, in a system where objective facts immediate payoff. must be supported, the voters can be shown the That leaves only one relatively small compo- extent of that support. I’ve discussed objective nent unfunded: learning purely for fun. My guess statements as if they’re either factual or not, but is that it would be foolish to leave it out. I don’t since the support is statistical it’s never a fully bi- know of research proving it (and certainly nary system. In issues subject to vote, there’s haven’t seen any disproving it), but I’m sure a likely to be quite a bit of room for interpretation mentally active citizenry will not only pay for it- as to what the facts are actually telling us. In self but will also add those priceless intangibles those cases, a simplified variant of the scholarly that make a society worth living in. Furthermore, procedure is indicated. Proponents can explain the marginal cost of letting the whole adult pop- how the facts support their view and provide the ulation learn at will is bound to be smaller than confidence levels for that support. Understanding setting up an elaborate — and doomed — scheme the meaning of confidence levels would be part to verify that the student’s goal is certification. of basic education. (There’s nothing about a 95% Or, worse yet, setting up a whole parallel system probability of being right versus a 75% probability of private “adult education” that will never be that would be hard to grasp even for a fifth grad- able to provide access to most subjects. A rocket er. All it needs is to be part of the curriculum, scientist or a scholar specializing in tercets of the which I’ll discuss shortly.) 14th century would be unlikely to attract enough Voter information booklets that go the extra students at a small private school. At a university, mile to assist voters would be laid out with the students without a goal would add only a tiny same attention to readable typography as a mag-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 129 azine article or a web site that wins prizes for to process it, as discussed in the chapter on Over- presentation of information. Statements of fact sight [97] . by either side or by the analyst would be accom- Distributed and active information flow can panied by the associated confidence level in the happen only when the facilities for it exist. Ben ten independent and most widely cited studies Franklin’s concept of public libraries in every on the subject (or fewer, if that’s all there are). If community was an expression of that ideal, and relevant points that weaken their argument were he was right that they’re a vital part of the infor- missing from either side’s summaries, the analyst mation system in a free society. Some people would point them out. The analyst would also think they’ve been superseded by the net, but I add a one sentence description to each sponsor- disagree. The two complement rather than re- ing organization, making clear what their mis- place each other. Both are needed. In the inter- sion is. For instance, “Citizens for Tax Reform: ests of the greatest ease of access, everything promote the use of plain language in all tax docu- that can be available on the net should be. But to ments.” facilitate deeper study, libraries will always have Good voter information is more difficult, but a function. Not necessarily because they’ll have entirely possible before 100% literacy is achieved books in them, but because they have different in a country. Even after that’s achieved, basic in- ways of organizing information and, mainly, be- formation can always be provided via audio and cause they’ll have librarians. Finding good infor- graphic channels. During transition periods, it’s mation in the glut now available is actually more essential that illiterate groups in societies be in- difficult, not less, than it was in the days of formed to the extent possible by whatever means scarcity. Librarians are information specialists works best. who have a vital teaching role to play in helping Information about elections and the govern- people find and use information, so they are an ment generally are only part of what citizens essential part of the education system in the need. Facets of private enterprise that have social broad sense. consequences must also be equally accessible to Tangentially, regarding my statement about public scrutiny. Ease of oversight is one of the ba- the complementarity of different kinds of infor- sic concepts, so any aspect of an enterprise sub- mation delivery, there’s growing support for that ject to regulation must also be transparent and view. Gladwell’s [254] recent discussion of the US subject to citizen as well as regulatory oversight. civil rights protests and “strong” commitment vs It’s an essential element of making sure there are “weak” in the real vs virtual worlds refers to many lines of defense against abuse, not just one. some interesting studies. The same difference is Confidentiality of trade secrets can be an ex- very evident in online teaching, although I hadn’t cuse against transparency in some cases, but the put my finger on it quite so clearly. Dissertations larger the company, the lower the priority of are appearing (for instance, 2006 [255] , 2005 [256] ) trade secrets. When not much damage can be pointing out qualitative differences as online done before the problem is evident, then one can methods become more widespread and their lim- give things like confidentiality more leeway. The itations more obvious. The 2005 reference is par- larger the company or the bigger its clout, the ticularly interesting as it studied software devel- more weight needs to be given to oversight and opers who, of all people, are least likely to need regulation and the less to the company’s con- face-to-face interaction. Yet even for them it was cerns. They can do too much damage too fast to essential. Real public libraries with real librarians cut them any slack. are important even in a world where the sum of Information must also flow easily the other human knowledge is also available on the net. way, from citizens to higher authorities. Citizen The flow of information requires physical in- feedback and reports of potential problems are frastructure. Since the Enlightenment in the early an important component of ensuring effective 1700s it’s been understood that free speech is on- regulation. That requires more than sufficient ed- ly possible when narrow interests cannot control ucation to know that one can make a complaint the flow. More generally, the vital resource of or a report. It requires personnel at the other end communication, the nervous system of the body
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 130 politic as it were, has to be free of any manipula- The idea to be realized is that everyone has ac- tion by special interests. Properly understood, the cess to information and communication so that post office, communications, and the net are all they can take full part in the political and legal part of a society’s system of information, a sys- life of the country. Communication without tem without which everything breaks down. Like much social significance, such as status updates, other vital systems, such as defense or medical does not need to be taxpayer-funded, nor does care, providing for it and sustaining its infrastruc- commercial communication, which should be ture has to be a government function. No other paying for itself. But it can be very hard to draw entity has the accountability to society that ful- the exact line between optional messages and im- filling a vital social function requires. portant ones, and it is always more important to Furthermore, in a fair system everyone must facilitate free and open communication than to have the same access to information and the scrimp on the marginal cost of a few more bits. same ability to communicate. Like a postal sys- tem, it must either be cheap enough so that price is not a consideration for individuals, or it must On Teaching and Learning be free at the point of use, like the internet be- fore commercialization. That doesn’t preclude Education in the narrow sense of formal train- payment for commercial services that are not so- ing is necessary to be able to use the information cially vital, but it does mean there must be an ac- and communication tools the government should cessible layer for the part that is. A commercial be providing. Before discussing that, however, it service can never fulfill that function since, if seems necessary to discuss the nature of teaching nothing else, it has to discriminate at least on the and learning, because it’s essential to get these ability to pay. right for a fair or a sustainable society. Miscon- Thus, communications and information are a ceptions about both teaching and learning lead function of government and inextricably tied in to little education and lots of wasted money. with education in the broad sense. The govern- Even worse, the resulting ignorance leads to igno- ment needs to provide and regulate the physical rant votes, which includes, naturally enough, ig- infrastructure, whether that’s mail coaches, norant votes on schooling, and so on in a de- fiberoptic cables or satellites, and provide a basic scending vortex. (This section discusses the same tier of service funded from taxes. That basic tier ideas as in the “War on Teachers” series, I [257] , II should include text and images for information, [258], III [259] .) education, political, legal, and feedback purposes. Going through the motions of sitting in school It would also include some quota of emails, doesn’t always teach anything, so the first ques- phone calls, or letters per person. Organizations tion is, “What is effective education?” It’s one of or businesses with requirements exceeding the those things whose definition changes depending quota would need to use commercial services. on the goal, but there is a common thread. We’ve Another area that shades from public good to effectively learned something when, faced with a purely private is entertainment. Whether Shake- quandary, we know how to approach an answer, speare is purely fun or purely education or some- which facts we need and where to look them up thing in between is an opinion. Whether Starcraft if we don’t know them, and once we have them is good for teaching strategic skills and hand-eye we know how to integrate them into a solution. coordination or is a silly game is likewise an opin- That’s true of a sixth grader solving a word prob- ion. As in other matters of opinion, those are best lem in math class, of a business executive figur- decided at the community level. ing out how to sell a new computer model, or of Since there must be complete separation be- a philosopher ruminating on the relationship be- tween the State and matters of belief, taxpayers tween different classes of thought. I’ll use the couldn’t be asked to fund religious teaching, or- word “competence” to summarize that result, al- ganizations or communications. The one excep- though it’s really much more than that. tion is that individuals can do what they like with There are many active components in learning. their personal quota of free communication. Remembering the relevant facts or sources takes
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 131 effort, making the relevant connections to find Another tangential note: knowing the subject solutions to problems takes even more effort, and matter becomes increasingly important the more figuring out where the gaps are in one’s knowl- advanced the student. In the US, at least, people edge and filling them takes perhaps the most ac- complain more and more about teachers too ig- tive commitment to effectiveness of all. norant to teach. There are several sides to that: Anything that requires active participation re- the teachers need to have mastered their sub- quires willingness, and willingness cannot be jects, the administrators need to assign the forced. That is a hugely important point that teachers correctly, and the conditions of teaching much of the current popular discussion about ed- need to be good enough to retain people with a ucation overlooks. So let me repeat it: learning choice of jobs. Only one of those depends on the can only be done willingly. It cannot be forced. teachers themselves. I’ll discuss conditions of Punitive measures have never worked, don’t teaching below. work, and will never work because they can’t One objection to the discussion of what’s in- work. volved in teaching is probably that it’s irrelevant Effective teaching is whatever enables effec- to the real world because only the very best tive learning. That requires knowledge of the sub- teachers do more than know the subject matter. ject matter, certainly, and of how to present it so Everyone who teaches knows that isn’t so since that students can learn most easily. But that’s everyone who teaches does it to some degree. just the first step. After that, the teacher has to Parents showing their children how to button a pay attention to each student, to try to get a feel shirt are doing it. Anyone who doubts it should for what they’ve understood, what they’re still pay close attention to themselves when they’re missing, and how best to fill the gaps given the trying to help someone they care about learn student’s way of organizing information. It feels a something. There’ll be that distinct feeling of try- bit like an exercise in mindreading, and the ing to get inside their minds in order to figure teacher has to care about the student to be able out how best to explain it. The main difference is to do it. Understanding someone else simply that non-teachers do that briefly, generally only doesn’t happen without caring. The teacher may with one or a few people at a time, and usually not even care about the student, strictly speak- only for relatively simple concepts. Multiply the ing. They may only care about doing their work effort and attention involved times the number of to a professional standard. But whatever the ori- students in a class, the amount of the subject gin, they have to care. The final and most impor- that needs explaining, and the number of hours tant step is for the teacher to take all their own teaching, and one can start to have some concept knowledge and understanding and apply it to of what it is that teachers do. lead the student to greater knowledge in a way To get a more complete concept, think about that gives her or him a sense of improvement and doing a teacher’s job. The closest thing to it that mastery. It’s that “light bulb going off” moment most people have done at some point is public that fires the desire to continue learning which is speaking. That addresses the first step, presenting the best gift of education. information to a group of people. The act of do- One tangential note: the most demanding ing it requires intense concentration because teaching is for students who know the least. That one’s mind has to be doing several things at once: takes the greatest skill and commitment. Ad- keeping the overall presentation in mind, speak- vanced students have enough understanding of ing coherently about the current point, and si- the field to need less help integrating new infor- multaneously preparing the next few intelligent mation. The kindergarten teachers are at the cut- sentences while the current ones are spoken. A ting edge of the field. Teaching microbiology to practised teacher will also, at the same time, be medical school students is, by comparison, a sim- gauging the level of understanding in the audi- ple job. (I speak from experience, although I’ve ence, modifying the presentation on the fly as never taught kindergarten. I have taught biology needed, and answering questions as they come to university students, and it is very clear to me up. When the students being taught are young, who has the harder teaching job.) the teacher will also be keeping order and check-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 132 ing for untoward activities, all while not losing trary, force makes people not learn (which cur- track of any of the above six simultaneous as- rently happens too much). All that’s needed for pects of the act of teaching. That level of concen- education is an unstressed environment with tration and engagement is standard during all of enough time and resources, and it happens. in-class time. It’s not special or something only What does “enough time and resources” actu- the best do. Some do it better than others, but ally mean? First and foremost, it means small every teacher does it. class sizes. It’s inevitable that the amount of at- That is fundamentally different from many tention a teacher can give any individual student other jobs. The level of preparation, concentra- is inversely proportional to the number of stu- tion, and energy required, all at once, is very un- dents requiring attention. In a class of thirty-five usual. Aspects of it occur elsewhere, whether in or forty children, a teacher’s time will be taken insurance adjusting, software coding, or bricklay- up with keeping order. Education will be a distant ing, but the need to have all those factors, all second. The fact that many children do nonethe- functioning at a high level, all at once is uncom- less learn in such environments shows how mon. The closest parallel to in-class time is per- strong the tendency toward learning is. Small tu- formance art. As with performance art, the great toring groups of less than five or six students majority of time spent on teaching happens out- measurably result in the greatest amount of side of class. And, also as with performance art, it learning. That’s why students having trouble with won’t amount to anything unless the individual a subject get tutoring. It’s not because all tutors involved puts a great deal of her- or himself into are brilliant teachers. It’s because the format al- it. lows for a great deal of individual attention. Class All of the above should make clear that teach- sizes much bigger than twenty or so are getting ing requires even greater active involvement than so far from the optimum as to be problematic. learning. Teaching, like learning, also cannot be Another important facet is time. I’ve men- forced. Punitive measures have never worked, tioned the time needed to give individual atten- don’t work, and will never work because they tion, but there’s also the time needed simply to can’t work. effectively present and absorb information. A stu- Trying to force good teaching would be like dent can’t study constantly. The neurological taking someone by the scruff of the neck and processes need time to assimilate and organize banging their head down on the table and yelling, the information on a biochemical