Build institutions, not apps

Horseshit.

Andrew Carnegie was a robber baron bastard, but it was him actually cutting checks that gave us museums and concert halls that persist to this day.

The Silicon Valley "elite" like to bitch, but they want everyone else to cut the check.

It is remarkable that in this soaring call to "build" institutions, the author does not cite a single example of institutional capacity he would like to build up, rather than tear down.

He cites some obviously real examples of institutional dysfunction (hi, San Francisco zoning!). But these examples are all (or are all portrayed as) institutions "hindering", "stifling" or "limiting" otherwise beneficial processes. This implies a worldview in which the only thing institutions do is get in the way of "the freedom to build", and the only implied remedy is to get them out of the way.

This is counterproductive, because it takes us straight back to the "government is [bad/good]" argument. These arguments haven't got us anywhere so far, even - indeed, especially - in Silicon Valley, which features one of the world's highest concentrations of libertarians.

(My amateur hypothesis: If you approach institutional reform with an agenda of dismantling those institutions, that's a recipe for scorched-earth resistance from anyone who believes in that institution's goals - however well or poorly that institution is currently functioning. This leads to the worst of both worlds: dysfunctional institutions, held in stasis by the tug-of-war going on around them.)

If you really believe in institution-building, you should be able to cite some examples of what they should be able to do more or better. Otherwise, you're just advocating old-school deregulation and calling it "building".

Tyler Cowen's summary of "state capacity libertarianism", which this article cites, is much preferable on this score: It is explicit about what Cowen believes institutions should do (and do well), as well as what they should not: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/01/wh...

Why not build apps to build institutions?

Politics is quite complex and full of its own jargon. It is not simple to understand.

Why not to develop apps, which will streamline a complex political process? Take zoning for example. There are new construction hearings, which only few NIMBYists attend, while pro-builders do not even know where to search for those. Say I'm a pro-builder busy with my own career. I have many questions. Where are those hearings held? Can I attend them, or there are some requirements? How do I meet those requirements? Is there any voting taking place? Where is it actually decided whether to build or not? What is the next action I can take given I am an average city dweller able to dedicate few hours per month for politics? If there is an app that would bring the tasks down to small actionable points with descriptions, and offer simplest step by step instructions, I may find it actually fun to do.

> The result is San Francisco, the most innovative city in a generation, proposing a Office of Emerging Technology to require any technology that uses public space, scooters for example, to get prior permission from the city

That sounds totally reasonable, lest your city become clogged with broken-ass scooters after the n-th scooter startup goes on their "incredible journey" to the stars.

Perhaps if you're going to litter the streets with scooters you should be required to post up cash in escrow for unlittering said scooters if/when you disappear.

I once had a relationship with someone with depression. As someone who is naturally quite happy[1], the thing that suprised me most at the start of the relationship is the amount of time she spent strategising how to be happy, rather than just getting on with being happy. In her case, it's understandable because depression is completely irrational[2]

But nations do have the capacity to act rationally, so when I these posts and wonder if the world really needs more strategies. Do we need to spend more time strategizing, rather than getting on-board with the solutions that already have steam (as imperfect as they might be)?

Anyway, here is my contribution to the noise: https://paul.copplest.one/blog/why-nations-succeed.html

    [1] happy/positive, whatever word you want without derailing the point of the comment
    [2] for anyone with depression, please read this with positive intent. Depression is horrific and I wouldn't wish it on my enemies