Lessons in civics
Published by Yazad Jal October 8th, 2004 in EducationFrom Don Boudreaux to his 7 year old son. Snippets:
- Even in principle, government is not synonymous with society.- In practice, government is an enemy of civil society.
- Even popularly elected government does not in any meaningful sense represent his interests or those of civil society.
- be forever skeptical of received wisdoms and truths – but always understand that there is much genuine wisdom and many valuable truths in our world; skepticism is indispensable for sorting these relatively few gems from the pack of imposters.
Read the entire piece.
Update (October 15): Came across a post on a libertarian blog that critiques Boudreaux. Interesting read!
I used to enjoy reading Don Boudreaux but this post makes me want to rethink that.
To summarize his statements
- democracy is meaningless as it doesn’t represent the people who elect it (and the alternative is???? Does Bank Of America represent my interest?)
- Politicians are all deceitful liars - and they only got to power by lying to people.
How is that different from any of the people in power - you think Ken Lay, Martha Stewart and all the CEOs got into their positions by being nice, truthful people. Politics is merely one field and just like others you have to claw and fight your way to the top.
Ck, I’m surprised (but glad) you enjoyed reading Don Boudreaux. Your views as evinced by your past comments are rather in opposition to his, and Boudreaux’s views haven’t changed much.
BTW, the post is brief enough not to need any summary. Boudreaux may be harsh on the institution of government, but you mix it somehow with democracy. Democracy is simply a tool used to select a government (or a board of directors in a company or …) He critiques the institution, not the tool.
Finally your How is that different from any of the people in power point falls prey to the logical fallacy of appeal to common practice
Ck , seriously - what’s your point?
You can argue with him, but just pouring scorn on his conclusions without having the logic to refute his means is laughable at best(I donno if it anything otherwise, but heck I like to use that phrase ;) )
Actually, CK, I think the whole point of the post was to get ppl thinking. His last bit of wisdom was to remain skeptical, so his points of wisdom are likely not to be taken at face value.
Isn’t it our role as citizens in a democracy to question our government and our leaders?