level. There’s “THINK, dammit!” It is not going to happen no an optimum beyond which more courses or more matter how much it seems like the simplest solu- studying means less useful knowledge in the end. tion. That’s why longer school years don’t automatical- Good teaching cannot be forced. It can only be ly translate into much of anything. Education is enabled. Luckily, that’s not difficult. not the same as manufacturing poppet valves. Humans actually enjoy learning and teaching. Similarly for teaching. As a high performance It’s probably got something to do with our 1400 activity that nonetheless requires a lack of stress, cc or so of brain. It’s evident even in small things, there’s an optimum to how much actual teaching like preferring new places for vacations, and can be done in any given day before quality starts watching new movies rather than re-runs. It’s to suffer. It’s not a desk job. The optimum is more fun. And teaching is fun, too. There’s noth- nowhere near eight hours a day. Three hours ing quite like watching that “Aha!” moment light every other day, up to a maximum of five hours up someone’s face. To the extent that there’s tedi- on occasional days, is closer to the standard that um involved, and there definitely is, a proper needs to be applied. (That’s actual, in-the-class start on the road to learning puts that in the con- teaching, not supervising study halls or the like.) text of the skills gained and it seems like quite a To those who want to insist that’s preposterous, I small price to pay for happiness. In the same suggest they spend a semester or two teaching. sense as the difference between eating and force- Basic resources are essential. Teachers and stu- feeding, discipline is needed to learn but nobody dents lacking comfortable buildings, pencils, pa- has to be forced to learn or to teach. On the con- per, and basic texts are being asked to do the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 133 work of learning in a vacuum. Given human inge- those of the teachers they work for, so runaway nuity, sometimes education happens even in that pay should be less of a problem. environment, but it is never an optimum use of Teachers’ remuneration comes in two ways either teacher time or student brain power. due to the unusual nature of the job: salary and Advanced resources are nice, but the amount security. The actual money tends to be low com- of improvement they confer approaches zero for pared to other work requiring equivalent training increasingly large sums of money. They may even and commitment. cross over into negative territory if the bells and Before continuing, I’d like to dispel the illusion whistles serve to distract the student from the that extra time off is part of the compensation primary task of learning and integrating knowl- for teachers. Teachers always and everywhere edge. spend more time on their work than the hours The teachers themselves are the most critical that appear on paper. Writing exams, grading, resource, and people are aware of that. There’s helping students, preparing class work, setting much talk about how to be sure that schools hire up labs, and all the hundreds of other outside- only “the best.” Unfortunately, although the in- of-class aspects of the job cannot be dropped tentions are good, that goal is a logical impossi- simply because enough hours have been worked. bility. Most people will have average teachers. The jobs have to be completed no matter how That’s the definition of “average.” Most people long they take. Just as one example, under cur- can’t have “the best.” That is why it’s crucially rent conditions, it’s a rare teacher at any level, important to make sure that “average” is also ad- school or college, who doesn’t do job-related equate. Small class sizes, for instances, are neces- work every evening and weekend while school is sary for average teachers to be good teachers. in session. That amounts to around a 70-hour The other critical flaw in the concept of hiring work week for those 36 weeks. That’s 2520 hours “the best” is that we (and I do mean “we,” all of per year. That doesn’t count work over the sum- us) aren’t omniscient enough to discern the best mer, which is also standard for nearly all teach- for a hugely complex task that requires commit- ers. For comparison, a 40-hour per week job, two ment and caring as well as above average intelli- weeks vacation & ten paid holidays equals 1920 gence [260] . A system built on hiring “the best” hours. It’s because of the unpaid overtime that will excel mainly at justifying hires after the fact, long vacations are not only justifed, they’re es- not discerning good ones beforehand. The way to sential. Work that takes away one’s evenings and find good teachers is to require good training be- weekends rightly compensates by providing a forehand and then judge by actual performance much longer block of time off. on the job. A probationary period, such as three In a more balanced educational system, un- months, would wash out the least capable, in- paid overtime would not be expected, and teach- cluding those who looked good only on paper. ers really should get more free time if their (I’ll discuss evaluation of teachers’ skills in a mo- salaries are below average for their level of train- ment.) Once again, if we try to avert the worst ing. and judge by actual performance, rather than de- The second aspect of compensation is tenure. lude ourselves that we can discern the best, The word tends to be misunderstood to mean there’s a fighting chance of success. sinecure, whereas it’s real meaning is closer to Salaries for teachers and administrators are a “due process rights.” A teacher with tenure can major expense in any educational system. Admin- still be fired, but only for very obviously not do- istrators tend to be background noise in the mix ing their job. Tenure means that evaluations have and the public often hardly notices them. Like ad- to be done strictly on the merits, and that any ministrators generally, they are good at growing personal biases have no place. Anybody who their empires and their salaries far beyond any wants to apply a bias will have to find some ob- optimum. In a sustainable system, they would be jective excuse for it and be ready to support it subject to the same limitations and controls [167] during outside review. That’s not nearly as simple as all administrators. One of those limitations is as making one’s own decisions without much that their salaries are directly proportional to chance of challenges. Tenure forces supervisory
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 134 personnel in academe to restrain their personal the cheap can be sure of landing in the third cat- biases. It’s not some ivory tower luxury that insu- egory. lates eggheads from the “real world.” It’s an es- The final issue is how to see whether students sential component to make sure that the have learned and teachers have taught. It’s to lineworkers, as it were, can do their jobs instead evaluate results. This is another area of great cur- of worrying about their bosses. (Would that be a rent ferment because the public at large wonders good idea everywhere? Absolutely. What we need uneasily, as a President famously put it, “Is our is more tenure, not less. But this is a discussion kids learning?” about teaching, so I’ll limit it to that.) As far as students go, we know how to do The security conferred by due process rights is evaluations. Grades based on demonstration of a big part of an unstressed environment, which is active knowledge are what work. If the education essential to good teaching. Academe differs from system isn’t dysfunctional to begin with, in other other work in one important respect. Its “prod- words if teachers can do their jobs with the re- uct” is education, and if it’s not done right the quired autonomy, they’re the ones with the skill, damage lasts forever. But the damage is very slow training, and familiarity with the students to best to appear — decades, usually — so there are few evaluate them. personal consequences for getting it wrong. In In contrast, a note on what doesn’t work: this it’s unlike other critical jobs, such as nuclear mass tests of passive knowledge. The US school reactor control room technician. An incompetent and university systems are increasingly engulfed technician will get washed out even if they’re in national multiple choice testing schemes that good friends with the boss because the stakes are are incapable of measuring competence. The top too high. But a competent teacher who is not third of students who pass through the system go friends with the principal is in deep trouble. on to college. Those are identified by the tests as Without tenure, it’s too easy to follow person- the best. So many of them have such poor ability al biases. Skill becomes a secondary considera- to integrate knowledge that colleges throughout tion. (I know that nobody will admit to being less the country have to keep expanding their remedi- than objective. The evidence tells us that people al courses or raising their entrance requirements. are, no matter what they admit.) Yet skill in People sense that the tests we have aren’t doing teaching is the critical factor in effective teach- the job, so the obvious solution is … to require ing, not relationships with important people. more of them. It’s getting to the point where Without tenure, only exceptional supervisors will tests aren’t measuring learning. They’re replacing disregard networking when handing out perqs, it. That definitely does not work. promotions, and even pink slips. Exceptions As to evaluating teachers, I hope the foregoing aren’t enough to keep the system working, and discussion has made clear that teachers are not skill becomes an accidental feature. With tenure, the sole ingredient determining student success. teachers can focus on teaching instead of devot- The conditions under which they teach are more ing their best energies to office politics. important than the skill of the individual teacher. So far, the simple matter of enabling education I mean that literally. An average teacher with a involves small class sizes, secure, not-overloaded class of fifteen will be able to transmit a good bit teachers, and good basic facilities. Those few fac- of knowledge to the students. A brilliant teacher tors by themselves may explain why people are so with a class of forty will only be able to affect a dissatisfied with the quality of schooling. None of very talented few, if that. them are the cheapest option. However, even under ideal conditions teachers In education, you don’t exactly get what you need oversight and feedback like everyone else. pay for. The optimum amount intelligently ap- There are three different approaches that don’t plied returns many times the investment. Too work. The traditional one in the US is evaluation much spending generates decreasing marginal re- by the teacher’s principal, and the new ones ei- turns. Too little spending yields less than nothing ther incorporate student feedback or use tests of because ignorance is expensive. It’s a nonlinear student knowledge to judge the teacher’s merit. relationship, but people who want education on The traditional principal-centered methods of
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 135 evaluation aren’t weeding out bad teachers or re- ing is more important for student learning, that warding good ones. Principals have too many the student is not the primary determinant of chances for intuitive and personal bias. Without student learning, and the list could go on. (There counterweight from other authorities of at least is an introduction to the topic and some further equal status, the system will suffer from too links in War on Teachers I [257] .) many teachers retained on factors other than Most fatal of all, though, is the flaw in the their skill. There’s a reason why unions insist on very concept of measuring teaching. Only tangi- seniority as the sole criterion. At least that’s ob- bles are quantifiable, and only quantities can be jective and not dependent on the principal. The measured. But teaching, especially teaching at current focus on tests is also groping toward ob- the school level, has essential components that jectivity. However, selecting an outcome by involve attention, understanding and caring. The throwing darts at a board is also objective. It’s hard truth is that there is no way to measure just not very meaningful. those. They can be evaluated to some extent by Student evaluations of teachers were all the other human beings with similar capacities, but rage for a while but are starting to recede as peo- they cannot be measured. If we insist on measur- ple grasp the fundamental problems with that ing how “good” a teacher is, all we’ll succeed in approach. Teachers can affect the results by giv- doing is throwing out the very thing we’re trying ing students what they want, which is fun and to measure: effective teaching. easy classes. Learning becomes secondary. By far All that said, it does not mean there is no way the simplest, least-work method for teachers to to evaluate teachers. It means there’s no simple reduce the time they have to spend on students objective method of doing so. I think most people and the flak they catch from them is to give them actually know that, but they keep hoping a few higher grades. Grade inflation has become so multiple choice tests will do the trick because widespread and severe that everybody is noticing. that would be so nice and cheap. That shortcut And it’s gradually dawning on people that it’s not doesn’t exist. What can be done is to try to en- a good thing. sure the objectivity of the evaluators, and to have There’s also a fundamental problem with stu- clearly stipulated methods that sample the totali- dent evaluations which would exist even in a per- ty of a teacher’s work. fect world. Students don’t know enough to know The method doesn’t even need to be invented. what they need to learn. That’s why they’re tak- It’s been used in similar forms in many places. ing classes. It’s only after they’ve learned and The important factors are inspectors, a pair or used the knowledge that they can even begin to more who can act as a check on each other, who evaluate the teaching. Student evaluations after come from outside the district and are not any ten or twenty years might give very useful in- part of the teacher’s chain of command, who sights, but they could never provide more than evaluate the administration as well as the teach- partial feedback on the current situation. ers, who make class visits, and who, when evalu- Student evaluations do provide valuable and ating teachers, look at all of their work, such as necessary feedback, but it’s essential to keep it in syllabuses or lesson plans, exams, grading, stu- perspective. It is useful as a tool for the teacher dent work and in-class interest, and so on. The to modify their own teaching style or methodolo- inspectors must themselves be former or current gy, but it can never be a factor in job evaluation teachers. There’s no need for the visits to be a without undermining the mission to educate stu- surprise. Teaching ability improves with practice, dents. but it can’t be faked. Even months of warning The newest hot topic is testing students to see won’t turn a bad teacher into a good one. How- how much they’ve learned. If not very much, ever, a few days’ warning is plenty, otherwise then the thinking goes that the teacher must not there’ll be too much motivation to put on a be very good. The assumptions behind the ap- show. proach are ludicrous: that multiple choice tests Assuming the inspectors are professional and indicate effective learning or competence, that honest, which could happen in a system with the teacher rather than the conditions of teach- transparency, easily accessible results, and feed-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 136 back, then such complete evaluations will actual- for a person to “own” it and to be able to use it ly provide usable information to the whole sys- in life. tem, rather than mere numbers which could just Thus, for instance, writing and revising essays as well have come off a dartboard. teaches an enormous amount in any number of A real method of evaluation is not cheap, any subjects. Working through mathematical word more than education itself it. Like education, it problems or using math elsewhere, such as shop returns many times the investment by improving classes or in a model rocketry project, teaches the larger system. And, also like education, the analytical skills as well as integrating arithmetic, methods that seem cheap are actually the most algebra, and geometry. Labs are essential in the expensive. They can, by themselves, kill off good sciences, in language classes, and wherever the teaching. ability to turn knowledge into actions is required. Passive knowledge never turns into active knowl- edge without practice. Formal Schooling The shared characteristic of everything that works is that it takes a great deal of student and Education has many purposes: ensuring gener- teacher effort and time. There is no way to do it al literacy, providing training and certification, effortlessly. There is no way to do it quickly. enabling the advancement of knowledge, and There is no way to do it in large classes. There is providing opportunities to broaden one’s mind or no way to do it with overworked teachers. There learn new skills. Some learning is best done full is no way to do it cheaply. In the longer run, it time in a school. Some is most useful as an occa- pays for itself many times over. If you look no fur- sional class tucked in around the other demands ther than this year’s budget, there seem to be of life. Educational institutions need to have the plenty of corners to cut. But if the things that ac- flexibility to match diverse purposes and interests tually make education work are cut, then chil- to provide maximum functionality and choice. dren learn much less than they could and have a First and foremost is basic education. Democ- harder time of it than they need to. And some racy itself is hardly possible without literacy. In- learn so little they go on to become society’s creasingly in the technological age it’s not possi- most expensive adults. ble without numeracy either. Democracy could It’s important to remember that education, re- flourish in a world with nothing but clay tablets al education, can’t be done on the cheap. Like and wooden wagons, but not without a basic lev- other vital services, from police to medical care, a el of knowledge and information. sustainable society, if it wants to continue sus- At its best, schooling can accomplish what’s taining itself, has no choice but to provide at needed these days. How and what to teach is least the bare necessities of all of them. Micro- known and many students around the world scopes may not be necessary for every student in graduate with a good education, which proves biology classes, but small class sizes and that it can be done. There’s a common thread well-trained teachers are an absolute require- running through what works and what doesn’t. ment in every class. The intangible is almost al- Studying a vocabulary list for a multiple choice ways more important than the bricks and mortar. test teaches nothing. The words themselves are Getting back to the large amount of required soon forgotten, and the ability to use them in knowledge, two factors work together to allevi- context never appears. Following a set of steps ate the difficulty of learning. A child’s earliest for a specific set of math problems teaches noth- teachers have to know how to transmit the ex- ing. The steps are forgotten right after the exam, citement of mastery so that the tedium of learn- and the notion that it ever had any application to ing is in its proper context. And the earliest phas- the real world never arises. The examples could es of instruction have to be much more individu- be multiplied, but the gist is always the same: ally tailored than they are now. Day care workers getting the right answers from students does not, are highly specialized teachers, not babysitters. by itself, prove that they learned anything. Their training needs to include skill in providing Knowledge must be actively used and integrated more advanced learning opportunities, seeing
