I have adapted this from something I wrote earlier this week to share here.
Recently, I “tweeted” what I found to be an interesting piece on Seth Godin’s blog about the fear of giving. As libertarians, we have a reputation of acting in our own self-interests. This is a reputation very much deserved, as it aligns with our beliefs with regard to individual liberty and personal responsibility, but it also accurately portrays our political giving. As individuals we act in our own self-interest, but as a group, we fail to adequately fund groups and candidates in line with our principles. The analogy used in that piece about giving was one that showed that in an emergency situation, one rarely considers the cost of action:
‘If you are walking by a pond and you see a child drowning, do you save her? What if it means ruining a very fancy pair of Italian shoes?’ Okay, if we assume the answer is yes, then why not spend the cost of those shoes to save 20 kids who are starving to death across town or the world? There’s really no difference. Or by, extension, invest in research or development that solves a problem forever… The issues are proximity and attention.
The discussion of the GOOOH system is a great introductory glimpse at a novel approach to selecting a candidate to serve as a citizen-statesman, replacing the career politicians currently serving.