CONSERVATIVES RIDICULE THE PROGRESSIVES FROM THE SIXTIES
Chanting that progressives are trapped in an non-existent world.
But conservatives are trapped in the same context.
Libertarians have answers.
Libertarians have the only answers.
It just may not be the anarcho-capitalist libertarians that have the answers.
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-31 10:02:00 UTC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Oe6HUgrRlQPROGRESSIVES ARE ALWAYS BEHIND THE CURVE — BUT THEY EVENTUALLY CATCH ON
Social integration through mythology and sermon. We just don’t need mysticism to make it happen. (And contrary to Neil Postman, we need both masculine and feminine story arcs.)
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-30 12:18:00 UTC
http://www.libertarianism.org/blog/important-concepts-political-obligationIS POLITICAL LEGITIMACY POSSIBLE?
Legitimacy would be ‘perfect’ if the actions of a representative (the government) were identical in both priority and content to the preferences of the individual.
Legitimacy is neutral if the preferences and priorities are unobjectionable. Legitimacy is lost when the preferences and priorities are actively unwanted, despised or damaging.
We can consider tyranny an absolute moral concept. Or a praxeological concept. As a praxeological concept, tyranny is the use of property (resources) to accomplish ends using means that we disagree with. Since there are three economies we operate within: the material, the normative, and the signaling economy, the chance of tyranny increases with the heterogeneity of material economic, normative economic, and signaling economies. As such tyranny is less likely to be expressed in a small homogenous society, and more likely, if not mandatory, in a large heterogenous society. This is one of the reasons that small european states preserved individual liberty, and consequential economic experimentation and innovation, while the competing civilizations, most of which were older and wealthier, were left behind by the competing disorganized european micro-states.
As libertarians, it is useful to use praxeological analysis (the study of actions and transfers) rather than to stick with imprecise use of dogmatic first principles. Those first principles are useful because of their generality and wide applicability, but imprecise because of that generality. General principles, rather than causal explanations, may not inform us as to what insights and actions can actually help us achieve our objective: freedom, rather than simply whine about it.
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-30 11:53:00 UTC
http://www.libertarianism.org/blog/important-concepts-political-obligationLegitimate authority cannot emereg among disparate economic, biological, or signalingdiversities. But otherwise this is solid thinking.
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-30 11:35:00 UTC
http://www.libertarianism.org/blog/how-we-might-become-politically-obligatedNeeds to sync with Haidt’s work raterh than invesnt new terms, but this is good thought Aaron.
Curt
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-30 11:33:00 UTC
http://dailyrushbo.com/rush-limbaugh-show-ratings-up-60-since-sandra-fluke-controversy/LIMBAUGH UP 10 to 60% DEPENDING UPON MARKET
It’s been tried before, in the 90’s. All publicity is good publicity. The most powerful feedback is to ignore it, not attack it. It only feeds the beast.
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-29 21:25:00 UTC
http://www.econ.washington.edu/user/erose/hypergamy_solew.pdfTHE END OF THE SUCCESS GAP?
“The success gap for women age 40-44 declined significantly in the 1980’s and 1990’s. In fact, according to some measures, the gap has disappeared.
Hypergamy has declined as well. What has changed is that marriage rates for the less educated have declined precipitously, although the patterns differ for blacks and for whites. I also track education-marriage and education-motherhood profiles.”
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-29 18:53:00 UTC
http://www.jewishfederations.org/page.aspx?id=46437AMERICAN JEWISH FERTILITY IS BELOW THE REPLACEMENT RATE
“While Jewish fertility approaches general fertility levels in later childbearing ages, overall Jewish fertility is too low to replace the Jewish population. NJPS data point to an average number of children born to Jewish women of less than 1.9. Demographers generally regard 2.1 as the average necessary for population stability. Moreover, a sizeable fraction of children raised by Jewish women and men in interfaith homes are not raised as Jews. Consequently, the “effective Jewish birthrate” is below 1.9 children per Jewish woman. Current Jewish fertility will contribute over time to a declining Jewish population, if other sources of population growth such as immigration do not compensate for it.”
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-29 18:49:00 UTC
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/03/puerto-rico-hypergamy-fact-of-the-day.htmlREDEFINING HYPERGAMY?
I think this is more of a numeric artifact produced by declining marriage rates, and an error in over-attribution of status to income. Women are not ENTIRELY money motivated, just as men are not ENTIRELY motivated by physical attraction.
1) Hypergamy is not synonymous with mating with alphas, only ‘the best she can get’. Or ‘better than she is used to’.
2) If male status signals are less dependent upon income, then they will be more dependent upon physical traits, relationships and behavior. In other words, men who are underemployed will find alternate means of signaling.
The eastern european and Mediterranean (PIGS) males manage to do this effectively already. So do african american males. They exaggerate masculine traits which cast higher income males as effeminate. In other words, traditional masculine traits and physicality compensate for income signals.
I don’t know why this is surprising. Males vary more than females in ability. There are always ‘unfit’ males that women must ‘marry down’ or ‘mate down’ with. Simply because without polygamy or serial marriages, some portion of women must always ‘settle’ because of the scarcity of ‘good’ men.
3) This change is occurring only in the lower classes. And only relates to marriages not mates.
4) The combined burden of unemployed and unemployable males and dependent females will have a higher impact on the state’s finances and the polity than any change in mating patterns. THis will further undermine the institution of marriage and individual accountability (as Murray suggests.)
But in essence, I think as economists we overrate income. It’s just one of the available signals. And since women and men have different reproductive strategies, and since men vary more than women in ability, it is quite possible for men to adapt without impact to traditional masculine and feminine gender concepts that are outside of the economic sphere.
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-29 18:45:00 UTC
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1439197717/ref=tsm_1_fb_lkTHE END OF HYPERGAMY?
I don’t think so. A redefinition of marrying up is more likely instead. I do think that there is a permanently unemployable lower class of men that will choose to demonstrate their masculinity in more masculine ways — as do Mediterranean and african american men. That said, we’ve reached the balance point in the economy, with women replacing lower quintile men — thus accurately reflecting IQ distributions between the genders.
Source date (UTC): 2012-03-29 18:40:00 UTC