J1 - First Considerations

I currently have a number of ideas for what I’d like to do my project on:

My first idea was to circle back to and complete a paper that I had considered using as my Senior Thesis in college. The working title was “Familial Socialism: The Economics of Sibling Rivalry,” and it’s purpose was essentially to explore the implications of the fact that clearly-defined property rights are lacking inside family units. If the institution of private property was developed by society as a solution to interpersonal conflicts over scarce resources, and if the family unit is a relatively property-less entity, then it stands to reason that conflicts within families, especially, but not exclusively, between siblings, is due to a lack of property rights that could resolve these conflicts. However, this paper would be highly deductive, and would not be the type of sustained research project that this program contemplates.

My second idea was to explore the debate over intellectual property that rages throughout the libertarian intellectual community. This is an issue that’s largely ignored by everyone else, but the libertarians who argue both sides of this issue are, as always, quite passionate. Those who believe that there should not be intellectual property rights point to the fact that ideas are not scarce; when I give you information, I do not lose that information. Those who believe that there should be intellectual property rights argue that scarcity isn’t necessarily the determining factor; intellectual property is undeniably valuable, and people are willing to pay to obtain it. And then, of course, there’s all the standard arguments about encouraging innovation by rewarding inventors. 

My third idea, which just occurred to me, is to offer a defense of the Confederacy that might slow down the destruction of civil war monuments in the South. Contrary to what children learn in school, the War Between the States was not fought over slavery, the Southern armies were not entirely composed of racists, and the North was not inherently the “good” side of the war. The reason we had a war in the 1860s was because Lincoln sent armies into the southern states to collect his taxes and kill everyone who refused to pay. And the men of the South, like any other Americans, chose to fight rather than die. When you view the Confederate soldiers as they truly were, men fighting to defend their homes, it becomes much harder to justify tearing down monuments honoring their sacrifice. However, I don’t know how much I can offer that would truly be original, and I think that this sort of fight lends itself more to popular articles aimed at specific attempts at desecration than scholarly articles fueled by heavy research.

My last idea was to explore the idea of Market Environmentalism. Capitalists and libertarians (and lay-conservatives) often say that the fight against global warming is best left to the private sector. And I have to agree with them; if the world is gonna change radically, I’d trust a capitalist to see me through the change way more than I’d trust a government bureaucrat. Similarly, most economists would advise that the most effective solution for saving endangered species, conserving scarce resources, and reducing pollution is through the free market. Again, I’d agree. However, I think that this line of argument admits too much. The libertarians and economists who argue that the best way to save the environment is through the free market are also, implicitly, admitting that the environment should be saved, preserved, or even be returned to a past state. I think that we should be arguing instead that the best way to improve our environment, the only way to change it for the better, is through the free market. So I’d be interested in doing a project on how the market can change our environment, rather than contribute to the literature on how the market can save our environment.

Whatever idea I pick (which I’ll have to do soon), I know that my end product is going to focus on education, rather than reform. I guess that the most obvious path to propagating and instituting my ideas is to appeal to a government body, but the imposition of my ideas through government force would be antithetical to the core of the philosophy that I’m advocating for. Besides, nothing good comes out of government anyway. If I want change, I have to start by changing minds. 

What is the best way for me to change these minds? Well, I’m not a very good artist right now, and, although I do want to become a better musician this summer, I don’t know if I’ll have enough time to hone my piano skills to give a good presentation for my project. I am pretty good at public speaking, but I’d need to attract some listeners before that could become a real option. My real gift is, and always has been, writing. However, I don’t want to do something boring like a paper, so I’m not sure how I’ll employ my writing skills to create a final product.

While I’m here, I think I should take a moment to realistically evaluate my ability to work on this project this summer. I will be working two jobs during this time; interning at the SUNY Research Foundation during the day and auditing freight at night. This means that I will have very little time during the week to do research or write. Additionally, I’m training for a marathon and a bike-ride across the state. This training might allow me some time to think, but it will also further subtract from the time I have to create something concrete. So, while I think that I’ll definitely have time to do a whole project, I harbor no delusion that it will be as impressive as the projects of the students who will have a whole year to work on them.