1,721,577 research outputs found
La società chiusa in casa. La libertà dei moderni dopo la pandemia
No full textOgni evento è unico, ma la pandemia che ha stravolto il mondo in questi due anni non è così diversa dalle epidemie che l’hanno preceduta. A essere diverse sono le società umane: mai così progredite. La paura sembra però aver annichilito la nostra razionalità. Davanti al virus ci siamo comportati come i nostri
antenati, che non avevano a disposizione le conoscenze scientifiche e la tecnologia del terzo millennio. Abbiamo sostenuto decisioni disastrose, quali le chiusure scolastiche, e ci siamo affidati a riti apotropaici di massa, come la prima vaccinazione in tv. Perché è potuto succedere? È forse l’ennesima conseguenza del tentativo di rimuovere l’incertezza facendo ricorso a spiegazioni semplici e finalistiche? Andando controcorrente, a partire dalla teoria dell’evoluzione e dalla difesa dei valori liberali, gli autori si interrogano sulla centralità nella nostra storia del rapporto fra comunità umane e micro-parassiti. Per avere società aperte, è stato necessario che i rapporti sociali non fossero messi in crisi dalla paura del contagio: progresso scientifico, avanzamenti della medicina e idee liberali sono andati di pari passo. Almeno fino a oggi. Ponendoci di fronte alle domande fondamentali sul mondo che intendiamo costruire, Corbellini e Mingardi provano a salvare quanto è rimasto della responsabilità individuale in un clima di ubriacatura per un ritorno a un’idea antica o collettivista di libertà: quella in vigore ai tempi in cui le società non sapevano e non potevano nulla contro epidemie e pandemie. E davano la caccia ai capri espiatori
Healthcare and the slippery slope of state growth: lessons from the past
No full textAll over Europe, the provision of healthcare services is widely considered a primary duty of the government. Universal access to medical care can be considered a basic ingredient of the so-called “European social model.” But if universal access to medical care is seldom questioned, European governments—faced with expanding costs caused by an increasing demand driven by an aging population and technology-driven improvements—are contemplating the possibility of “rationing”1 treatments, or the possibility of allowing a greater role for private suppliers. If a “multi-tier” healthcare system has long been anathema to the European leadership, guaranteeing a uniform access to state-of-the-art care seems to be well beyond the means of states suffering from persisting debt crisis. Was the failure of state-controlled “adequate” healthcare totally unpredictable? Far-sighted criticisms had been offered by two eminent thinkers in the classical liberal tradition, Herbert Spencer (1820–1903) and Friedrich A. von Hayek (1899–1992). Neither author is usually recognized as a forerunner of contemporary critics of the welfare state, and both investigated the issue of the state financing and providing health services well before (Spencer) or right after (Hayek) the establishment of national health services. With the benefit of hindsight, reading Spencer and Hayek helps us to understand how the crisis of state-supplied healthcare is not rooted in the mere progress of clinical technology, but is rather the logical consequence of the theoretical basis of the model itself. Whereas modern theorists of the welfare state tend to offer theories that are impervious to a critical appraisal of their unintended consequences—insofar as they are framed in a language of “rights”—both Hayek and Spencer understood that human systems are complex, and that unwanted effects of public policy should be taken into account. Although Spencer emphasized the moral hazards accruing from the paternalism involved in governmental provision of health services, Hayek explained how modern healthcare systems differ from real, private insurance designed to offer proper coverage against risks. These authors appreciated that the politicization of healthcare was bound to result in both standardization of care and disregard for the responsibility that comes with personal freedom. These two “diagnoses before the illness” can help us in defining the challenges and the potential solutions that healthcare systems face today. Understanding the fatal conceits inherent in the very architecture of national health services can be the first step toward healing our healthcare systems
Herbert Spencer
No full textThis volume makes a compelling case for the continued relevance and significance of Herbert Spencer (1820-1904), one of the foremost intellectuals of the Victorian era whose work now tends to be regarded as being of purely historical interest.
One of the originators of the evolutionary classical liberal or libertarian approach exemplified later by F. A. Hayek, Spencer engaged with such issues as the relationship between the individual and the state; the nature of majoritarian democracy; the legitimacy of private property; the consequences of the transition from relatively simple, feudal communities to complex, industrial societies; and the causes of war and the prospects of international peace. For him the future was individualist. However, as the scope of state action expanded and classical liberal ideas became increasingly marginalised during the course of his life, Spencer grew ever more pessimistic about the future prospects for liberty
Herbert Spencer on Corporate Governance
No full textHerbert Spencer (1820–1903) wrote on the emergence of railroad
corporations and corporate governance matters. Since Spencer is typically considered
a staunch libertarian, the fact that he expressed some criticisms over the
emergent corporate capitalism might surprise many. But what Spencer did was
mainly identifying the so-called “agency problem,” which he considered very
much worth addressing, especially in a market economy. Writing on the “railway
mania,” Spencer was appalled by fraudulent schemes. But he did not
consider them an inevitable feature of the capitalist economy. He focused on
the institutional dimension of conflict of interests within the then-emerging
corporation, and suggested to uphold freedom of contract in its strictest meaning,
as to offset those. Spencer’s theory may be seen as a pure freedom of
contract answer to agency problems, that stands in striking contrast with
theories – such as Adolf Berle and Gardiner Means’s – that stresses the need
for a technocratic solution, to make corporate capitalism viable in society
La ingeniería Web como marco de trabajo
No full textFil: Mingardi, Raúl. Universidad Católica de Santa Fe. Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; Argentina
- …
