Mike Munger is one of the most insightful political economist I know, and he also has a wonderful ability to communicate his ideas clearly and forcefully (as can be seen in his posts on Econ Lib, or on his blog). Recently he gave an address to the NC Libertarian convention, and his talk was posted on his blog on May 6. I particularly liked his discussion of the 'George Mason' lottery, which describes how rent-seeking games in politics result in waste (though extremely profitable to those in positions to conduct the lottery).
Mike's speech communicates clearly while political competition results in patterns of behavior and resource allocations that are entirely different from what they would be under conditions of market competition.
In a far less entertaining and clearly written manner, Peter Leeson, Chris Coyne and I have a paper circulating at the moment on "Saving Government Failure From Itself" --- I just presented it at Ben Powell's seminar at San Jose State University, and my visit to SJSU was absolutely wonderful and it was great to see Ben Powell, Ed Stringham, and Ed Lopez doing so well (they even let me win in golf!!!) SJSU seems to be a great atmosphere to study Austrian economics and political economy and the students seem to be enjoying themselves and learning how to become first-rate economists and political economists.
Bill Hutt was a pioneer in the study of government failure and the vote buying motive in politics. This arose from his work on the economic impact of the labour unions in the nineteenth century as the franchise was widened and parties started to compete for the trade union vote.
The Australian historian Keith Hancock was also a pioneer in this field. In his book Australia (1930) he described how the major parties were forced to compete for the votes of minority interests in marginal electorates where the major players are evenly matched.
"The same necessity which moderates the zeal of Labour politicians moderates the ardour of their opponents. They, too, must go scouting from their base of class
interest and instinct and theory far out into the electoral no-man’s land, where free companies and guerrilla mercenaries wander irresolutely between the two armies
which chaffer for their support. The free companies are sometimes ridiculously small but their adherence to one side or the other is decisive of electoral battles. Their numbers may be contemptible but their price is high." (p. 189).
Hutt’s major work on political economy is Economists and the Public (1936). He wrote "this book has arisen out of what I originally intended to be an important side-issue in a study of a certain equalitarian and democratic ideal, namely, the competitive system. But further reflection caused the problems here dealt with to acquire major importance and demand separate treatment”.
The “side-issue” that he felt obliged to address was the overwhelming opposition to free enterprise capitalism and free markets among intellectuals, politicians and other people of influence. Hutt’s deliberations on the anti-free trade mentality drove him to a major survey of the nature of the social sciences and their relationship to public
opinion and politics. The book appeared in the same year as the blockbusting General Theory from Keynes and Hutt’s book made no noticeable impression although it still speaks to our condition.
Posted by: Rafe | May 13, 2006 at 08:13 PM