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 137
which children are eager to use them, and help- ure. The same goes double for numeracy. Practi- ing them do so to the extent of their interest. cal skills are hardly part of the curriculum, except The idea isn’t to generate a raft of precocious for some rudimentary sex education, or shop little geniuses for parents to boast about. It’s for classes for students on a technical track. Basic children to learn what they’re interested in when life skills such as managing finances, nutrition, they’re interested. Learning to read at the right fitness, how to interview for a job, how to fix time, for instance, is downright fun. Learning as small appliances or simple plumbing or how to an adult is a real slog. That’s an extreme example, know when the mechanic is making sense are but there is also variation in readiness at young too lowbrow to even mention. The idea that skills ages. Some children have an easier time learning are low class dates back to the days when educa- to read at three and by the time they’re six it’s ac- tion was only for people who had personnel for tually more difficult for them, not less. Others that sort of thing. An egalitarian society should might be better off waiting till later than six. be providing an education that helps everyone There does need to be a maximum age by which through life, including all aspects of it. a child must start school because there are par- Parenthetically, it should go without saying ents who will keep them out forever to save that technology changes and specific skills money or to prevent cultural taint. At some learned in school might become obsolete. One point, all children are ready to begin formal could learn how to replace hard drives in com- learning. The consensus among educators seems puters only to graduate into a world where mem- to be that that age falls somewhere between five ory storage has shifted to photonic crystals. But and seven. The same variation in development ex- the type of analytical thinking applied to solving ists for numeracy, for hand-eye coordination and practical problems does not change, does take physical skills. All of them happen on their own practice, and can be taught. It’s also different schedule in each child, and learning is easiest from the analytical thinking needed in math or when fitted to the child and not the other way science or philosophy. It needs its own training. around. It’s an extension of the principles of flexi- Numeracy is another big deficiency in current bility and choice adapted to the youngest citi- education. Students achieve better math skills in zens. some countries than in others, but from a citi- The idea of instruction based on individual zen’s perspective it’s not adequate anywhere. needs should then be continued right through Math skills are taught in isolation and the usual the whole system. Children will reach the first refrain later in life is “I never used that stuff even grade level at different ages. That doesn’t have to once.” A great deal of time and mental effort is be a problem if they can also enter first grade at wasted for nothing. Actually, for less than noth- different ages. The grades need to be defined by ing because the process makes people allergic to subject matter, not age of the children. A six numeracy, which is a dangerous loss. year-old math genius could be in the same tenth The problem in math as in other academic grade math class as a twenty year old with a diff- subjects is that the curricula are established by fferent level of aptitude. That six year-old might be experts, and they know what is needed to eventu- just starting to read, and during recess be part of ally be successful in their field. But children don’t a playgroup that’s mainly seven year-olds. There need the foundational elements for an advanced is no child-centered reason to segregate children degree. They need a sampling that confers useful rigidly by age into one regiment for all activities. skills. In math, they don’t need to factor polyno- If we don’t waste the brain power of children mial equations. They need the fundamentals of at the earliest stages of learning, there’s a chance logic, they need arithmetic, basic methods of they’ll be able to absorb what they need to be- how to solve for an unknown, basic statistics and come effective citizens by the time they’re adults. how to evaluate numbers presented to support Because that’s another area where the system an argument, and where to look when they need now falls short. Children don’t learn near methods they haven’t learned. None of these are enough. Too many graduate with so little literacy impossible to teach to children. The curriculum that they associate having to think only with fail- just needs to be tailored to them instead of to a
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 138 theoretical requirement for an advanced universi- since children at different ages learn differently. ty degree. Schools need to prepare children for But that’s the point. The stratification should be the skills they’ll need in life. University prep based on what’s best for effective learning with courses can prepare them for the knowledge the least effort, not on a chronological age. they’ll need if they go on for advanced degrees. Certification is a small part of education, but Besides literacy, numeracy, and practical skills, it’s nonetheless important. The general idea is to children need enough introduction to the larger prove that the bearer completed a required body picture of human life on earth so they at least of courses and practice within an appropriate pe- know how much they don’t know. They need riod of time. Whether that was done as a full enough introduction to history, other cultures, time student or part time is not the issue. All that art, music, chemistry, biology, and geology to matters is how well it was done, something that have some idea of what the discussion is about should be recognized at the school level as well when these subjects come up in the news or in as at the university. Just as there’s no “Bachelor’s entertainment. And also so that they have some Equivalency Degree,” why should there be a high idea whether that’s where their talents lie and school equivalency degree? These things mark off they want to learn more about them. levels of education, and that’s all they need to do. In short, there’s a great deal for children to One level might be required as a prerequisite to learn. It should be obvious why it’s essential not further study, but that doesn’t mean it somehow to waste their time and to tailor the curriculum makes sense to put people in a straitjacket as to so they learn what they need rather than what the time required to reach it. they don’t. I suspect there’d be a great deal more Another way to facilitate flexibility in the certi- willingness among children to learn things whose fication process is to separate it from education practical application is made clear to them, and in the broad sense. The basic level of knowledge a they’d absorb more with less effort. citizen needs should come with a high school de- There’s so much to learn that school is bound gree. Call it a General Education degree to make to be a full time occupation in the early years. the learning involved explicit rather than the But just as the transition into academic learning manner of acquiring it. On top of that could should be gradual and individual, the transition come certification for specific lines of work, be it to work should be the same. Furthermore, there’s plumbing or medicine or accounting, and those no good reason why one ever has to end com- would include courses directly relevant to that pletely and the other to take over all one’s time. work. Some people might stop all formal learning. Oth- Further general education, however, would be ers might continue taking classes their whole a matter of individual predilection. It’s a waste of lives, whether for fun or profit. Work and educa- everyone’s time, and in a taxpayer-funded system tion could fit together in larger or smaller pro- also of everyone’s money, to expect adults to ab- portions throughout life. Equality does not mean sorb information for which they see no use. I’ve that everyone does the same thing. It means that taught college long enough to know that for a everyone can do what works for them. The edu- fact. Children are capable of absorbing every- cational system can be an important facilitator of thing, when they’re taught well, but by the time that goal. they’re 18 most people are more interested in get- A flexible educational system would not have ting on with the business of life. General educa- the same rigid barriers between stages and insti- tion is something they come back to, and when tutions that there are now. Day care would turn they do, then they can really make something of into school, which would shade into college, and it. A system that gives people the time and infra- some of those would also be loci of advanced re- structure to do that is the one which will see the search. All of them would be open to anyone who flowering of intelligence and creativity people fulfilled the prerequisites. The more experienced hope for from general education. the students, the more use could be made of dis- One aspect of school life could be worse in a tance methods, where they’re effective. Obvious- flexible system than it is now. Bullying is a con- ly, some age stratification is inevitable and good, sideration whenever children of different physical
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 139 abilities are thrown together, so it has the poten- commercial interests. For defense, the legal sys- tial to be worse if children of different ages are tem, elections, and regulation the answer is “no.” together. It’s probably clear by now that attack- For care of the vulnerable the answer is “yes.” For ing children, including when it’s other children education, I think the answer is “maybe.” doing it, and including humiliation or non-physi- Having parallel systems of education results in cal attacks, are just as illegal as similar behavior two separate problems. One is financial. When in adults. It’s not a minor matter just because the rich can buy themselves a completely differ- adults aren’t the victims. It has to be suppressed ent education than those with median incomes, as vigorously as any other criminal behavior. Pre- that promotes artificial divisions in society based vention should be the first line of defence, using on money alone and it fosters inequality. That is proven methods of education on the issues, re- unequivocally a bad thing. At the very least, porting, and enforcement. It should also be ap- where private education is available, there needs propriately punished if and when it does occur. to be a rule that all people on taxpayer-funded This is not something to handle leniently because salaries must send their children to the public “they’re just kids.” Bullying is the beginning of schools. Possibly, the same rule should extend to adult patterns of behavior that are against every- everyone whose wealth or income falls into the thing a fair society stands for. top ten percent. Flexibility in education and its adaptability to The other problem is cultural. If a given body different schedules could be promoted also by of knowledge is needed for an informed citizenry, the academic calendar itself. Scheduling may and that citizenry is essential to an equitable and seem like a pathetically pedestrian concern, but sustainable government, it makes no sense to say just as with other administrative trivia, the effect that some people can pull their children out of in reality can be greater than that of high-minded the community. Because children are the group principles. Academic schedules now hark back to affected. Alternate schooling for cultural reasons medieval times, when the students needed to at- is not about universities. It’s about parents who tend to their “day jobs” of helping with farming want to set their children on a different path during summer and early fall. Thinking purely in than the larger society. I would argue that par- terms of academics, though, another arrange- ents don’t have the right to make that choice for ment would work better. The school year could their children. Unfortunately, the children don’t be divided into three 3-month semesters with have the knowledge to make an informed choice one month between each one. Short or intensive for themselves. It’s a very difficult question. courses could be taught during the one month in- On the other side, private schooling can pro- tersessions. Three-month classes packed into one vide a valuable check on public education. It can month would count the same as the longer ver- experiment with new methods, like the Montes- sions for both students and teachers. A school sori and Waldorf schools. If the public schools year would be eight months, and any given se- start slipping, it can provide a vivid counterpoint mester or any of the one-month periods could be showing how far they’ve gone. used for vacations in any combination. This One way of making sure that the same body of would allow school facilities to be used on a con- knowledge was available to all schoolchildren tinuous basis without pretending individual stu- would be to have the same requirements for all dents can be constant learning robots. Major hol- types of schools, whether public or private. More idays would be treated as they are in other jobs, could be taught in private, but not less. They with one or two-day breaks. It would allow acad- would also all be subject to the same evaluations emic scheduling to fit more different kinds of and inspections. work schedules, which would be desirable in a However, that requirement would be costly to system aiming to promote the widest latitude of implement for home schoolers. Home schooling individual choices. has unique issues of teacher and student compe- Whenever the government has an essential tence. The latter could be promoted by requiring function there’s the question whether it can also home schoolers to take the same exams as public be appropriately carried out by individuals or school students, graded by teachers for extra pay.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 140
Teacher evaluations, however, become a real job. They need adequate salaries. They need con- quandary. Holding home schools to the same trol over their own jobs so that they can do what standard is fine in theory, but any system of valid they’re expert at, teaching, without interference. teacher evaluation will be resource-intensive. They cannot be construed as the cheapest solu- When applied to a micro-scale situation like tion to a shortage of other staff or as a supply home schooling, the cost per pupil will be huge. cabinet to make up for budget shortages. And Should taxpayers have to pay that bill? If they they need small class sizes in schools and in oth- don’t, and the costs have to be borne by the er classes where the students are beginners. En- home schoolers, none but the richest would ever suring good teaching is simple. After hiring good have that option. I don’t see an equitable solution people, after having real evaluations to make sure to the dilemma. Maybe there wouldn’t be very they stay good, and after providing them with many home schoolers if they were held to the good working conditions, the only thing anyone same standards as public schools? Maybe they has to do to ensure good teaching is to get out of could all be convinced to use the distance learn- the teachers’ way. ing component of public education? That brings me to the administrators in the In most countries, there would be a distance system. Teachers are not necessarily good admin- learning option to accommodate children who istrators, or vice versa, so, except for the hybrid couldn’t reach schools. At the school level, I’d en- position of principal, there doesn’t need to be a vision distance learning as a supplement to, not a requirement for educational administrators to replacement for, in-class learning because of the have been teachers. There do need to be the usu- differences in commitment that I discussed earli- al limits on administrators. In keeping with the er. Some part of the child’s school year, such as at principle that power devolves to those actually the beginnings and ends of semesters, would be doing the job, administrators administer. They in regular classes while living in boarding facili- submit accounting (based on teacher data when ties. appropriate), settle disputes, hire janitors, order Turning now to what basic education entails supplies, make sure the school is prepared for on the teacher’s side, it clearly would need com- emergencies, that there’s a nurse available, and petent teachers if children’s capacity to learn is so on. They’re appointed by the usual process [261] to be fully utilized. In the US, there might be the for administrators: either random selection from feeling that, right there, is a fatal flaw in the a qualified pool for the higher offices or simple whole idea. The current feeling is that far too hiring for lower offices. They’re subject to the many teachers are incompetent and need to be same oversight and recall potential. As with other kicked. Sometimes that’s to make them improve, administrators, their salary is tied to that of the sometimes it’s to kick them out, but either way, people they work for, in this case teachers. They they need “better standards.” don’t tell teachers how to do their jobs, hire People have it backwards. Work that requires a them or promote them. That needs to be done by high level of caring and personal commitment experts in the field, who are other teachers. In cannot be improved by kicking the person doing the interests of objectivity, teachers from outside it. The time to set standards is before they’re the district should have the main voice in those hired, not after. Afterwards, you can only make decisions, and they shouldn’t include the same sure they keep meeting them. And if the objec- ones involved in evaluations of the teacher con- tion is that you can’t get good teachers nowa- cerned. days, well, that’s the problem. If the conditions of work make too many competent people go else- where, then the thing to change is the conditions Advanced Education and Research of work, not to try to force competence where none exists. In terms of teaching students, universities are To get the good teachers the system I’m dis- not as far away from where they need to be as cussing requires, they need to have relevant certi- (most) schools. Knowledge of subject matter fication requirements and real evaluation on the plays a greater role than teaching skill, although
