Monday, April 10, 2017

Review: Against Democracy

Against Democracy Against Democracy by Jason Brennan
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Against Democracy, as the name suggests, is a devastating critique of democracy both in terms of the efficacy of real-world democracies to provide competent government and the moral justifications for democracy (more precisely, universal suffrage as a moral right). It is at its best when it challenges and debunks our cherished assumptions about and views of democracy.

I find the book less convincing when it comes to Brennan’s proposed alternative: epistocracy. This is the rule of the knowers; or more precisely, the idea that in some way voting or governing is restricted by some kind of test of knowledge. For example, you only get to vote if you can pass an exam like the citizenship test or everyone gets a vote, but people who can pass such an exam get extra votes. Brennan briefly discusses several possible ways epistocracy might work (and there are many), but without any actual full-blown epistocracies to look at, it is hard to get a feel for just what such a system would really look like and how such a system would actually work. This is hardly Brennan’s fault; there just aren’t any real-world examples to present.

He does discuss some of the epistocratic elements already in place (e.g. Supreme Court) and this helps make things clearer. Nevertheless, I think he might have spent more time fleshing out a few of the more promising alternatives in greater detail. After all, the discussion of epistocracy proper is only one chapter (I would assume Brennan is saving this for his next book.)

Without the more fleshed out alternatives, it is harder to evaluate them and compare them to democracy (which is what Brennan wants us to do). It also makes it harder to determine whether some of the objections raised against epistocracy are answered adequately. For example, I am not sure the demographic objection is satisfactorily met. This is the concern that epistocracy would, given the current demographic realities, disenfranchise individuals that are part of already disadvantaged groups. Brennan’s response boils down to the claim that since epistocracy should yield better policies (especially for such groups, who have been ill served by democracy), these individuals will be better off under epistocracy. This might be true but it sure doesn't seem like it would convince someone deeply concerned about this issue. Of course, that doesn’t show that Brennan is wrong, but it tugs at how deep the perceived value of voting is and that at least from a rhetorical point of view more work needs to be done.

Another practical concern is that Brennan never addresses how we get there from here. What is the realistic path to adopting his vision? If democracies are as incompetent as he convincingly argues, then how do we get democracies to change and implement epistocracy (peacefully)?

Another concern I have, and this runs through a lot of Brennan’s work that I have read, is that he has way more confidence in empirical social science than I tend to think is warranted. I am not denying the value of this science or its importance in making these kinds of arguments. Nevertheless, I think more humility and caution is needed when using it. The empirical data seems to me to be more limited in terms of scope and generalizability than Brennan seems to treat it. That said, he is explicitly cautious at times, just not as much as I think he needs to be.

I am sympathetic to Brennan’s arguments against democracy and for epistocracy. But I worry that's because I am not part of the groups that are disenfranchised by Brennan's proposals: my position in society is not likely to be affected. Would someone in those groups find the view as appealing? Probably not. But, then, such people aren't reading books like these I (and maybe that’s part of the problem).

As a realistic alternative, I don’t think epistocracy will win the day anytime soon. But I think the book has important value in the present forcing us to rethink the way see democracy and by making the case that more epistocratic elements need to be added or strengthened in our republic.



View all my reviews

Sunday, April 09, 2017

Review: Sackett

Sackett Sackett by Louis L'Amour
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This novel introduces Tell, the older brother of Orrin and Tyrel Sackett from the previous novel The Daybreakers. The story arc is similar to other Sackett stories: the wandering, the run-ins with unwise ruffians, and the beautiful woman the Sackett falls in love with. The story is great fun, if a bit formulaic. Like the other Sackett stories, L'Amour paints beautiful pictures of the Western landscape while weaving together (and sometimes creating) the idioms, tropes, and mythos of "The West."

View all my reviews

Friday, April 07, 2017

Review: Memorial Day

Memorial Day Memorial Day by Vince Flynn
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Flynn explores a frightening possibility; one that seems all too realistic. The hero Rapp is able, of course, to thwart the attack and save the world yet again--all in thrilling fashion.

View all my reviews

Sunday, March 19, 2017

Review: Aftermath

Aftermath Aftermath by Chuck Wendig
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This was great! It both introduces you to new aspects of the Star Wars universe but at the same time staying in the world fans of the movie will recognize. It mostly focuses on new characters, though a few of the main movie characters have cameos. I liked the structure with the interludes that focused on what was going on elsewhere in the galaxy: it gave you a feel for the whole universe here, more than just the main plot and characters. they also felt like they were setting up for future characters and events later on. It was also interesting to get the Imperials point of view as well--something you don't get in the movies. There is very little in terms of the Force and so it feels more like a straight up sci-fi novel. The characters introduced are interesting: refreshing but also fitting the forms typical of Star Wars. I can't wait to read book 2.

View all my reviews

Friday, March 10, 2017

Review: Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power

Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power by Jon Meacham
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Meacham's biography and history is not bad, but it could meander a bit. He weaves in many little stories and anecdotes about aspects of Jefferson's personal, daily life that I found less interesting. I get why Meacham does this: he wants to show Jefferson as a complete human being, but I found it distracting. The book is at its best when it focuses on the more historical aspects of Jefferson's life.

