When the wicked rule the people mourn

I've spent more time pondering the current Presidential elections than is probably healthy, reading most anything about the candidates that comes my way. I was disturbed a few weeks ago, that when my son asked me for positive reasons why I had voted in Texas' primary for Rubio, I had far less to say in his favor than I had to say about two candidates in particular who would never under any circumstances receive my vote. Shortly thereafter at Institute, a student reminded us that it is not enough to point out error, but to point towards light and truth. In recognition that my Facebook feed and thoughts dwelt far too much on the negative, I decided to back off on political posts for a while to try to recenter my thoughts.

Last week I found the answer I was looking for. It might not be everyone's answer, but it is mine: IT'S TIME FOR A SPREADSHEET! The methodology is simple: Who are the candidates and what does each stand for? Score them 0-10 (or higher or lower depending on the weight you want to put on one issue or another) and add up your totals. The highest number is the candidate you should support.

For my spreadsheet, I turn to Doctrine and Covenants 98:9-10: "When the wicked rule the people mourn. Wherefore, honest men [and women] and wise men [and women] should be sought for diligently, and good men [and women] and wise men [and women] ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil."

For my primary vote, I focused less on the wise part - did they agree with my stances on particular issues, or at the least could I see wisdom in their choices and arguments even if they come to different conclusions - and mostly on whether I thought this was a good human being. If they aren't, I don't care how much they agree with me on everything else, I won't support them. This is why I voted for Rubio in my primary election and why at this stage I will find anything nice to say about Sanders that I can even knowing on economic and foreign policies I'm likely to agree with his opponent more than him.

This post includes only my rankings on the honest and good parts. I measured it on nine dimensions:

Mencken on Democracy

Henderson and Mingardi shared some Mencken quotes last month about Democracy that I'm enjoying a little too much as I teach my Public Choice class.

Democracy is the theory that the common man knows what he wants and deserves to get it, good and hard.
If x is the population of the United States and y is the degree of imbecility of the average American, then democracy is the theory that x*y is less than y.
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.

Finding common ground: Karl Marx

This semester I'm teaching an independent study course on "heterodox economics" - which is to say, the stuff that doesn't typically make it to the textbooks. I was pretty confident in picking the readings for the sections on Austrian and new institutional economics, but decided to chat with my next-door colleague, an avowed Marxist, to see what he would suggest for covering Marxism. He recommended the first volume of Das Kapital in the gleeful knowledge that he was getting ME to read it as well. He knew I was not about to assign something to my student I hadn't read myself and the recommendation is a sensible one since I'm assigning very sympathetic readings for the other topics as well. I've been meaning to read Smith, Keynes, Ricardo, Marx, et al "someday" anyway, so I took this as a chance to cross one off my list.

Primarily, I confess, I was reading so I could voice better objections to Marx than that I don't like his conclusions or rehashing other people's criticisms. I've found those objections and I'm quite pleased with the understanding I've gained in the last couple weeks. My opposition to Marxism is now founded on firmer grounds*. I also found two things that I liked.


The first was a lovely quote in praise of the labor market as

"a very Eden of the innate rights of man. It is the exclusive realm of Freedom, Equality, Property and Bentham [the greatest happiness for the greatest number]. ... And precisely for that reason ... under the auspices of an all-cunning providence, they all work together to their mutual advantage, for the common weal, and in the common interest."

I found myself in ready agreement with that characterisation.

The other idea was one I had never before considered, but I found it profound in my circumstances.

It's so nice when someone agrees with me: Book of Mormon vs. America

I've been reading Bushman's biography/study of Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling, and was gratified to read the following passage on politics and government in the Book of Mormon:

American constitutionalism is faintly invoked and then dismissed. Book of Mormon governments are monarchies and judgeships. Old Testament governments, not democratic legislatures and elected presidents. Monarchy is terminated at one point ..., surely a republican moment, but not by revolution. ... The king's recommendations for a new government, moreover, are not democratic. ...
There is one apparently democratic gesture at this turning point. The first judge is selected by the voice of the people. But this step toward democracy is immediately retraced. Successors to the chief judge inherit their offices... . Thereafter, judges are appointed. The voice of the people is consulted only when the former judge's sons fight over the judgment seat or no natural successor is available. ... The most valued features of republican government -- regular elections, a representative legislature, and checks and balances -- are absent. Moreover, throughout the text, church and state are liberally intermixed. The first chief judge is also the high priest, and the prophets and the judges collaborate in ruling the people. Righteous rule is the prophets' object rather than limitations on power. ... Against republican government, it proposes righteous rule by judges and kings under God's law.

Chest-thumping, flag-waving American I may be, but I have been surprised that I have never been able to convince anyone of these notions. The Book of Mormon people is neither democratic [day to day decisions made by the people] or republican [decisions made by elected officials], and there is no sense of a separation of church and state. It's so very nice to hear someone of Dr. Bushman's standing agree.

This is how we do things here

We have now lived in Nigeria for six months. This is how we do things here ... this weekend.

I'm flying to Addis for a conference in a couple weeks. There are two airlines that service Yola to the capitol, each of them flying at a random time in the "morning" and "afternoon". My flight from Abuja to Addis leaves in the early afternoon, so I need the flight that really is in the morning. I dropped by the airport to buy my ticket (which you can't do online) in cash (another necessity for the time being).

There I was informed that they are no longer doing morning flights. This has been the case for ... 3-4 days now. They'll probably start up again, another source informed me, sometime this week. So I asked them, if I come back next week and you do morning flights then, can I get a ticket then? Yes. Okay. So I'll go get my ticket next week. If they still aren't, I'll have to fly out the night before and overnight in Abuja.