Comments on: Cato Unbound Debate: Lessig’s Code at Ten (Part 4: Lessig’s response)

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Thu, 14 May 2009 17:19:17 +0000

“For Copernicus, there is only one fool-proof explanation for the movement of the planets and stars: You put the earth in orbit around the sun.”

By: Cato Unbound » Blog Archive » Our Conflict of Cyber-Visions

Cato Unbound » Blog Archive » Our Conflict of Cyber-Visions — Thu, 14 May 2009 14:22:50 +0000

[...] stands above it all and that it is only I who brings cursed ideology to the table. But as Cato’s Jim Harper rightly noted in response to Lessig’s assertion that he is a “non-ideologue”: It is impossible to discuss public [...]

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Thu, 14 May 2009 13:19:17 +0000

“For Copernicus, there is only one fool-proof explanation for the movement of the planets and stars: You put the earth in orbit around the sun.”

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Thu, 14 May 2009 12:19:17 +0000

“For Copernicus, there is only one fool-proof explanation for the movement of the planets and stars: You put the earth in orbit around the sun.”

By: Seth Finkelstein

Seth Finkelstein — Wed, 13 May 2009 00:17:42 +0000

Yes, Lessig was calling himself a non-ideologue, in the sense that this sums up the opposite:

"For the libertarian, there is only one fool-proof solution to the problem of government corruption: You shrink the Leviathan. "

He wasn't using ideology in the manner of system of thinking generally. Rather, I believe he meant that if you're the intellectual equivalent of a cuckoo-clock, that's a pretty trivial way of thinking.

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Tue, 12 May 2009 20:24:24 +0000

I thought your essay was excellent, Adam.

I was most interested in one line in Lessig's piece, though. He said: "I do stand with the core argument of Code, as any non-ideologue should . . . ."

Is Lessig calling himself a non-ideologue?!

It is impossible to discuss public policy without using ideology. When I hear someone self-identify as non-ideological, I take that as a confession that they are unaware of the role that ideology plays in their thinking. If Lessig fancies himself a neutral analyst - dismissing "ideologues" as such, that's pretty fanciful indeed.

By: rolex replica

rolex replica — Tue, 12 May 2009 14:27:13 +0000

That public threats to liberty can be complemented by private threats to liberty. And that the libertarian must be focused on both. [...]

By: Seth Finkelstein

Seth Finkelstein — Tue, 12 May 2009 06:11:24 +0000

Adam, a serious meta-question – what did you expect? Am I misreading your trash-talk, or are you honestly disgruntled with your role as “Professional Opponent”? i.e.

Tomato Can : A journeyman fighter, or “professional opponent,” who is not good enough to be a champion but provides a good fighter with a good practice session without any real danger to himself. Also called a “ham-and-egger” (for the diner food once consumed on the road by these men), or “palooka.”