Some ruminations on how panarchy can be made to work in the real world

In part 1 of this column I began from a local Republican convention where a couple of the customs—the invocation and gratuitous friendliness nod toward Israel—got me to thinking that there surely must be a better way for human beings to deal with their political needs (than to spend copious time working to elect public officials by majority vote, who then, together, exercise a comp- ulsory monopoly over providing an ever expanding range of services, whether you want these services or not). Unlike the normal marketplace, an individual cannot simply choose something else or opt out entirely. Again, the analogy to ordering breakfast is apt:

First of all, let’s assume that what I truly want for breakfast is on the menu. Go down to my local Kerby’s or Leo’s coney islands or regular coffee shop: virtually anything I want will be on the menu somewhere… and if it isn’t the owner will work with me, say, if I want salmon with my eggs. It may just cost a little more. Okay, then let’s contrast that with a system where if I want something, a majority of the patrons have to want that same thing before I can have it. Aliens in a space ship looking down at this kind of breakfast system would say to one another, “Boy, these humans are majorly retarded.”

Thus democratic politics in a coercive, compulsory government system means that in the neighborhood of zero persons get the government services they would freely choose, nor do they obtain the public officials (elected by ‘everyone’) they would prefer to provide these services. It’s all a bizarre, horrendously complicated and time-consuming process that no one in his right mind would spend a minute on, were it not for the fact that the actions of these officials can seriously eff up beyond recognition the lives of you and your loved ones. Continue reading →