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 141 the latter is never completely irrelevant. The im- Grant proposals take time to write. (Imagine portance of subject matter and the ability of stu- doing about 100 complex tax returns in a row, to dents to learn on their own means that large get a sense of the tedium and attention to detail classes are less of a problem (although large labs involved.) The chances for funding of any given don’t work at any level) and that distance learn- proposal are small, so several are done by many ing can be more extensively utilized. However, faculty every year. Most of that work is inevitably just because they work a bit better than schools, wasted. Further, publications that prove one did doesn’t mean universities are actually where they something with earlier grants are essential to need to be. Even in as simple a matter as teach- getting future grants. So publications proliferate. ing (it is simple at that level) there’s still much Writing them, submitting them, and revising that could be improved. them also takes time. In other respects than teaching, universities All of that is time that cannot be spent on have drifted far off course, at least in the US. (The teaching. Status naturally accrues to research as indications are that the situation is not materially a less humdrum activity than teaching. When in different in other countries, but I’m intimately fa- addition to that, promotions and pay raises de- miliar with the US system, so this discussion re- pend almost entirely on quantity of research out- flects that.) The main problems are in the treat- put and grants received, teaching falls only slight- ment of faculty and in the focus on research for ly above emptying the wastebaskets. A necessary university gain. Both of these negatively affect job, but one tries to get someone else to do it. students and the advancement of knowledge. Much of the teaching is passed down to those Those are not minor functions. So, by slowly de- who have little other choice. That also fits well stroying the whole point of universities, those with the administration agenda of reducing two trends also waste a great deal of taxpayer spending. Teaching assistants, temporary, and money. How well universities function has major part-time faculty are all many times cheaper than social implications, so, although it’s tangentially tenure-track faculty. This serves to lower the sta- related to government, I’ll give some suggestions tus of teaching still further until academe has be- on how the situation could be realigned. come more or less a caste system. Poorly paid First, a micro-summary of how the current sit- people teach far too many classes and are hired uation developed to put my suggestions in con- only for three months, sometimes a year, at a text. Research received government funds be- time. Looking for work every few months takes cause of the incalculable social benefits of the oc- time. Both the overload and the job hustling re- casional breakthrough. Research requires infra- duces the time they can spend on individual stu- structure, so the government included money for dents. The result is that nobody can really afford “overhead” and didn’t limit it to the actual direct to make individual students a priority. Teaching costs. It was intended as support for the critical faculty are just trying to cover their classes when social function of universities generally. So far, so there are only 24 hours in a day, and research fac- good. ulty are mainly concerned about funding. It’s not University administrators saw money, which, that any of these faculty are bad teachers, but ei- with a bit of accounting to beef up infrastructure ther it’s not their real job or they’re overloaded. costs, could be turned into larger amounts that Teaching and learning suffer under the current they could do something with. Government reward system, but so does research even though grants became what would be called profit cen- it’s supposed to be the whole point. The problem ters in industry. Administrators allocate funds, so is not just that people generate chaff to get the they never have a hard time convincing faculty of money. It’s more systemic than that. Govern- the importance of their priorities. The push was ment-funded research is for those projects with- on to get research funding. As time went by, ad- out obvious payoff. Studies with a clear potential ministrators grew increasingly dependent on that for profit are rarely basic research and should be overhead. The reward structure for faculty be- funded by the industries that benefit from them. came increasingly intertwined with getting But potentially breakthrough research has a prob- grants. lem, and that is its position out on the cutting
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 142 edge. Nobody who isn’t themselves on that edge known at the beginning. That’s why it’s being is likely to understand it, and the few who are done. So trying to pre-judge results by funding in- out there may well be professional rivals. They teresting conclusions is only about playing it safe. may be friendly rivals, but they are still less than It’s not about new discoveries that, by their very objective reviewers. So funds are doled out either nature, never have foregone conclusions. Trying based on the opinions of those who don’t under- to fund “promising” research is actually a waste stand the research or those who could have a of money rather than a prudent use of it. When it stake in undermining it. None of that promotes comes to basic research, the government is in the brilliance, even though the system has sacrificed same position as the scholars doing it: they have everything else for excellence in research. to give it their all without any preconceived no- That summary should show how far-reaching tions, and then when it doesn’t work, they just the consequences of minor and well-intentioned do it again for a different question. That’s hard changes can be. Provide money for unspecified enough for scholars to do after years of training. indirect costs as a proportion of the direct re- It’s not something governments have ever done, search funds, and before you know it, overhead is but that’s how it must be done if they actually at 50% and proposals are porked up to cost the want to get what they’re paying for. taxpayers as much as possible. It is essential to Another reason to give up on trying to evalu- get the reward system right, and to re-evaluate it ate the research itself is, as I’ve mentioned, that periodically to see where it’s slipping and to very few people besides the researcher actually make the necessary changes. know enough about the topic to do that. Trying The solution is to realign rewards with desired to limit funds to those proposals the reviewers outcomes, and at least one component of doing understand is another way of trying to play it that is always to pay for things directly. If you safe, instead of taking the risks that a step into want well-taught students, make teaching the ac- the unknown requires. tual job of professors. Make it impossible to hire Potential payoff might seem like a good way of or promote them on any other basis. Further- identifying promising research, but, except for more, the teaching should actually and realisti- applied research taking small incremental steps, cally fit into a 24-hour work week, the same as it is not. Once again, this is because there is no everyone else’s. Faculty members wouldn’t have way of knowing the outcome of basic research. to fear turning into teaching drones who are Sputnik was launched in 1957, but the telcos bored to death. They would have as much time as heavily dependent on satellite technology only everyone else to pursue interests for which made fortunes over four decades later. In medi- they’re not paid. Professors who are hired partly cine, potential payoff can be a bad goal for a diff- or entirely to do research should likewise have to fferent reason. What we want in medicine are the meet realistic and explicit expectations. They cheapest solutions, not the expensive ones. We should be paid to do research. They shouldn’t al- want a measles vaccine, not topnotch eye trans- so be funding building upkeep. Buildings should plant surgery after a bad case of the disease. In be paid for by funding for buildings. Money for many important ways, profits can actually cost administration would be assigned using the same us cures [243] . The likely payoff is only worth con- independent methods of assessing prices as other sidering in the broadest social terms and with in- government functions. In all aspects, the point is tangibles weighted far more than money. That’s to pay directly for the thing being bought, and not what people usually mean by the word “pay- not to pay for something else and hope some of it off.” ends up facilitating the actual goal. A rather different way of funding research is Basic research, however, still presents a prob- needed: one that recognizes the inevitable igno- lem because in important ways the goal isn’t rance of both the research and its results. I could what it seems to be. It’s to study a given topic, of see a system working as follows. Some propor- course, but the goal is generally understood as tion of taxes is dedicated to research based on more than that. It’s presumably all about the re- what is deemed an optimum balance between sults. Yet the results of real research are un- affordability and fostering social advancement.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 143
That pot is divided into a few large sums, more ment auditing arm which would be expected to medium ones, and many small ones of a few pick up on any irregularities. thousand dollars each. As always when I outline specific approaches, Short proposals can be sent in by anyone with I’m only trying to flesh out my meaning. Experi- the requisite academic credentials, whether they ence would show whether there were better work in education or not. Universities would be ways to spread research money as widely, as eff- obligated to provide facilities for funded research ffectively, and as frugally as possible. Incentives as part of their charter. The proposals indicate should be aligned with enabling scholars to con- which funding size class they need. If the money centrate on their work instead of extraneous dis- is awarded and not used up, the remainder could tractions. be used on further work to develop the idea. The Direct payments, whether for teaching, re- goal is to reward intelligent frugality in research. search, buildings, maintenance or administra- The proposals outline the idea, but they’re evalu- tion, are simpler under a single payer plan, when ated purely on the soundness of their methodolo- the government funds all of education. Then one gy. Can the proposed methods produce the data source of funds doesn’t need to try financial acro- the researcher needs? Scholars are good at evalu- batics to influence a sector outside its purview. ating methods and what they say about a re- searcher’s grasp of their field. Methodology re- view would also serve to filter out proposals for Diffuse Learning perpetual motion machines and other silliness, if somebody with academic credentials were fool- Humans can keep learning throughout life, ish enough to submit such a thing. To promote but the obvious implication is generally avoided. objectivity, the reviews need to be double blind, It’s not just children who are at risk from their not single blind as they are now. In other words, impressionable minds. Any suggestion that adults identifiers on the proposals need to be removed might uncritically absorb messages tends to be so that both reviewers and proposers are anony- met with offended objections. And yet the evi- mous (or as much so as possible). Part of the dence that adults can learn without wanting to evaluation of methods would be whether the pro- or trying is unequivocal. The entire advertising in- posal asks for a realistic amount of money given dustry is based on it. I would think that the the methods involved. The reviewers would be prospect of messages attaching themselves to drawn from a pool of qualified people, using sim- one’s brain would worry people. The rational re- ilar procedures to other matters requiring review action would be to avoid unwanted messages be- [261] (Government II, Oversight ). fore they could take hold. Denial does nothing If the proposal passes the review for method- but allow the involuntary learning to proceed. ological coherence, then it goes into the pool for There’s resistance to the rational approach funding. Funds would be allocated randomly to mainly, I think, because of the fear that others proposals in the pool until the money ran out. If might start to take away one’s favorite entertain- not funded, the same proposal could be resub- ment. The general idea is, more or less, “It’s none mitted without being reviewed again for some of your business. Don’t tell me what to do.” period of years, after which it would be checked In a free society, one where everyone can do to see whether it was still relevant. If the propos- anything that doesn’t interfere with the same al is funded, the researcher could be asked to rights in others, that is indeed true. What you do show daily or weekly log books describing work to your brain is your business. The same rule ap- done, but there would be no requirement for plies to more tangible drugs. publication because there might not be any re- But that right does end where it affects others, sults worth publishing. Negative results would be and if enough members of a community learn posted or publicly logged at a central library so lies from pervasive background messages, they’ll that others would know of them and the same start to act on them. Lies don’t reflect reality, so research didn’t continue to be repeated. Receipts actions based on them cause damage, and that for funds spent would be mirrored to the govern- will affect everyone. The fact that it’s impossible
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 144 to draw a line between what’s damaging and tion of tall lean body types. what is not, and the fact that narratives are a cul- The narrow range of body types defined as at- ture’s soul whether they reflect reality or not, tractive is an interesting example of how the sto- doesn’t change the fact that sustainability de- ries we tell ourselves influence the subsequent pends heavily on reality-based actions. stories in an increasingly tight spiral. Preference So, even though there’s no question that it’s a for long, thin women has grown so extreme that can of worms, societies do have to think about for the vast majority of women the only way to what the prevailing diffuse education is teaching. meet the ideal is anorexia. Some countries have They need to be at least aware of what’s going actually noticed the health costs of anorexic girls, on. Living in the comfortable fantasy that it and started making motions toward a better bal- doesn’t matter which stories we tell ourselves ance. Spain, for instance, began requiring fashion hasn’t worked and won’t work. Ironically shows to employ less etiolated models. enough, that attitude is often justified by the All that remains is to take that intelligent ap- equally comfortable fantasy that we know reality proach all the way. The images of us that we pre- … when our grasp of it is mediated by those self- sent to ourselves should reflect us. The cultural same stories that supposedly don’t matter. expectation needs to be that the people elevated There are currently three main ways of float- as representative of humanity actually are repre- ing messages to people: ads, entertainment, and sentative. Across the totality of media, they news. That includes aspects of new media and should reflect the mix in the population. Ads, social media, which fall into one or more of those fashion magazines, videos, and all the rest should categories. How messaging should or can work all reflect the actual demographics of the popula- along those different paths is an open question. tions by gender, race, age, and body type. This In some cases, the answer, or at least a good doesn’t place an undue burden on casting direc- starting point, seems clear. Consider ads, for in- tors or their equivalent. They’re already incredibly stance. Truth in advertising laws and limits on precise and careful in their selections. They just repetitiveness of commercial speech would need to reprioritize their criteria. The penalties change ads into something barely recognizable by for not doing so could be to hand over casting to current standards. Both that and some entertain- groups that have proven themselves capable of ment related issues were discussed in Free selecting diversity as well as talent. The grounds Speech vs. Noise [103] . for “eminent domain” in casting could be a new However, the point being made there related class of misdemeanors called “bad judgment.” to preventing a counterfactual din. The point The one-sided messages about sexiness are a here is the much murkier one of examining what problem because they’re one-sided. By faithfully the various messages actually teach. reflecting the sexism of the wider society in There’s a justifiable horror of establishing lim- which men have sex and women are sex, the its measured by what fits in the narrowest minds needs of an entire half of the population become or by what serves the interests of the powerful invisible. That damages the half who are denied, few. And yet it beggars belief that any constant obviously, and it damages the other half by message can have no influence. Censorship does putting them in an adversarial situation for an nobody any good. But just because thought con- activity that’s fundamentally cooperative. If the trol by silencing is bad, doesn’t make thought heart and soul of the activity are avoided, what’s control by repetition good. The issue has to be left is obviously going to be a pale shadow of the addressed, although I’m not sure how. real thing. Men, too, get far less than they could. I’ll discuss a few examples of diffuse but highly And yet, even though the attitudes damage every- consistent messages that have a pernicious social one, they strengthen over time because that’s effect, and how it may be possible to counterbal- how stories work. The new one has to top the old ance those situations without censorship that si- one or there’s a flat feeling of “been there, done lences ideas. Some of the most obvious one-sided that.” If they’re headed in a good direction, they messages permeating media are the usefulness of can get better. If they’re headed in a bad one, violence, the sexiness of women, and the admira- they get worse.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 145
