Discussion about this post

User's avatar
EB-Ch's avatar

Again and again, intellectuals who are focused on one-dimensional people fail to explain society and in particular politics. The main problem with the median voter theorem is that few people are one-dimensional. If America were divided into four one-dimensional groups for the past 300 years, the logical conclusion would be that some time ago America would have been divided into 4 nation-states and the only relevant issue would have been how the division took place.

Expand full comment
KE's avatar

I think one of the major issues is that you can either be a Jeffersonian, or you can have a society with modern levels of sophistication and wealth/major influence in state affairs. Not both. Many of the more influential libertarians act like they can have both. It "worked" okay for Jefferson because he was part of a tiny aristocracy with certain privileges, but that's not a model that scales or is compatible with modern American arrangements or morality. Historically, most Jeffersonians understood they had to prioritize simplicity and being left alone. It requires choosing liberty at the expense of material benefits and prestige. You can still benefit from the advances of the larger society, but you can't be a national insider. It simply is not a philosophy that can be applied to national government, and attempts to do so inevitably end up serving one of the other groups. "Just America" has a similar problem with trying to take a strategy beyond functional limits, but I've always found it jarring to call today's progressives Puritans, and I find it similarly jarring to call today's libertarians Cavaliers. Both are long gone--aristocratic influence doesn't really survive a switch from regional interests to national power. Some similarities exist, but that's because competing aristocracies rooted in different "regions" of the national "meritocratic" class have arisen.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts