Libertarians AND neoliberals versus behavioral psychology and economics

Reason magazine, the closest thing to a "house organ" for small-l libertarians and read by many in the party as well, is "interesting." But not interesting enough to sniff my blogroll.

I'd say I'd largely agree with 15 percent of what it rights, fairly agree with 25 percent, fairly disagree with 35 percent, and think 25 percent is batshit. And the same person can write in all four categories.

Take Radley Balko, a great guy on things like police brutality and militarization.

But, also one of those libertarians who believes on many issues that "the lawsuit is the answer for everything."

Like DWI checkpoints. He has in the past called for them to be abolished on the grounds that they violate civil liberties AND that the threat of lawsuits is a deterrent.

Dude? There is SO much wrong with this.

First, to the degree that driving is a right and a privilege, it's not an absolute.

Second, to the degree that even libertarians will admit the state has public health regulatory rights (tho many libertarians are wingnuts on masks, shutdowns, etc. on COVID), driving is surely one of those. Just as the rights of your fist (or your germy cough) end at my nose, even more so, your rights behind the wheel of two tons of metal end when you're on the same highway as me.

Third, lawsuits don't bring dead people back to life.

Fourth, re the War on Drugs, alcohol is deadlier than any illicit drug.

Fifth, the biggie for purposes of this blog post?

Libertarians refuse to wrestle with, let alone actually consider, the implications of behavioral psychology and economics for the false idea of Homo sapiens economicus as a rational actor. No surprise, though. From what I can tell, they fail to consider that Adam Smith's "invisible hand" comes from his Enlightenment Deism, even though there's proof on Smith's pages, and that said Enlightenment Deism has had things like quantum mechanics "put paid" to it.

But, neoliberals are problematic, too. With them, with the likes of Cass Sunstein, it's been an overeager, uncritical, still capitalism-based acceptance of the interlocked disciplines.

Sunstein has never asked whether a capitalist nudge is the best way — as in either the most productive or the ethically best way — to actually effect long-term changes in behavior. Ditto in spades on whether it's the best way to effect changes that work well within long-term societal, not just individual, needs.