The situation up to that point is already dam- the Bill of Rights? aging, and has already passed beyond the point of Assuming violence in media is harmless be- being a private matter. But it doesn’t stop there. cause it doesn’t lead to observable viciousness in Sex becomes conflated with rape, as might be ex- most people suffers from another fallacy too. Vio- pected when it’s construed as a fight. By dint of lence has its social effect not by the actions of repetition, rape then becomes a joke, and cur- most people but by those of a few. It may affect rently we’re in the realm where anyone, victim or only a tiny minority, but depending on what they bystander, who doesn’t get the joke is a prude or do, the human damage could be immense. The a spoilsport or both. And at least one source of point with violence in media is not whether it this brutalization of everyone’s humanity is the affects most people, but whether and how it aff- inequality at the beginning of the road. ffects anyone. That also points to a possible solution. There’s If violent entertainment leads to, say, in- a way to distinguish sex from dehumanization. creased low-level bullying by a few people it will Sexual messages, whether they’re relatively sub- pass under the scientific radar unless the experi- tle in ads or not so subtle in pornography are not mental design is explicitly looking for that. (I’m damaging when both points of view are equally saying “people” rather than “children” because evident and equally considered. In ads, for in- workplace bullying is no less of a problem than stance, men would sometimes be desirable and the schoolyard kind. It’s merely different in exe- not necessarily behind the camera whenever sex- cution.) Yet the bullying will damage much more uality is involved. Women would generally be just than the victims, criminal as that is. It will have a humans, as they are in life, and not always sexy. chilling effect on the freedom of all people, Pornography could actually serve a useful pur- who’ll be constrained not to behave in ways that pose if it taught people what works for women, attract bullies and, even worse, not to help the since that’s clearly far from self-evident to many victims out of fear for themselves. That last is a men. But something like that would have an up- lethal corrosive at any age. I don’t know of any hill struggle to even be classed as porn at this studies that have even tried to measure subtle point. A rejection of harm would cut out much of long term effects. I can’t imagine how you could, what’s now misunderstood as porn, and the re- given the sea of variables involved. quirement to represent women’s own point of Repeated messages of violence in entertain- view would dump most of the rest. But there ment, as entertainment, run counter to every- might be ways to foster socially beneficial atti- thing that makes either a fair society or a sustain- tudes without instituting a toxic morality police. able one work. It seems pretty obvious that such More on that in a moment. messages would need to be counteracted. Pervasive violence in media is generally con- I can think of two approaches that might help sidered irrelevant to the real world because most reduce the lessons violence teaches for real life. people don’t become measurably more violent af- One is that the only acceptable victims of it — ter partaking. But the most pernicious effect of a this is supposed to be entertainment, after all — constant drumbeat of violence in entertainment are machines, such as obvious non-humanoid ro- is defining it as fun and turning it into something bots. It shouldn’t be acceptable to define the suff- normal. We’re to the point now where reacting ffering of any sentient creature, let alone humans, to a decapitation (in entertainment) with “Cool!” as entertainment. That way, one could still shoot is cool. The fact that such a thing is supposed to at things, but they would be things. The taboo be fun, for some value of the word “fun,” isn’t against harming living, breathing creatures even considered a symptom of anything, let alone would be part of the message. madness. The mentality leaks out of fantasy, The other approach could be an ethos that re- which people like to pretend is separated from quires an allegiance to underlying reality. The as- reality by an impenetrable wall of reason, and is sumption behind violent entertainment is that vi- already evident in ordinary life at the extremes. olence solves problems. The enemy is gone after How else to explain the widespread easy accep- being smashed. The question that should be tance of torture in a country which once wrote asked is does violence really solve the conflict in
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 146
question? If no — and there are very few situa- what’s providing the messaging, in which case a tions where violence works the way intuition ex- news organization does right to report it. On the pects — then the resolution in the story needs to other hand, news which is trying to draw in reflect what happens in the real world. (Yes, viewers is evidently quite as capable of pandering those stories will be harder to write.) to the lowest common denominators as any oth- All of the remedies to the specific examples er medium. discussed involve cultural shifts. It becomes un- I’ve already discussed [262] the likelihood that acceptable to have cookie cutter models or for-profit news is a logical impossibility. The mis- women who could be replaced by rubber dolls sion of news organizations has to be reporting with no loss of function. The creative classes can truth without fear or favor to the best of their work with those paradigms just as they now ability. The mission of a for-profit is to do what- manage to make movies about detectives who ever it takes to get the most profit. Those two don’t smoke or blacks who don’t play a banjo. missions might overlap on rare occasions, but The social function comes in where damaging they have nothing to do with each other. Maybe repetition is identified, brought forward, and by the use of news as an avenue of entertaining ex- social consensus is taken out of the repertoire. citement will be a thing of the past in sustainable It’s been done before. There is nothing impossible societies with only highminded not-for-profit about it. news organizations. There is one other lever besides good will and In case that assumption turns out to be overly intelligence that can be brought to bear. Whenev- optimistic, I want to stress that news programs er there is talk of limiting expression, the objec- are more responsible than other outlets, not less, tion arises that interfering with artistic expres- for ensuring that they inform rather than manip- sion is a bad thing. There’s a good deal of truth to ulate. They need to guard against not only misin- that. On the other hand, the pattern to most of formation on their own side, but also the willing- the objectionable repetition is that it is designed ness on the part of their listeners to believe con- to extract money from people by stimulating venient statements. News organizations would their adrenal or other glands. The artistic expres- be subject to the fact-checking standards in any sion only becomes an issue when the revenue case. Their role in fostering an informed citizenry stream is threatened, for instance by a require- is so critical, however, that they should be held to ment to soften the high their users can expect. a very high standard in the more nebulous area of It’s never brought out as a reason for lower profi- general messaging as well. They should not, to fits because the creators’ artistic integrity re- take an example at random, spend more time on quired them to make a less salable product. Real sports than educating the public about global artistic expression seems far less dependent on warming. The elevated standard could be ex- money than the kind whose main function is pressed in actual punishments, such as revoca- pushing a high. tion of license, for a persistent pattern of diffuse That should point the way to a possible misinformation. method of suppressing objectionable repetition. Not all diffuse education is bad. Useful infor- When a community decides it’s had enough of vi- mation can also permeate many channels. Social olent “fun,” something they could do by vote, or support for repeated messages should be limited when the courts decide certain kinds of expres- to those which are unequivocally valid state- sion run counter to the founding principles of a ments of fact, such as public health information. fair society, it could be illegal to produce it com- Libraries, physical or virtual, also provide diff- mercially. The whole production and distribution ffuse education. It’s available in whatever quantity would have to be a volunteer effort. People with or time the user wants it. That would be impor- a real message will continue trying to get it out tant for all the information on which a fair, and under those circumstances. People who are try- therefore necessarily transparent, society de- ing to make a quick buck off a rush will quit. pends. Transparency provided by diffuse availabil- News forms a gray area when considering re- ity of information isn’t reserved only for issues of peated messages. On one hand, reality may be obvious social significance. There are also, for in-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 147 stance, such apparently mundane matters as to illustrate what I mean by egregious and what transparent and easily available price information some possible actions against them could be. which, in the aggregate, is essential for the eco- There may be far more effective methods than nomic system to work. those I’ve imagined. I’ve spent some time on diffuse, repeated mes- sages because they’re the dominant avenue for - + - misinformation, and misinformation is not some- thing a sustainable society can afford. However, it’s only dangerous when repeated. If it’s not con- To sum up, education is a vital function. With- tinual, there’s not much of a problem, so it’s im- out good information, equally available to all, portant to keep the response to it proportional. and without enough education to understand It’s better to err on the side of carelessness than that information, democracy itself is impossible. to be so vigilant against bad messages that all A fair system of government is ensuring its own speech starts to suffer. It’s only the egregious cas- survival when it fulfills its obligations to support es that need action, and then they need carefully education. considered action that targets them specifically and leaves the rest of the life of the community + + + alone. I’ve tried to give some examples primarily
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 148
Creativity
they bring. With those two concepts in mind the If we’d had the same rules millions of years ago rational way to align creativity and its benefits as we do now, we’d still be living in trees. Some becomes clearer. Don’t make futile attempts to bright wit would have locked down the concept limit the spread of ideas. Try to see how wide- of spending the night on the ground and set up a spread they are. Don’t try to extract a toll. Try to toll booth. make sure the creator gets paid. Ideas as property are based on a fundamental Census methods are available to count how fallacy, and as with all fallacies, acting on them widespread something is. There are many compli- does not work. The flaw is that ideas in the broad cations associated with counting the results of sense, encompassing concepts, inventions, and creativity, and I’ll get to a few of those in a mo- creativity, do not share the main characteristic of ment, but for now let’s stay with the general property. They are not decreased by use. It idea. A census of usage can tally the distribution doesn’t matter if the whole world sings the same of a given creation. The creators are then paid song. That doesn’t change it and it still provides based on that tally. The money to pay them each individual with the same enjoyment. Ar- comes from a tax on the physical goods needed guably, it provides more enjoyment because shar- to use their creations, in other words from a tax ing ideas and feelings is more fun than having on the paper, storage media, phones, screens, them alone. pills, or other substrates that carry the benefit to Property, on the other hand, is a way of dis- the user. tributing limited resources that can be used up. I need to discuss a terminology issue paren- Food, clothes, land, or phones are all things that thetically. Since I’m insisting that the products of can only be shared a little bit, if at all, without creativity aren’t property, I can’t use the conve- becoming useless to the sharer. nient term “intellectual property” to describe the Ideas don’t need to be apportioned among too whole class of patentable, copyrightable, and many users any more than sunlight does. In fact, trademarkable things. I’ve used “creations” in- the only way to force them into that mold is to stead, even though it’s a clumsy-sounding term. artificially limit their availability, just as the only There are also of course differences among those way to make people pay for sunlight would be to three subgroups, some of them necessary, some set up a space shield and extract a ransom. Set- of them mere historical accidents. For instance, ting up artificial barriers and waylaying people having a different standard for patentable objects trying to get past them offends against an intu- as opposed to copyrightable expressions is neces- itive sense of justice. It breeds resentment fol- sary. Having a different term of protection — lowed by workarounds. Which is what’s hap- close to 100 years at this point for copyrights, pened with the counterproductive attempt to twenty years for most patents — seems arbitrary. lock down creations, whether artistic or medical Most of what I’m discussing applies to new cre- or technical. ations generally, rather than either patent or Confusion arises because there’s also a sense copyright specifically. Trademarks are a small that creators have a right to benefit from their subset where rights extend for as long as the good ideas. The sense is justified, just as anybody mark is used. That seems sensible, and I don’t has a right to be paid for work useful to others. delve into trademark-specific issues. That’s different from pretending an idea can be A census method with subsequent payout is transformed into disappearing ink if too many superficially analogous to the market system people look at it. Paying the creator doesn’t magi- used now in that sales are a rough tally and the cally change a limitless resource into something price the market will bear determines payment. else. However, markets can only handle property. Like Thus, ideas are not property and creators have the proverbial hammer to whom everything is a a right to be paid proportionally to the benefit nail, markets have handled creativity as if it was
