tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post5381335802358450525..comments2024-03-19T07:48:37.771-04:00Comments on International Political Economy at the University of North Carolina: Politics Is Not the Dispassionate Quest for EqualityThomas Oatleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14092437150746625670noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post-17845900911754335602010-08-15T09:27:46.737-04:002010-08-15T09:27:46.737-04:00Thanks for stopping by, Charlie. I'm happy you...Thanks for stopping by, Charlie. I'm happy you did, and I'd love to continue the dialogue. But right now I think we might be talking past each other.<br /><br /><i>No, it's not equivalent: you've restricted the scope of 'the citizens'.</i> <br /><br />I have not. I include defense contractors, as well as homeless and everyone else, as citizens.<br /><br /><i>I'm fairly sure there's no explicit judgement given.</i><br /><br />Erm, bullshit. You've been open and honest about your normative preferences. I'm merely extending them to a context that your logic implies, but that might offend your sensitivities. <br /><br /><i>Perhaps not, but changing the scope is exactly what makes the difference; this was what I was trying to get at here. Joffe makes use of an unrestricted statement: i.e. 'manipulation of public power for private gain'. Whose power? Whose private gain?</i><br /><br />Exactly. You are trying to stretch a positive observation (politics is about competing interests) into a normative judgment (politics should be about some interests winning out over others). See?<br /><br />You continue to say explicitly that we should emphasize a normative politics, then immediately accuse me of an unfair reading when I point out that that is your view! Pardon me, but why should I apologize for pointing out your own views to you?<br /><br />My take is that positive politics is distinct from normative politics. In the positive sense, rent-seeking from the homeless is equivalent to rent-seeking from defense contractors. In the normative sense, the homeless *may* have a different claim to aid than the defense contractor, but that judgment depends on an entirely different conversation than the one we're having.<br /><br />And I'm still curious as what other way you've heard the term "rent-seeking" applied.<br /><br />Anyway, I'm very happy to hear from you, and I'd be happy to keep this going on our respective blogs, comment sections, or e-mail.Kindred Winecoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14330671232391851377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1331441403058020963.post-33948377664008959672010-08-14T12:47:29.167-04:002010-08-14T12:47:29.167-04:00Is this not equivalent to what Whitaker has stated...<i>Is this not equivalent to what Whitaker has stated? He doesn't seem to think so.</i><br /><br />No, it's not equivalent: you've restricted the scope of 'the citizens'.<br /><br /><i>In his example, he seems to think the action taken is legitimate.</i><br /><br />I'm fairly sure there's no explicit judgement given.<br /><br /><i>I doubt he would think the same of my example.</i><br /><br />Perhaps not, but changing the scope is exactly what makes the difference; this was what I was trying to get at here. Joffe makes use of an unrestricted statement: i.e. 'manipulation of public power for private gain'. <i>Whose</i> power? <i>Whose</i> private gain?<br /><br /><i>So what Whitaker is trying to do is to criticize a positive observation about politics -- that it is fundamentally about competing interests -- in favor of a normative view of what politics should be about.</i><br /><br /><i>Shouldn't</i> we have a view of what politics ought to be about (understood as 'how politics ought to be conducted'? And isn't conceiving of politics as being 'about competing interests' in itself a value judgement?<br /><br /><i>His view of the latter can easily be summed up as "politics should favor my preferred interest groups, without having to be so crass as to admit that it does". Why? Because it should, that's why</i><br /><br />I think that's probably an unfair reading.<br /><br />It's good that someone takes an interest!Charlie Whitakerhttp://fistfulofeuros.netnoreply@blogger.com