Saturday, October 13, 2007
Lessig 2.0, the video
Larry Lessig has moved on from Copyright to Corruption. He explains:
I don't mean corruption in the simple sense of bribery. I mean "corruption" in the sense that the system is so queered by the influence of money that it can't even get an issue as simple and clear as term extension right. Politicians are starved for the resources concentrated interests can provide. In the US, listening to money is the only way to secure reelection. And so an economy of influence bends public policy away from sense, always to dollars. [Link.]Lessig's first lecture on corruption is Must-See-TV! Do watch it. Or, at least listen to the audio.
Technorati Tags: Corruption, LawrenceLessig
Comments:
The more influence politicans have to sell, the higher a price they are able to command.
The only solution to this problem is to take power away from politicians. The way you do that is to keep the federal government powerless so that everything not listed in the Constitution is done on the state level. People can pay more attention to more local government, and if it gets really bad, they have the option of switching to a different state's government (by moving).
Politicians will always try to sell their influence. You keep it down to a dull roar by keeping them as powerless as possible.
That means doing less through politics and more through markets. This is good for markets, too, because it forces government to look more to their customers and less to politicians.
Post a Comment
The only solution to this problem is to take power away from politicians. The way you do that is to keep the federal government powerless so that everything not listed in the Constitution is done on the state level. People can pay more attention to more local government, and if it gets really bad, they have the option of switching to a different state's government (by moving).
Politicians will always try to sell their influence. You keep it down to a dull roar by keeping them as powerless as possible.
That means doing less through politics and more through markets. This is good for markets, too, because it forces government to look more to their customers and less to politicians.