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 149 property. When the nature of creativity causes it parent and accountable, without any considera- to escape the inappropriate container the market tions besides correctly logging who had which isn’t able to use an appropriate non-market-based idea. Distributing royalties is equally a govern- approach. Instead it keeps attempting the useless ment function because it requires an objective job of trying to bottle the equivalent of sunlight. census untainted by any motive except accuracy, That by itself is a big waste of everyone’s time, and transparent, accountable payments based on energy, and money. that. No other entity has (or should have) the en- But there are other, bigger problems. The cate- forcement power and accountability required. gory error has generated injustices. Since creativi- Variants of the idea of royalty distribution ty can’t be bottled, who gets paid and for what is based on a census have cropped up repeatedly in rather arbitrary. That leads to the usual result: recent years (e.g. 1 [81] , 2 [82] , 3 [83] ) because it’s an the powerful get paid, the others not so much. obvious way to fairly distribute the rewards for Those powerful people are very rarely the cre- useful creations. The idea is applicable at any ative people themselves. The examples are legion, stage of technology, but it is easiest to apply in a but to take just one instance, Charles Goodyear wired world. Headers in computer files can in- invented the vulcanisation of rubber (without clude attribution lists of any degree of complexi- which it’s about as useful as chewing gum) but ty, similar to software version control systems, died poor. Imagine carrying out the industrial rev- and they’re also much easier to census than phys- olution without rubber, and yet it wasn’t ically tallying actual products. (This just in, as Goodyear who saw much benefit from his work. they say: Google is experimenting with tags that The inventor, programmer, or artist cheated of trace sources [264] .) However, a wired system is their work by those with more money is such a also easier to game, and it should go without say- common occurrence it’s a stereotype. ing that stringent safeguards and punishments The ironic result of “intellectual property” against fraud have to be in place. Physical sam- laws is that their stated purpose of rewarding in- pling has an essential place, I expect, as one of novation is an almost accidental outcome. The several parallel tallying methods. Used together, actual history [263] shows that they were estab- they would provide one type of safeguard against lished as a tool for governments to control con- fraud. tent. Distributors were the enforcers in return for One difference between a centrally adminis- a time-limited monopoly providing guaranteed tered census system and market-based distribu- profits. The government control aspect has been tion of royalties is that a census does not pretend beaten back, but the philosophical tools needed to have a perfect one-to-one correspondence be- to see the illegitimacy of guaranteed profit tween usage and payment. Markets do have that haven’t been widespread enough yet to correct goal, but their distribution of payments is on the the other half of the injustice. The rewards for in- whole wildly unrelated to how much a given novation go to uninnovative third parties, and as work is used. Anyone who finds the current sys- the system is pushed ever further away from its tem good enough in terms of apportioning royal- official goal it breeds mainly cynicism, not cre- ties could not fault a census-based system for im- ativity. Markets, by trying to pretend ideas are precision because it would be far more precise property, create a situation in which all that mat- than the markets for this purpose. ters is who “owns” the idea, not who created it. Now that the internet has made it easier for That perverts the system of rewards and takes everyone to publish and broadcast, a fundamen- them away from the people with a right to them. tal problem with assigning credit for creativity is Once “intellectual property” is recognized as a becoming increasingly evident. Creations never matter of rights rather than markets, the institu- happen in isolation. Every inventor, author, artist, tion which should handle it is clear. Administer- and scientist stands on the shoulders of others. ing a system whose primary purpose is enforcing The only way to assign credit is to draw more or rights is necessarily a government function. less arbitrary lines that delimit enough difference Granting patents and copyrights is already done from previous work to merit separate acknowl- by a government office because it must be trans- edgement. The cutoff for a US copyright, for in-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 150 stance, is more than 10% difference, although However, it doesn’t seem practically possible, at how that 10% is quantified is rather subjective. In least to me, to assign rights to and then pay for practice, it seems to mean “some easily notice- every single dot and comma that somebody able and material difference.” might add to a body of work. There has to be The imprecision is inevitable — there’s no way some level below which contributions are just to quantify a work of art, for instance — and it’s part of the background, as it were. But people re- difficult to see any way to avoid arbitrary and act badly when somebody else gets a better re- subjective demarcations. That implies that the ward for what they see as equal or less work. It bar should not be set too low because the smaller offends an innate sense of justice [267] that goes the contribution, the murkier the distinction be- right back to chimpanzees and earlier. tween significance and insignificance. The point of equitable rewards for creativity is Making the determination of originality is to facilitate its expression. It would be counter- complicated by the need to be fair. Now and in productive to implement a system that’s felt as the past the “solution” to the complexity of cre- even more unfair than the one we have now. The ativity has been to give up and simply assign a system needs to take the psychological factors in- given work to the applicant(s) for a patent or to account if that goal is to be met. I would guess copyright. In this day of remixes, a more calibrat- that a clear demarcation — difficult as that is — ed system is essential. As I mentioned when dis- between the amount of contribution that re- cussing legislation in the fifth chapter [98] , I think ceives royalties and the amount that doesn’t that methods used in software version control would mitigate negative reactions. When work is can point the way. Software, and legislation for obviously original, that’s not a hard call to make. that matter, are just special cases of works with When it’s incremental, then perhaps adding a multiple contributors [265] . Sometimes those time factor would help. To be eligible for royal- tools are called content management systems, ties, the amount of work involved should be but that’s an unspecific term covering everything equivalent to some sizable part of a work week. from tracking minor changes in a word proces- In other words, if it’s equivalent to a half-time sor, to blogging software, and to education job, it’s significant. If it’s something one dabbles course management which may not have the in occasionally, then official recognition is proba- necessary contribution tracking. Something like bly misplaced. Plone [266] is perhaps the closest thing now avail- My sense is that commitment of contributors able. is not a smoothly increasing variable. A minority The software version control or Plone-type sys- contributes a lot, then there’s a more or less tems I’m aware of (I can’t say “familiar with”) are sparsely populated intermediate gap, and then used in the open source community by volun- the majority whose aggregate contribution may teers. In that situation, most participants are be huge but where any individual adds only a lit- honest to begin with. Plus the community is tle. If that sense is correct, research should be rather small, skilled, and generally aware of the able to identify that gap. If the demarcation line facts, all of which acts to prevent cheating. A for receiving royalties runs through the gap, it similar system adapted to patents and copyrights, will align with the intuition that only larger con- where money from royalties might be in play, tributions deserve specific rewards. would need a much stricter system to prevent The next difficulty is to identify the best group cheating. I’m not sufficiently close to the field to to make the determination that new material has have an idea how that could be applied, but it’s a been contributed, and how much. The people problem that must be solved in a fair system of with the clearest concept of the work are others creator’s rights. working on the same or similar projects, but they There’s also a psychological issue that should are also interested parties. If there are royalties be taken into account when apportioning royal- to be distributed, they may be motivated more by ties. One desirable effect of an equitable system a desire to keep the pool of recipients small than of rewards should be that more people feel moti- by an honest appraisal of work. Critics or special- vated to act on their creativity and to contribute. ists in the field who are unconnected with the
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 151 project seem like good possibilites. Public com- scales that have been worked out for different ment should always be facilitated because exper- classes of products. (I would say that ringtones, tise often crops up in unexpected places. Once for instance, should have lower royalty rates than the outside expertise and input on the originality headache cures.) Royalties received for similar of a given piece of work has been obtained, then classes of products should be much more consis- the experts at the patent or copyright office tent under that system than they are now. The would evaluate all the input on its merits and pay scales themselves would necessarily be a make a determination, subject to appeal. somewhat arbitrary because they’re set more or The current process is supposed to work more less by consensus. (The current system also sets or less like that, too, but for various reasons it’s royalties that way, but the only factor taken into veered off course. Patent officials are evaluated account is the bargaining power of the creator.) on how much paperwork clears their desks, not Consistence should help avoid wide disparities in how well it stands up to litigation. So it’s become reward for equivalent contributions. customary in the US to grant patents for practi- Requiring creators to license their work is cur- cally anything and to assume that if there’s a rently called “compulsory licensing,” which problem, it’ll come out in the courts. Further- makes it sound like a bad thing. “Compulsory” more, possibly related to the desk-clearing stan- anything meets with reflexive resistance. But all dard, patents are granted apparently without it does is take away the ability to impose a mo- anything approaching due diligence on prior art. nopoly. That reduces short term gain for a few The assumption throughout seems to be that liti- people, whose objections are no different from gation is a solution rather than a problem. In re- those of anyone losing privileges. They’re not ality, it’s laziness and dereliction of duty to expect valid if the goal is equitability. the courts to clean up messes that should never However, there is one sense in which creators have happened in the first place. Patent and would have more control over their work in a fair copyright officials who are doing their jobs will system than they do now. The entertainment in- make a thorough and good faith effort to deter- dustry has something called “moral rights,” mine that a piece of work is indeed new, and which refers to how a creation can be used in how new. Litigation has to be a rare occurence other contexts. Consider, for instance, Shake- when a mistake has been made. If it’s not rare speare’s character, Lady Macbeth. There’s a fa- enough, it’s indicative that the responsible bu- mous scene in which she sees the blood of mur- reaucrats need to be fired. der on her hands, and nothing can wash it out. So far, creator’s rights have been discussed in Shakespeare did not retain any moral rights. They the context of payment for work. The other as- hadn’t been invented yet in the early 1600s. So a pect is control over the work. Obviously, minor soap company could have made a zippy ad show- contributors (less than 50%?) wouldn’t have a ing a relieved Lady Macbeth after one handwash- controlling interest in any case, but what of ma- ing with their EverClean soap. The only thing sav- jor ones? How much control is appropriate? ing Shakespeare’s legacy is that Lady Macbeth is When discussing money [161] , I stressed that re- too old and forgotten to be worth selling. al free markets and monopolies are incompatible. Moral rights clearly belong to creators. Their That is no less true if the monopolist is an artist creations belong to them in ways that money can or inventor. The creator has a right to be paid if never buy. They have rights in them that money someone is benefitting from their work, but that can never buy. Creators, therefore, have veto doesn’t give them monopoly “rights.” An unfair power over what they see as inappropriate alter- advantage is a privilege, not a right. Creators can- ation of their work. Like the fact of their author- not prevent others from manufacturing their in- ship, moral rights are also permanent and in- vention, playing their song, or publishing their alienable. At least for expressions, but not tools, books. The creators do have the right to be paid i.e. for copyrights but not patents, that control in proportion to how much their work is used over usage is permanent. Creators who felt and how critical it is to people’s lives. The govern- strongly enough could include instructions about ment would disburse the funds based on pay moral rights in their wills. Those rights, however,
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 152 cannot turn into a back door to permanent copy- The more equitable rules of copyrights, right. The scope of moral rights needs to be limit- patents, and trademarks envisioned here would ed to relatively broad classes of usage. Creators obviously require big changes across a range of have the right not to have their work perverted, industries. The main effect would be to render but they don’t have the right to prevent legiti- armies of middlemen superfluous. As always mate use of it. Making moral rights explicit and when the application of just principles damages enforcing them is probably more important in an entire business models, the simple fact that profi- age of remixes than ever before. It is only fair fits vanish is not a sufficient reason to reject fair- that if someone wants to use a character or an- ness. I’ll repeat myself by saying that slavery was other expression in a way that’s odious to the cre- once a profitable business model and that didn’t ator, then they’re under an obligation to come up make it right. Nor does implementing justice with their own concept and not copy someone mean increased poverty. On the contrary, every else’s. single time, there is more wealth when there is There’s a point that may need stressing in a more justice. The illusion of lost wealth comes broader sense. The rights of a creator are inalien- from the few people who lose the ability to milk able because they’re matters of justice, not prop- the system. erty. They’re not something that can be bought or Furthermore, insofar as the middlemen pro- sold or passed on to someone else. The creator, vide a real service, there’s no reason why produc- and no one else, has the right to moral control ers or publishers or agents would necessarily all over their work, and the right to royalty pay- disappear. Expertise in packaging, distribution, ments at a level and for a period of time stipulat- and sales is not the same as making an invention ed by law. or an artwork. Artists, especially, are stereotypi- That would mean some changes in business cally poor at those jobs. There’s a need for some practices. For instance, corporations or any other middlemen. The difference is that they would institutions would not be able to take rights to have to be paid from actual added value and not inventions made by workers. The corporation’s simply because they’re gatekeepers who can ex- benefit comes from the profit of being first to tract a toll. market with a new product. The royalties go to Moving on from creators to the creations the individual inventor(s) no matter whose pay- themselves, one current large source of problems roll they’re on. The corporation recoups the costs is the definition of what can be patented. In the of research from profits, not from taking the re- US, things went along reasonably well for a while wards for creativity that isn’t theirs. when the definition was narrowly focused on the In the case of celebrities, the valuable “proper- sort of original work an amateur would recognize ty” may not be a work, strictly speaking, except as an invention. New technology, however, intro- in the sense that it’s the carefully constructed duced gray areas, and the unfamiliarity of judges public persona of the celebrity him- or herself. and lawyers with technical issues made that Private citizens already have the right to control standard hard for them to apply sensibly. The de- their personal images and data, as discussed un- sire to give US business a boost also worked to der privacy [242] in the Rights chapter. The creativ- promote the granting of patents, although that ity of entertainment and sports personalities is motivation doesn’t appear in the dense legalese packaging a specific public face, but the mere of court arguments. fact of being a public person doesn’t make them That’s eventually landed us where we are now. lose all rights. In the private aspects of their lives, Patents are given for mere and obvious ideas, they have the same rights to privacy as any citi- such as one-click shopping. Patents are granted zen. In the public aspects, they have the same on life although the life in question (parts of a moral rights to their personas that other creators DNA molecule) has merely been read, not creat- have to their work. That would make paparazzi ed. There have been some actual DNA inventions, jobs obsolete and complicate the lives of gossip such as bacterial artificial chromosomes, BACs, columnists, but those aren’t sufficient reasons to but those do not constitute the vast majority of deprive people of their rights. patents granted for DNA sequences. In the phar-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 153 maceutical industry, when the patent on one er. There are, as always, gray areas in that defini- blockbuster drug is close to running out, it’s pro- tion. For instance, the linked Wikipedia article vided in a trivially different form, such as a week- points out that a washing machine is a ly dose instead of a daily dose. Somehow, patents patentable tool that cleans wet clothes using agi- are granted for something which is nothing but a tation, but a stick used to agitate wet clothes is dosage change. User interfaces get patented, as if not. in a former time somebody could have locked That example points up the fact that down the concept of using dials to control ma- patentability is yet another situation in which chinery, forcing any competitors to use more there is no substitute for good judgment. Unusu- cumbersome systems, such as inserting pegs into al creativity deserves recompense. Common or holes. garden variety creativity should be appreciated The situation with trivial and proliferating and facilitated, but it’s an attribute almost every- patents is complicated by the fact that copyrights one shares and so it requires no special recogni- are both easier to obtain and last much longer. In tion. Distinguishing between uncommon and the software industry, for instance, that’s created common contributions is what takes judgment, an incentive to seek copyrights rather than and always will. Most cases don’t require excep- patents even though nobody reads software like a tional ability to judge. It’s possible to discern book. People use it, like a machine. Yet the legal whether a tool is new and non-obvious, even if system has let the applicants get away with the it’s not always simple to articulate why. In the travesty of copyrighting software. That could be washing machine example, it seems clear to me due to a lack of technical knowledge in the legal that the difference is the obviousness of the tool. system, or to excessive accommodation of those Even I could think of using a stick to work the with money. Either way, none of this should hap- water through the cloth more easily. On the oth- pen in a rational system of patents and copy- er hand, neither I nor most people have ever been rights. anywhere near inventing a washing machine. An- Rights should be granted when the consensus other example is the weed whacker. That useful among knowledgeable people agrees that there invention was patented, but also copied. The has been non-trivial original work. And insofar as patent was not upheld [269] when the inventor there are necessary differences between patents, sued, because the judge felt it was an obvious which are granted basically for tools, and copy- idea. However, it was obvious only in a “why rights, which are for expressions, then the cre- didn’t I think of that” way. The fact is, nobody ation and the type of rights assigned should be in else had thought of it, and if it was really so obvi- the correct class based on the merits. The salient ous, that mechanism for weeding should have feature is not which office happens to be process- cropped up repeatedly. Perhaps a consensus of ing the application. The important point is in public comment by disinterested third parties which category the creation actually belongs. would help avoid such miscarriages of justice in The criteria for what is patentable is a matter patent law. All methods that prove useful in pro- of opinion. There’s no law of nature involved, and moting good judgment should be applied to the for most of human history the concept didn’t ex- issue in the interests of maintaining a just, effec- ist. As a matter of opinion, it depends on consen- tive, and, ideally, frictionless system that requires sus. The consensus, after a few hundred years of no litigation. experience with the idea, seems to me to be coa- Fair use is a shorthand term to describe a type lescing around the concept of a new tool. of usage for which royalties are not due. In prac- Stripped of its legalese, that’s the core of the cri- tice, people tend to view it as any small scale, pri- terion used in US patents in the mid-1900s when vate usage, as well as socially important ones, the system worked better than it does now. such as in libraries, archives, education, or quota- Adding some of the legalese back in, it’s called tions that are part of other work. In the system the “machine or transformation test [268] .” An in- envisioned here, the entity not paying would be vention is patentable if it’s a non-obvious device different, the government rather than the individ- or method of transforming one thing into anoth- ual, but the principle should be the same. And
