Almost Classical

Putin, at 85 percent approval (or higher, depending on source), is the most popular leader in Europe among his voters. Though we know he controls the media and crushes opposition, he really doesn't care what the West does or doesn't do. He's even used the sanctions as proof that the West is out to destroy Russia. It wouldn't matter who sat in the Oval Office. Putin's Russia is, as he says, "Trying to right a horrible wrong." Pride and honor are at stake, not international norms. And, in the end, Russian oil and gas are needed by many nations in the region -- at least for now -- and that gives Russia leverage. The sad reality... there is not much Pres. Obama or anyone can do to change Putin's worldview. Sanctions, harsh words, none of those things will matter to Moscow. And China will be more than happy to support Putin's Russia. When we try to understand the world through "American" or "Western" eyes, we miss that other ec...

I hesitate to suggest a book I haven't yet read, but I read Sean Trende loyally. The book, available today, is  The Lost Majority . A link to the introduction can be found at:  The Lost Majority . The introduction states: This book makes three interrelated claims. First, that the 2010 midterm elections were a result of Barack Obama and the Democrats misreading both their mandate and how they had been brought to power, imagining a realignment in 2008 when, in fact, none had occurred. Second, that the emerging partisan majorities described by theorists from both parties are mirages. Third, that the entire concept of realignments/permanent alignments, which underlay much of the misbegotten analysis of the 2008 elections, is bankrupt and should be abandoned. I wholeheartedly agree with these statements. The "swings" mentioned in the media, by historians, and by some political scientists are illusions. The swings are of a few percentages, generally in the...

I appreciate the implications of this research. Though I believe humans are naturally, evolutionarily, predisposed to be competitive and self-interested (for better and worse), this research helps demonstrate how we adjust our views with age and experience. We might be naturally selfish (watch children at play), but we also mature and learn to apply ethical systems to control our impulses. Kids Own Up To Ownership - Science News : Kids own up to ownership: Concept of property rights may come naturally to preschoolers By Bruce Bower June 18th, 2011; Vol.179 #13 (p. 17) WASHINGTON — Young children are possessed by possessions. Preschoolers argue about what belongs to whom with annoying regularity, a habit that might suggest limited appreciation of what it means to own something. But it’s actually just the opposite, psychologist Ori Friedman of the University of Waterloo in Canada reported on May 28 at the Association for Psychological Science annual meeting. At ages 4 and 5, youngsters ...

Daniel Kahneman is a Nobel laureate in economics, and a behavioral psychologist by trade. His specialty is "hedonics" — which is a fancy way of stating that he wonders what makes us happy (and sad) as humans. If you believe that economics is often the pursuit of happiness or pleasure, you can immediately see the importance of Kahneman's research. Many of us find "pleasure" (emotional reward) in obtaining a perceived bargain, according to Kahneman and other researchers. Unfortunately, what we perceive as a bargain isn't always so. I've known "coupon clippers" who would buy items for "half price" — but these were items they'd never normally purchase. Our reward impulse is not logical and reasonable because it is an impulse, not careful consideration of the variables involved. Economists used to believe in the "rational consumer" and the "rational seller." Both are statistically accurate in the macro, but at the m...

I am a believer in "behavioral economics," and am convinced human nature is neither rational nor predictable at the individual level. The " Austrian School " of economics, which is closer to my views on economics than any other general school, suggests that mathematical models in economics generally overstate the predictability of humans. I am seldom stunned or shocked when economic predictions are "unexpectedly" off the mark. Too many economists are convinced they conduct "science" when they are closer to the randomness of human psychology. I dislike generalities, but mentioning the Austrian School helps place my views in some context. Note : I have argued and will continue to argue too many "sciences" should have some other label. It would be best to simply call these disciplines "studies" than sciences. Economics is one such field. I love it, but is it science? Not like physics is a science. One reason the Austrian School i...

I heard a Democratic consultant complain about Frank Luntz this morning. The problem is, Luntz and George Lakoff give the same type of advice, but to different parties: words and phrasing matter. Politicians left, right, and center learn to manipulate words. A lot of science goes into this -- it is marketing, after all. The New York Times Magazine had a lengthy article on attempts to persuade people to be more environmentally responsible. Neurologists, linguists, psychologists, and experts from a dozen other fields are trying to shape words and messages to get citizens to do the "right" things. Politics and activism require marketing. Call it rhetoric. Call it manipulation. Call it framing, nudging, or whatever else you prefer. The reality is we choose words with the intention of obtaining a desired result. For one side or the other to claim: "Our opponents use rhetoric!" is nonsense. Reading the books of Luntz and Lakoff, you realize it is all the...