Chris Coyne — 2023 Markets and Society Conference Keynote
TL;DR
Economist Chris Coyne contrasts state-imposed 'Pax Imperii' with emergent 'Pax Hominum,' arguing that top-down peacemaking relies on four flawed assumptions about elite capabilities while generating illiberal violence abroad and eroding domestic liberty through expanded state power.
⚖️ Two Models of Peace 3 insights
Pax Imperii: The State-Centric View
This dominant perspective treats peace as a government-provided public good requiring vertical, coercive power (Leviathan) to impose order, exemplified by historical hegemonies like Pax Romana and Pax Americana.
Pax Hominum: The Emergent Alternative
Bottom-up peace arises from horizontal, voluntary cooperation among ordinary people exercising diverse, context-specific skills within heterogeneous cultures rather than through centralized design.
Mainline Political Economy Framework
Drawing on Boettke, