Paul Dragos Aligica

This Element brings together the problems of economic calculation, institutional diversity, and institutional feasibility, arguing that these themes are deeply interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Building on recent developments in institutional theory, political economy, social philosophy, and logical analysis, the Element revisits the classic debates surrounding alternative economic and governance systems. The discussion is organized around three core elements: (1) an overview of recent developments in institutional theory and social philosophy, that driven by technological advances have revitalized debates on alternative economic and governance systems; (2) a reexamination of the economic calculation debate, tracing its evolution from Austrian economics to a broader theoretical synthesis incorporating institutional political economy and conflict theory; and (3) a discussion of the formal, logical, and philosophical foundations for thinking about feasibility and realizability, offering analytical tools for evaluating the plausibility of institutional alternatives within specific historical and social contexts.

This Element brings together the problems of economic calculation, institutional diversity, and institutional feasibility, arguing that these themes are deeply interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Building on recent developments in institutional theory, political economy, social philosophy, and logical analysis, the Element revisits the classic debates surrounding alternative economic and governance systems. The discussion is organized around three core elements: (1) an overview of recent developments in institutional theory and social philosophy, that driven by technological advances have revitalized debates on alternative economic and governance systems; (2) a reexamination of the economic calculation debate, tracing its evolution from Austrian economics to a broader theoretical synthesis incorporating institutional political economy and conflict theory; and (3) a discussion of the formal, logical, and philosophical foundations for thinking about feasibility and realizability, offering analytical tools for evaluating the plausibility of institutional alternatives within specific historical and social contexts.

How do we conceptualize and theorize about the social organization of ideology? How should we think methodically—in theoretically and empirically informed ways—about the institutionalization of indoctrination and propaganda? How should we approach the study of the social and political instrumentation of ideology in regimes that assume that historical missions of messianic social change are the stringent organizing and legitimization principles of their very existence? This book is an attempt to answer these questions. On the one hand, this book explores key elements of conceptualization and theoretical framing of the phenomena associated with the institutionalization of indoctrination. New potential venues of theoretical elaboration are identified, and in several cases, these venues are tentatively engaged. On the other hand, this book balances the exploratory theoretical approach with an exploratory historical investigation. Concentrating on the case study of Communist Romania, this book charts various facets of the institutionalization of the “political-ideological commissars” in the education system, while tracking their evolution. The two dimensions of the book offer, in conjunction, a contribution to our understanding of the institutional arrangements of indoctrination and their associated social monitoring and control practices, as well as to our awareness regarding their avatars, as manifested in recent history.

How do we conceptualize and theorize about the social organization of ideology? How should we think methodically—in theoretically and empirically informed ways—about the institutionalization of indoctrination and propaganda? How should we approach the study of the social and political instrumentation of ideology in regimes that assume that historical missions of messianic social change are the stringent organizing and legitimization principles of their very existence? This book is an attempt to answer these questions. On the one hand, this book explores key elements of conceptualization and theoretical framing of the phenomena associated with the institutionalization of indoctrination. New potential venues of theoretical elaboration are identified, and in several cases, these venues are tentatively engaged. On the other hand, this book balances the exploratory theoretical approach with an exploratory historical investigation. Concentrating on the case study of Communist Romania, this book charts various facets of the institutionalization of the “political-ideological commissars” in the education system, while tracking their evolution. The two dimensions of the book offer, in conjunction, a contribution to our understanding of the institutional arrangements of indoctrination and their associated social monitoring and control practices, as well as to our awareness regarding their avatars, as manifested in recent history.

Classical liberalism entails not only a theory about the scope of government and its relationship with the market but also a distinct view about how government should operate within its proper domain of public choices in non-market settings. Building on the political economy principles underpinning the works of diverse authors such as Friedrich Hayek, James Buchanan and Vincent and Elinor Ostrom, this book challenges the technocratic-epistocratic perspective in which social goals are defined by an aggregated social function and experts simply provide the means to attain them. The authors argue that individualism, freedom of choice, and freedom of association have deep implications on how we design, manage and assess our public governance arrangements. The book examines the knowledge and incentive problems associated with bureaucratic public administration while contrasting it with democratic governance. Aligica, Boettke, and Tarko argue that the focus should be on the diversity of opinions in any society regarding "what should be done" and on the design of democratic and polycentric institutions capable of limiting social conflicts and satisfying the preferences of as many people as possible. They thus fill a large gap in the literature, the public discourse, and the ways decision makers understand the nature and administration of the public sector.

In this book Paul Dragos Aligica revisits the theory of political self-governance in the context of recent developments in behavioral economics and political philosophy that have challenged the foundations of this theory. Building on the work of the 'Bloomington School' created by Nobel Laureate Elinor Ostrom and Public Choice political economy co-founder Vincent Ostrom, Aligica presents a fresh conceptualization of the key processes at the core of democratic-liberal governance systems involving civic competence and public entrepreneurship. The result is not only a re-assessment and re-articulation of the theories constructed by the Bloomington School of Public Choice, but also a new approach to several cutting-edge discussions relevant to governance studies and applied institutional theory, such as the debates generated by the recent waves of populism, paternalism and authoritarianism.

In this book Paul Dragos Aligica revisits the theory of political self-governance in the context of recent developments in behavioral economics and political philosophy that have challenged the foundations of this theory. Building on the work of the 'Bloomington School' created by Nobel Laureate Elinor Ostrom and Public Choice political economy co-founder Vincent Ostrom, Aligica presents a fresh conceptualization of the key processes at the core of democratic-liberal governance systems involving civic competence and public entrepreneurship. The result is not only a re-assessment and re-articulation of the theories constructed by the Bloomington School of Public Choice, but also a new approach to several cutting-edge discussions relevant to governance studies and applied institutional theory, such as the debates generated by the recent waves of populism, paternalism and authoritarianism.

Elinor Ostrom, co-recipient of the 2009 Nobel Prize in economics, argues that in studying social order, we should not be limited to only the conceptions of order derived from the work of Adam Smith and Thomas Hobbes. To be precise, we should not limit ourselves to theoretical frameworks of The State and to theoretical frameworks of The Market. We need approaches that match the extensive variety of institutional arrangements existent in the world. In this book, Paul Dragos Aligica discusses some of the most challenging ideas emerging out of the research program on institutional diversity associated with Ostrom and her associates, while outlining a set of new research directions and an original interpretation of the significance and future of this program.

Very few studies have ventured to explore the shift in economic ideas that were such a critical factor in shaping and understanding the East European transition process. Paul Dragos Aligica and Anthony J. Evans have seized upon the potential that this crucial case has to illuminate the larger phenomenon of diffusion and adoption of economic ideas. Two different but related research agendas are developed: the study of the spread of 'neoliberalism' as seen from the perspective of Eastern European post-communist evolutions and the study of Eastern European transition as seen from an ideas-centered perspective. Combining a distinctive synthesis of the existing data about the spread of neoliberal economic ideas in Central and Eastern Europe with an analysis of the processes at work, the authors challenge a series of misunderstandings and myths about the spread of neoliberal economic ideas. The disputed topics include: the myth of an Eastern European rush to embrace the theories and ideas that may be considered the mark of 'market fundamentalism'; the notion that a harsh 'neoliberal dogmatism' was somehow imposed on the region from outside; the idea that the standardization and regimentation of economic thinking was a result of the spread of the Western way of doing economics; and the belief that the Eastern Europeans passively embraced this uniformity and standardization due to pressure from the Westerners. This unusual synthesis will appeal to scholars in economics, political science, communist/post-communist studies and new institutionalism, as well as policymakers.

This book focuses on the alternative paradigm, the pro-growth intellectual tradition that rejected the prophecies of doom and called for realism and pragmatism in dealing with the challenge of the future. Paul Dragos Aligica reconstructs and describes the basic elements of this tradition that emerged in the seventies as a response to the Club of Rome and the "limits to growth" movement. He outlines a comprehensive perspective on its methodological and conceptual foundations. Aligica uses the work of the two major founders of this alternative approach: Herman Kahn and Julian Simon. Herman Kahn was the first scholar and public intellectual to engage and refute the "doomsday" theses advanced by the Club of Rome and its followers. In his spirited and optimistic arguments he made a strong case for the feasibility, desirability and morality of global economic growth arguing that even given all the likely human, environmental, and material costs and risks, "the case is close to if not fully overwhelming." Julian Simon elaborated the "anti-doomsayers" lines opened by Kahn, further developing the emerging paradigm. He articulated new and precise arguments on issues such as population growth, natural resources scarcity and technological change, and reinforced Kahn's thesis that continued world economic development is a moral imperative as well as a practical desideratum. Together, Kahn and Simon managed to build the foundations on which rest the current counter-reaction to the "limits to growth" rhetoric and its initiatives. Both were not only public figures of great accomplishments and influence but also remarkable thinkers and personalities.