4 Responses to “”

1. AAA March 26, 2005

   Great quote. I use Federalist 51 a lot and that quote in particular even more.

   Inspiring stuff…

   March 26, 2005 at 4:17 pm
2. T. J. Madison March 27, 2005

   >>”I defied the terrorists”

   I certainly hope so. More likely, however, she has simply helped deliver herself (and her countrymen) into the hands of different terrorists.

   At least her role in the “secret band of robbers and murderers” is clearer than it usually is.

   >>In framing a government, which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.

   Empirically the second task is almost impossible, and it is largely in the failure of the government to acheive the first task that we have any liberty left at all.

   March 27, 2005 at 4:41 pm
3. Tom G. Palmer March 27, 2005

   Mr. Madison implicitly admits that the “second task” is possible, since it’s “almost impossible.” What makes it more likely? For example, under what conditions is the judiciary more likely to be independent and able to check unconstitutional exercises of power? Those are hard questions. A few good essays (I’ve been reading a fair amount in this area) that cover the problem include:

   Barry Weingast, 1997, olitical Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of Law,” *American Political Science Review* 91: 245-63
   Richard A. Epstein, 1990, “Independence of Judges: The Uses and Limitations of Public Choice Theory,” *Brigham Young Law Review*, 827-856
   Keith Whittington, 1003, “Legislative Sanctions and the Strategic Environment of Judicial Review,” *he International Journal of Constitutional Law*, 1: 446-474
   Mark Ramseyer, 1994, “The Puzzling (In)dependence of Courts: A Comparative Approach,” *Journal of Legal Studies*, 23: 721-747

   Some systems have more controlled government than others. Why? What can we learn from the successes and the failures and how can we do better? Those are important questions. The future of freedom and peace may depend on how well we answer them.

   March 27, 2005 at 5:27 pm
4. T. J. Madison March 28, 2005

   Here’s an example of what I consider real progress in Iraq:

   http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/22/international/middleeast/22cnd-iraq.html?ex=1269147600&en=4fab5dc83f59b0ae&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

   >>Mr. Madison implicitly admits that the “second task” is possible, since it’s “almost impossible.”

   Let me clarify what I mean by almost impossible: CATO is a strong organization run by intelligent, sensible people. CATO regularly presents Congress with sane, rational alternatives to the current ruinous policies. It would be unreasonable for any supporter of freedom to expect the CATO team to do any better. Everyone I’ve met seems to be fighting the good fight with 100% of their energies.

   What has this accomplished? Every year the limits on state power in the US have grown weaker in almost every parameter, almost monotonically for decades. Why is this? I suspect it’s because almost any politician who systematically followed CATO’s advice would likely be fired. It’s irrational for any politician to spend any political capital on limiting government. The selection pressure and institutional logic involved with governments in general and democracy in particular seem to preclude success in limiting the power of government using political means. (Violent revolution would most likely be even more disatrous, as it has in the past.)

   It’s not hopeless, but it would seem most unwise to bet one’s resources and one’s liberty on success.

   Fortunately there are other alternatives.

   March 28, 2005 at 10:13 pm