Public Policy Debate for the Day

I apologize for not citing where this idea stemmed from, but it was a day or two ago and I can’t for the life of me remember.  If anyone knows, please post it in the comments.

There is so much conflict between different groups (Occupy v Tea Party, GOP v Dem, religious v secular, austerity v stimulus).  Perhaps part of this stems from the fact that we have forgotten the following symmetries:

Wherever you see “free” replace it with “equal.”  And vice versa.

Wherever you see “freedom” replace it with “equality.”  And vice versa.

America was founded on the idea that one leads to the other.  If we create an environment for individual freedom, we should get equality.  And that should be seen as a GOOD thing, not a threat.

Similarly, think of the phrase “the will of the people.” America was also founded on the principle that the will of the people should guide government.  But that doesn’t mean it becomes the exclusive objective for every aspect of civil society.  For example:

“Will” implies the people’s conscious desires and wants.  Sorry, but our brain just doesn’t work in a way that makes this a good thing.  I am not a big fan of government paternalism.  But there is a huge repository of behavioral science research that demonstrates the fallibility of our consciousness to figure out what we want, let alone what we need. 

“The People” implies we all speak with one voice.  We have common motivations and objectives.  Not even close.  So how do we resolve conflicts?  Majority rule? Ultimate libertarianism?  Free market and buyer beware?  We can’t have it all, as much as our politicians pretend we can.

The source that stirred up these thoughts didn’t propose solutions and I am not going to either.  At least not today.  Just some thoughts for the day.