4 thoughts on “Xmarks’ Top 20 Corruption Sites List Includes Deep Capture”

1. Lila,

   What is the point of a campaign against naked short selling, insider trading, highly-levered balance sheets, etc.? These are all outgrowths of regulated markets.

   If a concerted effort was made to eliminate regulated markets, these problems would all disappear, as well.

   Focusing on specific issues seems to promulgate the idea that this is a “policy” problem and that if governments can just arrive at the correct policy, all will be well. But the problem is government and its policies.

   Reply

2. Hi Taylor –

   In my opinion, generalized arguments against the state have great value as theoretical clarification.

   I’m not sure they will accomplish anything more practical unless we also address specific things..
   Also, by saying “government is evil” we are clearing the deck for a cop-out …

   That’s like Marxists saying all property is theft, so there’s no difference between say, the guy who steals your wallet, and another guy who made money from his business lawfully, but hey, he wouldn’t have made that money without the laws that are in place because of the government, so his money is really just as much theft, so let’s not prosecute the theft…

   Where does that get you?
   In the first place, not prosecuting the theft makes people lose faith even more in honest behavior…and turns even hitherto honest people into racketeers

   Then, exposes of how these scams takes place will make establishing the ground rules better.

   Do we need ground rules? Yes. Just like basket ball needs hoops..
   You don’t tell people how much they can score, but you do mark out a playing field and set the rules of the game.

   On the theoretical side, the state is an evil..
   On the practical side, some governments really are more honest than others..

   Finally, the problem is not solely government. That is an analysis that stays at a secondary level. The problem is power.

   Different kinds. Who has it. How it’s checked. Governments are just the way that power is concentrated too heavily in one center..

   Having an honest sec or regulator would help disperse the power of the big banks..
   as would having many more banks…
   as would having many smaller states that could curb the imperial state
   Public interest sites that expose corruption act to disperse and attack financial power through moral power…public exposure and censure is a form of moral power.

   This is 4th gen war – welcome to it.

   Reply

3. Lila,

   I respect you as a thinker on many topics, unfortunately this is not one of them. I believe your effort to be practical is naive to the extreme. You know enough to discount your own arguments you’ve made here so I won’t bother going into it.

   It’s funny, you decry the theoretical yet you engage in it yourself. Yes, having an honest SEC, etc., “would” do a lot of things… but have we ever had one? And furthermore, could we?

   That is where your analysis fails.

   Government is power. If the problem is power, then the problem (in part at least) is government. And government isn’t the solution to government.

   Has a state ever gotten more honest with time?

   That’s rhetorical, don’t bother answering. We’ll have to discuss these ideas another time when I am not frustrated with your response as I am now and prone to calling names (though with reason, I think).

   Reply

4. Hi Taylor –

   You are wrong on all counts, especially on my being naive.

   1. Where do I discount theory? I think theory is vital. I said theory won’t accomplish what you want it to accomplish. Pragmatism will. Pragmatism doesn’t have to be abandoning principle..it’s applying principle in the world of practical affairs..instead of mistaking the map for the road.

   2. Where do I say I want more government? We already have an SEC and regulators and FBI. I don’t want more of them. I just want them to do their jobs. You will admit that an sec that does its jobs is better than one that doesn’t.

   3. I am all for public exposure by citizens. That’s the precise definition of civil society and voluntary libertarian action..

   4. I’ve no where advocated increasing regulations of a substantive kind. I do think the uptick rule should be brought back. That is something most traders would agree on. That is just a rule of the road.

   Wanting financial crime to be prosecuted is no different from wanting the cop on the beat to protect my house when it’s burgled. Or do you object to that too?

   5. Ultimately, the best thing would be to undo some laws …to make the market function as a check on the concentration of some power centers.

   But is that happening? And what are libertarians doing about that? Nothing.

   Is anyone trying to repeal limited liability laws..or any of the other stuff that allows monopolies and huge corporations/firms/banks to wield monopolistic control that deforms the market..No, I don’t think..

   So, in certain ways, governments do act as checks to those power centers.

   That doesn’t mean I think that’s ideal or that I would advocate expanding government. It just means I recognize reality.

   The BRIC nations act as a deterrent to Anglo-European power. That doesn’t mean that I think they are innocent of the guilt of the state..of course not.

   It’s a question of using principles of subsidiarity and contiguity to address the issue.

   Those are libertarian principles by the way..You’ll find them in Acton.

   Actually, I think public exposure of the kind Deep Capture does, naming names and so on..is almost enough on its own to discredit the whole apparatus that keeps the system propped up.

   Which is why I support 9-11 research.

   If you really want to strike at the root..strike at all the institutions that prop up the credibility of the state and show them for what they are..the press, the universities, the prize committees, the financial journalists, the analysts, the corrupt money managers who pose as heroes of free speech..

   What’s wrong with that?

   That’s all “government,” Taylor.

   Not just some pathetic school teachers that the libertarians love to beat up on because they’re easy targets and they won’t get into trouble for it. It’s easy to beat up on postal workers, and regulators and school teachers..because they can’t do much in the way of retaliation.

   But it’s not so easy to beat up on the media and the hedge funds that are almost a branch of government because careers and families can be threatened.

   Reply