Every now and then I go back to the ideas developed by Mesquita and his colleagues about the Selectorate Theory. They entered public discourse via CGP Grey’s videos, and a book called The Dictator’s Handbook.
The wikipedia article I linked to above, gives a pretty good overview. I see it as a work in the line of Machiavelli, or Gramsci: a theory of how power operates. There are some very good common-sense arguments there for example for expanding democratic participation (“the size of the selectorate”) as much as possible in as many spheres as possible, because small selectorates simply mean less public goods. At its limit, it leads quite naturally to egalitarianism in politics, the economy, etc.
I’m not saying it is perfect as a universal theory of everything, of course. It’s an abstraction, but it seems a very useful one. I think that it’s a very useful tool that seems to be completely ignored in left/socialist circles.
I think that it’s a very useful tool that seems to be completely ignored in left/socialist circles.
it’s probably ignored because there are many other theorists with more nuanced analyses of power: Marx, Gramsci, Marcuse, Foucault…
The Dictator’s Handbook doesn’t offer much in that regard. it assumes homo economicus and bases conclusions on flawed studies. selectorate theory has thus far failed as a tool for analysing — or making predictions about — states in the periphery.
it’s probably ignored because there are many other theorists with more nuanced analyses of power: Marx, Gramsci, Marcuse, Foucault…
What I find interesting in Selectorate Theory is that it links power and economics in a quantifiable way. Coming from STEM, I understand it, in ways that frankly I don’t when it comes to “continental” theorists, who make much less sense to me. But I’m not well read, so maybe I just don’t understand shit.
The Dictator’s Handbook doesn’t offer much in that regard. it assumes homo economicus and bases conclusions on flawed studies. selectorate theory has thus far failed as a tool for analysing — or making predictions about — states in the periphery.
Can you please explain what you are basing this critique on?
Can you please explain what you are basing this critique on?
reviews i’ve read, and my own bygone notes and experience with The Dictator’s Handbook and The Logic of Political Survival. my critique is leveraged at both of them, because my memories of them are intertwined, and the former is based heavily on the latter.
The Logic of Political Survival is based in game theory (rational choice model), which falls apart when you consider that people don’t/can’t always process all information and don’t/can’t always minmax their choices. the supporting data for selectorate theory is biased; correcting for this bias heavily diminishes the findings.
on the theory’s usefulness as a tool for analysis: Gallagher and Hanson wrote two papers ([1],[2]) about it. tl;dr: it’s not a great predictor; it doesn’t explain illiberal systems or peripheral politics; and it doesn’t account for plurality.
What I find interesting in Selectorate Theory is that it links power and economics in a quantifiable way.
i can appreciate that; i also have a STEM background. if you’re modelling a core liberal democracy, i think it does well enough. however, i think it’s oversimplified, which is a common problem i find with quantified theories of social phenomena. it also probably falls apart if you want to predict the effects of a system reform/upheaval, or beyond.
that’s why i refer to the philosophers and social scientists. their theories aren’t calculus, but they provide the framework for understanding the origins and also what rough shape the outcome can take, without being too prescriptive.
Lovely answer and great pointers, thank you very much!
Ghislain Maxwell’s father Robert Maxwell, was a spy for mossad, several agency heads attended his funeral. The leader of Israel gave the Eulogy (information available via his Wikipedia page).
Peter Thiel took over for Jeffery Epstein at Mossad’s R&D company Carbyne after Jeffery died in prison (Epstein was a co-owner, now Thiel has taken that position). This information is not on Wikipedia.
Peter Thiel funded the entirety of JD Vances political career… A career which is only two years old (he first ran for senator in 2022). Vance worked for Thiel before that, and Thiel was even the one who offered him up to Trump as a VP candidate.Thiel also gave Trump access to his analytics, which he is known for.
Peter Thiel developed demographic targeting systems for the FBI and CIA. He pioneered and refined similar systems during his company Palantir’s involvement with the Cambridge Analytica scandal (experimenting with the emotions of Facebook users), which essentially started what we now just call “The Algorithm”.
I bring all this to your attention because it does sound like the stuff of conspiracy theories, but these are just some of Trump’s “keys to power” (I find it funny I linked you the same “Rules for Rulers” video you were already posting about here four days earlier).
It’s common for us to dismiss such things because they’re not discussed by The Culture Industry (which I mention as you also seem to know of The Frankfurt School and Gramsci, and The Culture Industry is a Frankfurt School idea).
So these things are all related (geopolitics, resource wars, cultural controls, forms of false consciousness, the ruling classes and thier personal relationships to power), even though to say it all in a row like this, or to point out the specifics of how these things play out in the world can make one sound like a kook.
Anyways, just thought I’d spout some more facts that sound like conspiracy theories, but they’re true and verifiable, and fit within the theories you’re posting about, so thought I’d say more.
Bye!
