Another interesting thing about Smil is that he has principles. In particular, you can tell he that he values intellectual honesty far more than he values fame or material wealth.
. . .the danger of getting paid for your ideas: It’s easy to sell out or self-censor because you’re afraid of (a) financial or (b) status pushback.
The essay covers several interesting issues. I think that every public intellectual has to have second thoughts about writing things that challenge the views of his or her audience. But it is important to be willing to do that. I think that this is one of Tyler Cowen’s strengths.
I find uncomfortable ideas just disappear.
For example, while many recognize the costs of property zoning (perhaps the largest structural impediment in the US today), the topic just disappears in “libertarian” or “free market” blogs, under a tsunami of free trade and minimum wage posts. If you don’t believe me, just Google.
And as for the routine criminalization of push-cart vending, it is not even ignored, as it is not even a topic.
The VA runs a communist healthcare system for former federal employees. But the topic is Obamacare.
I have seen “libertarian” blogs piously pettifogging about the evils of rent control—-while mute on property zoning!
I have yet to see even one prominent free-market blogger make a casus belli out of property zoning.
Let’s hope Tyler Cowen picks up the torch. He writes a great blog.
Arnold, you do seem willing to be ” writing things that challenge the views of his or her audience. “, at least a bit — tho your purpose seems to be to find and tell the truth, as you see it.
I no longer see many examples of Tyler doing so in the last year, altho he is still very very interesting and wide ranging. Some examples, or at least one recent, would be good.
In general, I think good criticism or praise requires at least one example. Those who criticize Trump, and his tweets for instance, like I used to do, should be asked for an example. Now that I’m reading him, I find most of his tweets PR pablum, plus repetitive (tho still true) complaints about Fake News, and an occasional insult or less-than-presidential comment.
“It’s easy to sell out or self-censor because you’re afraid of (a) financial or (b) status pushback.” — I think the lack of audience on Medium for your notes shows two things: 1) the audience there is not interested in the truth as you see it — because they are looking more for confirmation bias; and 2) if you stay there looking for click-status, you’ll either start to self-censor/sell out, or continue to be frustrated.
I suggest you try to join the Heterdox Academy of Haidt, and/or the Intel Dark Web folk. I also suggest you try to improve your on-camera videos, perhaps like Scott Adams and even the blogging heads folk.
Fear of financial loss (as a pro-life Rep), along with being boring / not read much, has reduced my own motivation for blogging. As I’m moving towards retirement, I’ll start doing it more again, maybe.
I found Tyler to be a strange example, as I consider him to be one of the most politically correct writers.
His true thoughts might be carefully inserted into his posts, but they tend to be restrained or concealed behind humor.
Cowen, our favorite contrarian and a man of vast erudition, is playing the long game in the opinion business. He does not tread unto topics that might return to bite. He also enjoys his coyness.
True. Take todays Lyme Disease book post. What is he saying? I think I know but who am I? Just some neoliberal corporatist shill (or a genuine communist depending on the day.) Part of his audience or not? Probably not.
Good essay. I was not familiar with Smil.
Who is the audience? I am sometimes confused. Is Tyler’s audience represented by his commenters? I wonder. Because he certainly challenges his commenters, many of whom are a combination of trolls and team red partisans. So there must be a different audience. Who are they? Maybe his twitter audience. I don’t do twitter.