The Myth of Representation

What is missing is the incentive to represent. Human beings have one general incentive, self interest. When an election takes place voters assume they will be represented when their selection takes office. The person elected is actually acquiring a licenses to exploit the citizens and pedal influence.

Surprisingly this process is never noticed. Citizens are confounded that those they elect completely ignore their wishes when they take office. How is this possible in a country full of brilliant and sentient people? The fact is that they are not brilliant and sentient? Folks are engaging in herd behavior and not actually thinking, though they insist they are.

The individual feels so important within himself, he cannot fathom that others see him as only a resource. The best way to take advantage of another person is to exploit his since of self importance. This is one of those cases where the way things are defined and the they work in practice are completely different. That is why in my Fantasy Free approach to economics, I study people in institutions according to how they function only. How they are defined is completely meaningless. Mainstream economics is built on myths about human behavior and thus offers traps rather than solutions.

Representation is possible but not in the way American’s go about their deluded political lives. The belief is “We are special so anyone we elect will naturally take care of us.” To get representation voters have to apply constant pressure and throw lawmakers out of office the minute they don’t do what is expected of them. Doing it any other way is not much different than wearing a sign around that says kick me.


(Visited 25 times, 1 visits today)

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.
This entry was posted in Daily Comments. Bookmark the permalink.