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 154 the principle should explicitly date from the time that the requirement to avoid favoritism among when fair use meant that people could use what vendors does not have to mean reduced efficien- they had. The current push by content owners to cy of the workers. The desired interface could be turn copyright into an excuse to extract rent ordered with any product, since the two must be every time anyone touches their “property” is an independent of each other. attempt to charge whatever the market will bear. That leads to the further implication that pro- It has no relation to a fair price or to fair use. motion of competition requires rules that ensure I’d like to spend some time on a topic not usu- interoperability. It’s essential at all levels: in sim- ally included in discussions of creativity or intel- ple hardware such as electrical plugs (at both the lectual “property.” The government doesn’t only wall and appliance ends), in machines where dri- administer the rights involved, it’s also a major vers for different hardware must interface with customer for the products. Under the current all software, and for users where people must be system where patents grant a monopoly as well able to take the interface they’re comfortable as rights to royalties, that can mean the govern- with to any application or device of their choos- ment in effect becomes a factor in creating mo- ing. That would require an effective standards nopolies as well as becoming one of the trapped setting process whose primary mission, in an eq- customers. Neither of those is acceptable for an uitable society, would be the convenience of and entity that must treat all citizens equally. I as- least expense to the most users. sume the situation would not arise in a system The requirement for interoperability does not, that requires compulsory licensing. If it nonethe- by itself, preclude closed and secret processes. less should develop, it’s clear that it has to be The government itself, however, has to operate stopped. The government should make the explic- on stricter rules because it cannot be in the posi- it effort in its purchasing to buy from different tion of relying more on some citizens than oth- companies, if their products are of similar quali- ers. The government itself must be transparent ty. The most efficient way to do that is probably and equally accessible to all, which means the not to have preferred vendors at all, but to leave tools it uses have to share those characteristics. buying decisions up to individual bureaucrats Unless they do, there’s a big and unacceptable subject to audit, as always, and random reviews loophole in the transparency requirement. for conflict of interest. The primary criterion, of There’s nothing to stop the government from us- course, is getting good value for the taxpayers’ ing proprietary tools, but they must be open. money. Closed source hardware, software, or other tools The mandate to spread the government’s cus- has no legitimate place in government offices. tom brings up a tangential aspect of compulsory Archiving is another function where interoper- licensing. As tools grow increasingly complicated, ability and transparency has not been an issue user interfaces became more and more of an is- heretofore. Librarians preserving books for pos- sue. People don’t generally think of interfaces as terity might have had to worry about physical a tool of monopoly, but they can be, and they can preservation, and the time and expense of tran- be the most effective one of all. There’s nothing scription, but they never had to worry about los- we prize more than the time and effort we have ing the ability to read the books themselves. The to put into learning something. If using a com- words wouldn’t turn into a jumble of unrecogniz- petitor’s product means learning a new way to do able characters unless the language itself was something, then it won’t be used, even if the re- lost. However, through the miracles of modern sult is better. Just look at the impossibility of get- technology, we’re now in a position where the ting the world to use anything but qwerty key- ability to read something written a mere twenty boards. years ago depends on the continued existence of Inventing a new and improved interface is a a company. real contribution and a real invention. But com- The problem is currently most evident in com- pulsory licensing has to explicitly include the puter games, where it doesn’t worry most people right to use that interface wherever appropriate. since games are considered worthless. Some The relevance to the government’s situation is games from the early history of computing are al-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 155 ready unusable because their programming was - + - closed and the companies who held the secret of it have vanished. Whatever one’s opinion of the Getting the rewards for creativity right is prob- games themselves, they’re the canaries in the ably more important in an equitable society than coal mine who are showing us the future of the kinds we currently have. In a world of peace much larger and weightier things. and equitable distribution of wealth and time, It is not right for work to be lost because of a people’s focus is likely to be on finding ways to rights holder’s desire for secrecy. Right to a amuse themselves. For many people that means patent or copyright does not include the privilege having fun in the usual sense, playing sports, en- of destroying the work made when using the gaging in social life, and the like. But there’s a tool. How best to implement that limitation in large minority for whom fun has a more exten- practice would need to be worked out. Maybe it sive definition. It means learning and doing, as should be a requirement to deposit all necessary well as being amused. If the society as a whole information with the government archivist when- facilitates that activity, and if it’s justly rewarded, ever a product starts being used by more than that’ll lead to a beneficial cycle of innovations some tiny percentage of the population. Maybe and more satisfying lives for all citizens. some other method would be more effective. There do have to be procedures in place to ensure that work isn’t lost simply because the knowl- + + + edge of how to read it was once kept secret.
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 156
Afterword
This exploration of what equal rights means in millenia. our world shows mainly how far we’ve drifted After the death of earlier empires, what’s away from that goal. Many people set course for emerged from the rubble has been better. There’s it during and after the Enlightenment in the no reason to assume it will be different this time. 1700s, but in recent generations there’s been the So, even though I’m not enough of a seer to assumption that all the hard work has been done. know what lies on the other side of trouble, I’m Not so. Autopilot isn’t working. It’s past time pretty sure it’ll feel like waking from a bad to get back on track. dream. I see the future in grayish terms. We’re not do- I’ve set these thoughts down in the hope that ing anywhere near enough to avoid disaster, so they can help toward bridging the dark time. we’ll walk into it. We’re headed for a dark age Maybe they’ll be lost too soon to do any good, and who knows how long it will last. That de- but this is all I can do. I don’t have the intestinal pends on how bad the environmental damage fortitude to do much besides think. will be and whether we react to the trouble by This work is dedicated to all of those who have pulling together or falling apart. It could be many more of what it takes than I do, who’ll carry us decades, or it could be centuries. If the worst through the time of trouble to the other side. case climate change comes to pass, it could be
+ + + + +
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 157
URLs in this post:
[1] MMolvray: http://molvray.com/acid-test/contact/ [2] home web site: http://molvray.com/govforum/ [3] 1990: http://books.google.com/books?id=4xg6oUobMz4C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false [4] summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elinor_Ostrom [5] Re-imagining Democracy: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-re-imagining-democracy [6] MMolvray: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-mmolvray [7] 2010: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-2010 [8] : http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc- [9] Table of Contents: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-table-of-contents [10] Control: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-control [11] Rights: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-rights [12] Defining Terms: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-defining-terms [13] Missing Rights: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-missing-rights [14] Privacy: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-privacy [15] Right to Live: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-right-to-live [16] Rights in Conflict: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-rights-in-conflict [17] Free speech vs. noise: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-free-speech-vs-noise [18] Summary: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-summary [19] Environment: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-environment [20] Defining the Problem: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-defining-the-problem [21] Facts (not decisions): http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-facts-not-decisions [22] Costs and Choices: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-costs-and-choices [23] Decisions (not facts): http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-decisions-not-facts [24] Problems and Penalties: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-problems-and-penalties [25] Cost of Transition: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-cost-of-transition [26] Sex and Children: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-sex-and-children [27] Relationships: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-relationships [28] Parents: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-parents [29] Children: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-children [30] Government 1: War and Politics: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-government-1-war-and-politics [31] Introduction: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-introduction [32] Force: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-force [33] Between groups: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-between-groups [34] Force against criminals: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-force-against-criminals [35] Decision-making: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-decision-making [36] Voting: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-voting [37] Minority Protections: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-minority-protections [38] Officeholders: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-officeholders [39] Precognitive decisions: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-precognitive-decisions [40] Laws: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-laws [41] Administration and Taxes: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-administration-and-taxes [42] Government 2: Oversight: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-government-2-oversight [43] Oversight: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-oversight [44] Regulation: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-regulation [45] Public Works: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-public-works [46] Money and Work: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-money-and-work
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 158
[47] The Nature of Money: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-the-nature-of-money [48] Capital: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-capital [49] Finance: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-finance [50] Scale of business: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-scale-of-business [51] Corporations as bodies: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-corporations-as-bodies [52] Advertising: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-advertising [53] Prices and Incomes: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-prices-and-incomes [54] Pricing of basics: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-pricing-of-basics [55] Labor: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-labor [56] Care: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-care [57] Medical Care: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-medical-care [58] Retirement: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-retirement [59] Disability: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-disability [60] Child Care: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-child-care [61] Care of infants: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-care-of-infants [62] Care Facilities: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-care-facilities [63] Anti-Poverty Measures: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-anti-poverty-measures [64] Medical Research: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-medical-research [65] Education: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-education [66] Social Implications: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-social-implications [67] On Teaching and Learning: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-on-teaching-and-learning [68] Formal Schooling: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-formal-schooling [69] Advanced Education and Research: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-advanced-education-and-research [70] Diffuse Learning: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-diffuse-learning [71] Creativity: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-creativity [72] Afterword: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=672#toc-afterword [73] research: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/209548 [74] Advertising: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=180#toc-advertising [75] Education: http://localhost/govlocal/?p=327#toc-diffuse-learning [76] 1: http://adverlab.blogspot.com/2005/01/mind-control-hypersonic-sound.html [77] 2: http://gawker.com/news/the-future/schizophrenia-is-the-new-ad-gimmick-329133.php [78] Stephen Fry: http://www.stephenfry.com/2010/11/30/two-million-reasons-to-be-cheerful/single-page/ [79] earlier piece: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2005/11/copyright-copyleft-copy-everything/ [80] Creativity: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/11/creativity/ [81] 1: http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/02/inside-the-isle-of-mans-1month-unlimited-music-plan.ars [82] 2: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/14/france_p2p_plan_fails/ [83] 3: http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/files/earp_mcdiarmid_vcl_at_berkeley.pdf [84] Solove’s “Understanding Privacy”: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dsolove/Understanding-Privacy/ [85] who belongs in the species Homo sapiens: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2004/05/choice-or-child/ [86] Money and Work: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/05/economy/#toc-labor [87] a recent conflict: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na- ramadan11-2008sep11,0,5446525.story [88] Unconscious processing of Web advertising. 