While Meacham's expressed goal was not to lionize Jefferson -- and this book is not a hagiography -- there are times that I think he glosses over the more problematic, partisan, or inconsistent Jefferson to focus on the grander Jefferson. He covers the former elements, but they are down played maybe a bit too much. This might just be a factor of having recently also listened to Chernow's bio of Hamilton where Jefferson doesn't come off grand at all. Speaking of Hamilton, it was surprising how little a role Hamilton has in Meacham's biography. Adams is Jefferson's antagonist here, not Hamilton.

Edward Hermann was a fantastic reader: I could listen to him read the phone book.

View all my reviews

Monday, March 06, 2017

Review: Echo Burning

Echo Burning Echo Burning by Lee Child
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

A skillfully crafted thriller that is full of twists. It's implausible and ridiculous in the way that such thrillers are -- but that's the point and part of the charm. Reacher's reluctant heroism driven by his sense of justice and compassion for Ellie saves the day in this racist, backwater Texas town. The portraits of the different characters from Carmen to Ellie to Alice to Hack to Rusty provide the foundation for the plot and the action.


View all my reviews

Saturday, February 18, 2017

Review: The Free Market Existentialist: Capitalism without Consumerism

The Free Market Existentialist: Capitalism without Consumerism The Free Market Existentialist: Capitalism without Consumerism by William Irwin
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

William Irwin’s The Free Market Existentialist is a clear and concise exploration of the compatibility of three views not often united under one heading: existentialism, a defense of free markets, and moral anti-realism.

Irwin is explicit that he doesn’t expect existentialists to turn into limited government libertarians, nor libertarians to become existentialists. His goal is more modest: showing that there is nothing incompatible about the conjoining of these views and there might even be ways in which they fit better than other more conventional pairings. In this regard, I think Irwin achieves his goals. One might not walk away from this book a free market existentialist himself, but one will, I think, see how that’s not some crazy oxymoron either.

In terms of the existentialism, Irwin’s focus is primarily on Sartre and his work. First, Sartre is possibly the best-known existentialist and second, he was a Marxist. Irwin makes a convincing case against Sartrean Marxism and then explains how many of Sartre’s themes might be a better fit with free market capitalism. He also suggests how one’s understanding of free markets and one’s self within free markets can be improved by taking an existentialist perspective.

The last two chapters of the book focus on explaining Irwin’s vision of free markets. It is not his goal here to be exhaustive or to provide the philosophical foundations and justifications for free markets (there are footnotes directly to such sources). The vision presented is standard classical liberal/libertarian fare and I have little to quibble with here.

The part of the book I found the most wanting was the focus on moral anti-realism. Irwin describes moral anti-realism as the rejection of the view that morality exists independently of anyone’s beliefs about it. I think that is probably too broad—though that depends on what we mean by morality existing and existing independently. The meta-ethical issues about the existence of morality are complex, and I think, largely muddled. (To be clear: the issues themselves are muddled, not Irwin’s discussion). While the bridges between moral anti-realism and existentialism were easier to grasp, the relation of moral anti-realism to free markets was less persuasive—thought not without some interesting and worthwhile points.

I think the choice of title is telling. Irwin is the eponymous Free Market Existentialist; he is not providing us with an ‘ism’ to take up. There may be others who share his view (I admit to be sympathetic: I used to describe Rand’s Objectivism as Existentialism on Prozac) but, as he says in the conclusion, he’s not trying to start a new orthodoxy. It’s about starting a conversation and I think Irwin’s book does just that.



View all my reviews

Saturday, January 07, 2017

Review: Richard Stark's Parker: The Hunter

Richard Stark's Parker: The Hunter Richard Stark's Parker: The Hunter by Darwyn Cooke
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Different and far darker than I expected--though I didn't really know what to expect. The noir artwork and themes drew me too it (and the guy at the comic book store highly recommended it). I hadn't even heard of the original novels by Richard Stark.

Parker is the protagonist - but he's certainly no hero. He does, though, have that inner code that noir protagonists have. He's a completely self-sufficient and supremely competently man. You do not want to cross this guy--as he is makes crystal clear in the course of the book. As Spenser said of Hawk: "He's not a good man, but he's good."

I haven't read many graphic novels, so I don't have much to compare this to. But the art fit the story very well. It helped set the mood and tone.

View all my reviews

Review: Live by Night

Live by Night Live by Night by Dennis Lehane
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I had this book on my shelf for a bit but when I saw it was being made into a movie, I decided it was time to read it. It's a great book; Lehane at the top of his game. It should make a great movie.

It's precursor The Given Day was really good, but was a bit unwieldy. There were too many story lines going at once. Live by Night is much more focused on just Joe Coughlin's life. This allowed the reader to get much more inside of Joe's life than Danny's and the other characters from The Given Day. We get a much more introspective novel.

It didn't strike me until reading this how existential Lehane's novels are. All of his novels seem to be about characters thrown into a violent and absurd world, facing hard choices, trying to make the best of their lives. Nevertheless, Lehane's characters are far more constrained by their past and their environments than a Sartrean Existentialist would have them (radical freedom and all). This is evident with Coughlin as well--and in part is one of themes of the book: one's past will catch up to you and reaps its 'rewards.'

The one thing I am still not sure about is the ending. I won't spoil it, but it didn't sit quite right with me. That said, I am not sure any other ending would have been better.

View all my reviews

Monday, January 02, 2017