But if we can’t get agreement, understanding, and motivation, at the first-order level, then how can we assure it at the level of constitutional institution creation? (I’ve long agreed with those who say that Hayek couldn’t provide adequate explanation of why the U.S. constitution isn’t an instance of “constructivist rationalism”.)

People may like (e.g. Swiss) constitutionally decentralized institutions. But this affection is an article of tradition, common sense, and accumulated experience leading people to believe that the institutions are maximizing social welfare.

American libertarian’s faith, on this score, is constantly being called into question. Notice the intellectual contortions that one has to go through to defend federalism PER SE in the American context. Just think of the Raich (medical marajuana) decision for starters.

(Plus, our economic and political institutions ARE UNDENIABLY getting more centralized and its disingenuous and a little obscurantist to argue that we could just go back to greater decentralization.)

I’d rather say that, ideology aside, we have a fair bit of agreement and understanding at the first-order level. Government selfishness and bad incentives are a problem, but so are those in the “private sector”. It’s best not to think of a government deciding on and utilizing a social welfare function. Better to think of government as just one part (especially deadly) part of the country’s attempt to vaguely agree on a social welfare function and implement it.

I don’t think I disagree too much with the spirit of this post, contrary to appearnances (maybe).

But if we can’t get agreement, understanding, and motivation, at the first-order level, then how can we assure it at the level of constitutional institution creation? (I’ve long agreed with those who say that Hayek couldn’t provide adequate explanation of why the U.S. constitution isn’t an instance of “constructivist rationalism”.)

People may like (e.g. Swiss) constitutionally decentralized institutions. But this affection is an article of tradition, common sense, and accumulated experience leading people to believe that the institutions are maximizing social welfare.

American libertarian’s faith, on this score, is constantly being called into question. Notice the intellectual contortions that one has to go through to defend federalism PER SE in the American context. Just think of the Raich (medical marajuana) decision for starters.

(Plus, our economic and political institutions ARE UNDENIABLY getting more centralized and its disingenuous and a little obscurantist to argue that we could just go back to greater decentralization.)

I’d rather say that, ideology aside, we have a fair bit of agreement and understanding at the first-order level. Government selfishness and bad incentives are a problem, but so are those in the “private sector”. It’s best not to think of a government deciding on and utilizing a social welfare function. Better to think of government as just one part (especially deadly) part of the country’s attempt to vaguely agree on a social welfare function and implement it.

I don’t think I disagree too much with the spirit of this post, contrary to appearnances (maybe).