Voters as Mad Scientists: The Hanania Interview
Talking about my latest book with the noted polymath
In the latest podcast of the Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology, Richard Hanania interviews me about my new book, Voters as Mad Scientists: Essays on Political Irrationality. From Hanania’s write-up:
Much of the conversation then centers around Caplan’s simplistic theory of the right and left. This is compared and contrasted with Scott Alexander’s thrive/survive theory of the political spectrum, Robin Hanson’s theory of farmers and foragers, and Hanania’s “Liberals Read, Conservatives Watch TV.”
Near the end, the discussion turns to the political climate at GMU, and whether the intellectual community that has been built can survive the trend towards DEI.
Very fun, but even more fun if you read the book! Hint hint.
I think Bryan does not give some of the liberal writers enough credit. For example Yglesias, who Bryan mentioned during the chat, literally has a book on having a billion Americans - making a strong case for allowing substantially more immigration - and has another book on the rent being too high - with the same type of arguments as Bryan against regulation of construction.
Obviously being of a left-wing persuasion, Yglesias (like me) is concerned about inequality. But the biggest policy changes advocated to increase equality are things Bryan and similar thinkers should be able to support (i.e. cheaper housing). If Bryan and other libertarians cannot make common cause on these issues with liberals, it seems that the prospects of success of these ideas are diminished.
To whom it may concern:
I would be interested in elaborating my take on right and left. Features of it:
* Pinker's concept of the left pole, which gets us to see that "right" means non-left.
* The greater diversity of the non-left, as compared to the left. (Note that we speak of "leftism" but not "rightism.")
* The principle that people's policy positions on issues are in large measure received from their partisan attachment.
* The sources and underlying nature of leftism.
* The semantic history of "left."