2008: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120751206 /abstract [89] seem more persuasive: http://www.duke.edu/~bjn3/nyhan-reifler.pdf [90] deaths in children: http://www.blacktriangle.org/blog/?p=1974 [91] monetary cost-benefit ratio: http://americansforimmigrationreform.com/files /Impact_of_the_Undocumented_Workforce.pdf [92] Trees are affected by electromagnetic radiation: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/11/wi-fi-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 159 might-be-harmful-to-trees-can-cause-bleeding-and-bark-tears-study-says.html [93] Original: http://www.wageningenuniversity.nl/NL/nieuwsagenda/nieuws/Bomen101120.htm [94] Glenn Greenwald: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/03/22/canada [95] 2004 numbers: http://www.soc.duke.edu/~jmoody77/205a/ecp/Fox_ajs_welfareattitudes.pdf [96] dogwhistles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics [97] the section on Oversight: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-2-oversight/#toc-oversight [98] here: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-1-war-politics/#toc-laws [99] a bus jumping a sudden chasm in a road: http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2007/08/movies-dumbing- down-science-a-list-of-egregious-and-funny-offenses.ars [100] jump potholes and crashing their cars: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2007/08/science-goes-to- the-movies/#more-148 [101] Weaponized Free Speech: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2006/12/weaponized-free-speech/ [102] 2006 article: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/12/18/061218fa_fact2 [103] Free Speech vs. Noise: http://molvray.com/govforum/2008/12/rights/#toc-free-speech-vs-noise [104] here: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2006/12/fraud-funding-and-science/ [105] Education: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/11/education/#toc-advanced-education-research [106] phlogiston: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston [107] land bridges: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_bridges#Land_bridge_theory [108] Science, 2001: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/292/5523/1903 [109] carcinogenic: http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=6393.php [110] Far over 90% of climatologists: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686 [111] Nature: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v1/n5/abs/ngeo185.html [112] here: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2005/11/global-warming-dog-that-doesnt-bark/ [113] here: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2007/07/global-warming-links-to-rebut-deniers/ [114] recent article: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/01/28/0812721106.abstract [115] Government: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-1-war-politics/#toc-decision-making [116] earlier: http://www.molvray.com/govforum/2008/12/rights/rights.html#toc-summary [117] voting: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-1-war-politics/#toc-voting [118] a chapter of its own: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/05/sex-and-children/ [119] IPCC 2007 Report on climate change: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf [120] thorough summary: http://climateprogress.org/2009/03/22/an-introduction-to-global-warming-impacts- hell-and-high-water/ [121] 2006 review of the economics of climate change: http://www.occ.gov.uk/activities/stern.htm [122] summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Review [123] here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/01/can-2c-warming-be-avoided/ [124] earlier post: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2008/02/less-heat-more-light-solving-the-energy-crisis/ [125] AAAS, 2000: http://atlas.aaas.org/index.php?part=1&sec=theory [126] requirement for vaccinations: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/09/care/#toc-medical-care [127] Care: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/09/care/#toc-child-care [128] Tibetans in exile: http://www.tcv.org.in/ [129] One example: http://www.splc.org/news/newsflash.asp?id=1012 [130] Karatnycky and Ackerman (2005): http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/special_report/29.pdf [131] Zunes et al. (1999): http://http://books.google.com/books?id=rlIH-NQbFQgC&pg=PA45& lpg=PA45#v=onepage&q=&f=false [132] tasered: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/dangerous-amputee-by-digby-this-is.html [133] the death penalty is lethal: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2006/05/death-penalty-is-lethal/ [134] Democracy Doesn't Work: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2005/05/democracy-doesnt-work/#Voting [135] following ironic comment: http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2009/10/state-of-non-left.html [136] Erica Klarreich: http://www.fairvote.org/op_eds/science110202.htm
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 160
[137] Lani Guinier: http://books.google.com/books?id=aRF7XdcCLq0C&q=inauthor:%22Lani+Guinier%22& dq=inauthor:%22Lani+Guinier%22&hl=en&ei=9i4FTbTjOISisAOZ_tWBDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result& resnum=2&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAQ [138] Brams (2001: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/292/5521/1449 [139] 2003): http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/faculty/brams/theory_to_practice.pdf [140] applied in practice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulative_voting#History [141] Roberts Rules of Order: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulative_voting [142] stardust in aerogels: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/news.php [143] Dunning-Kruger effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect [144] Goldin & Rouse, 2000: http://www.faculty.diversity.ucla.edu/search/searchtoolkit/docs/articles /Orchestrating_Impartiality.pdf [145] They’re better: http://www.slate.com/id/2111894/entry/2112067/ [146] Simmons & Nelson, 2006: http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~lnelson0/Simmons%20&%20Nelson,%202006.pdf [147] a big enough factor to predict the winner.: http://web.mit.edu/polisci/research/glenz/WP_faces.pdf [148] Thomas Jefferson: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch4s7.html [149] Politics and the English Language: http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm [150] Karl Fogel: http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/07/why-congress-ne.html [151] 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_v._Intel [152] 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Corp._v._Advanced_Micro_Devices,_Inc. [153] point it out: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/call-for-time-limits-in-civil-court-cases- 1441555.html [154] the 2009 poverty level wage in the US: http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09fedreg.shtml [155] OECD: http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,3343,en_2649_34533_1942460_1_1_1_1,00.html [156] Krugman: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/a-bit-more-on-administrative-costs/ [157] low 30% range: http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/html/analysis_univ.html [158] tensegrity structure: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensegrity [159] Transparency International: http://www.transparency.org/ [160] present value of net future cash flows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal [161] Capital: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/05/economy/#toc-capital [162] Greasemonkey script: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/63543 [163] this post: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2005/12/globalization-for-me-but-not-for-thee/ [164] Krugman’s blog: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/bernanke-in-atlanta/ [165] basic medical care: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/09/care/ [166] education: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/11/education/ [167] pointed out: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-1-war-politics/#toc-administration- and-taxes [168] the NAIRU: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/supply-demand-and-unemployment/ [169] can-do article about North Ivory Coast: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8446994.stm [170] For instance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics#Criticism_of_assumptions [171] “The Pretence of Knowledge”: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1974/hayek- lecture.html#not1 [172] Government 2: Regulation: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-2-oversight/#toc- regulation [173] anti-competitive practices: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law [174] 3.8mbps: http://www.akamai.com/stateoftheinternet/ [175] falling: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/broadband_speeds_around_the_world.php [176] 5mbps: http://www.techpark.net/2009/04/08/internet-connection-speed-the-top-10-countries/ [177] 75c per minute: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/08/business/fi-lazarus8 [178] less than one-fifth that amount: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32560401/ns/technology_and_science-
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 161 tech_and_gadgets [179] high frequency trading: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/business/24trading.html?_r=1 [180] $220: http://techcrunch.com/2007/07/02/that-599-iphone-costs-220-to-make/ [181] $2445: http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/total-iphone-2-year-costs-charts-details/ [182] a state of shocked disbelief: http://www.thestreet.com/story/10443959/greenspan-admits-flaw-in- regulation-stance-update.html [183] best minds: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/03/volcker-on-derivatives-abuse.html [184] in Africa: http://crossedcrocodiles.wordpress.com/2009/09/ [185] Phalatse, 2000: http://www.springerlink.com/content/074616773tm7188r/ [186] Jordan, 2002, Washington Post: http://www.grossmont.edu/carlos.contreras/History126/Mexico_articles /Mexican%20Workers%20Pay%20for%20Success-%20maquiladoras.htm [187] Silver, 1993: http://eprints.cddc.vt.edu/digitalfordism/fordism_materials/Silver.htm [188] Pollan: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/opinion/10pollan.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&pagewanted=all [189] Diet for a Small Planet: http://www.smallplanet.org/books/diet-small-planet [190] weird decision: http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/01/what-should-congress-do-about-citizens-united/ [191] some of the men: http://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission#Concurrences [192] a post I wrote on the topic: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2007/02/the-pinworms-of-peace- and-prosperity/ [193] Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#Origins [194] fell for it: http://plumer.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_plumer_archive.html#116779441565213604 [195] freedom from intrusion: http://molvray.com/govforum/2008/12/rights/#toc-missing-rights [196] information function: http://molvray.com/govforum/2010/11/education/#toc-diffuse-learning [197] Parents are unaware: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2008.11.005 [198] only one in forty had even noticed the music: http://www.le.ac.uk/psychology/acn5/nature.html [199] boosts consumer confidence in them: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nielsen-financial-ads-boost- consumer-confidence [200] steering political choices: http://www.aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/media-and-elections/mec/mec04 /mec04b/onePage [201] “Does Money Buy Elections?”: http://www.scribd.com/doc/19779600/Policy-Paper-Does-Money- Buy-Elections [202] New York State races in 2000: http://www.scribd.com/doc/21480225/20010419PFWealthPrimary [203] Da Silveira and De Mello (2008): http://www.econ.puc-rio.br/PDF/seminario/2008/VersionJan08.pdf [204] Krugman, 2007: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscience_of_a_liberal [205] reduced performance: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/4526.html [206] are evident: http://www.researchrecap.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12 /audit_integrity_20081208_ch_corner_pander.pdf [207] 2002 NPR report: http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executive.html [208] Bertie Woosters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._G._Wodehouse#Major_characters [209] Lady Ada Lovelaces: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7960818.stm [210] George Hales: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Ellery_Hale [211] Roosevelt’s Second Bill of Rights: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights [212] UN Declaration of Human Rights: http://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Human_rights_set_out_in_the_Declaration [213] IRS: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=104627,00.html [214] fair market rent: http://www.universallivingwage.org/fmrtables_2010/CA_FMR2010.htm [215] USDA calculations: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/calculatorintro.htm [216] $12/hr for one person: http://www.universallivingwage.org/ [217] a study: http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/cdlindrel/1096.htm [218] 11 hours per day, 6 days per week: http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 162 handle=hein.journals/month81&div=18&id=&page= [219] estimated to spend about 24 hours per week: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_affluent_society [220] readily available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States [221] 139.3 million tax returns filed: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=175470,00.html [222] Botswana: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana [223] Congo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo [224] low levels of corruption: http://media.transparency.org/imaps/cpi2009/ [225] minimum wage is $0.58 per hour: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100467.htm [226] take action against it: http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/casestudies/Botswana2006.pdf [227] corruption and fighting: http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/10/zimbabwe-and-the-causes- of-african-poverty/ [228] Kenya: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya [229] Care: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/08/care/ [230] Australia, UK: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2010/Jun/Mirror- Mirror-Update.aspx [231] reference: http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/print/QUA-252950/US-Found-Lagging-Behind-Other- Nations-in-Health-Quality-Access [232] earlier post: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2006/01/real-moral-hazard-of-medical-insurance/ [233] another story: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all [234] tuberculosis: http://www.canprep.ca/library/TBCivilLiberties.pdf [235] AIDS: http://www.asph.org/UserFiles/Module5.pdf [236] CDC sheet on tuberculosis treatment: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5211a1.htm [237] lower costs: http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/2010/nachega_health_costs.html [238] walking or other exercise: http://199.175.219.1/parks/activecommunity/pdf/JAN2007FRANKfinal- embargoed3.pdf [239] an underappreciated factor: http://activelivingresearch.org/alr/files/AJHP_8_Ewing.pdf [240] a rise in calories consumed: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FoodConsumption/app/reports /displayCommodities.aspx?reportName=Total%20Calories&id=36#startForm [241] here: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2007/07/gene-scans-and-single-payer-health-insurance/ [242] privacy: http://molvray.com/govforum/2008/12/rights/#toc-privacy [243] here: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2007/08/profits-cost-us-cures/ [244] Sex and Children: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/05/sex-and-children/#toc-children [245] Nurse-Family Partnership: http://www.childwelfare.gov/preventing/programs/types/nursefamily.cfm [246] 1: http://www.uhfamily.hawaii.edu/publications/brochures/ECCSbrochure_9.pdf [247] 2: http://www.strengtheningfamiliesprogram.org/about.html [248] 3: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/180140.pdf [249] The simplest way to alleviate poverty is to give the poor money: http://www.guardian.co.uk/katine/katine- chronicles-blog/2010/jun/29/just-give-money-cash-transfers [250] gender disparity in who wastes money: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/opinion/23kristof.html [251] Brazil: http://www.mfdr.org/sourcebook/6-1Brazil-BolsaFamilia.pdf [252] decision making: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-1-war-politics/#toc-precognitive- decisions [253] 1920: http://books.google.com/books?id=_SDZAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&d#v=onepage&q&f=false [254] Gladwell’s: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=all [255] 2006: http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi/Chongwony%20Lewis%20K.E.pdf?ohiou1199472454 [256] 2005: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.60.4238&rep=rep1&type=pdf [257] I: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2010/10/war-on-teachers-i-gigo/ [258] II: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2010/10/war-on-teachers-ii-why-it-cant-work/ [259] III: http://www.molvray.com/acid-test/2010/10/the-war-on-teachers-ignorance-iii-what-could-work/
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy 163
[260] above average intelligence: http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx [261] usual process: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/11/government-1-war-politics/#toc-officeholders [262] discussed: http://molvray.com/govforum/2009/03/environment/#toc-facts-not-decisions [263] history: http://questioncopyright.org/promise [264] tags that trace sources: http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/11/27/0117252/Googles-New-Meta-Tags-For- News-Story-Authors [265] just special cases of works with multiple contributors: http://www.red-bean.com/kfogel/ [266] Plone: http://plone.org/ [267] innate sense of justice: http://www.emory.edu/LIVING_LINKS/empathy/Reviewfiles/fairplay_NS.html [268] machine or transformation test: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine- or-transformation_test#Is_satisfying_the_test_a_necessary_condition_for_patent- eligibility.2C_a_sufficient_condition.2C_or_both.3F [269] not upheld: http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/9112.pdf
. Click here to print .
Creative Commons (CC) 2010 MMolvray BY-NC-ND (with attribution, non-commercial use only, without modification.)
MMolvray -- Re-imagining Democracy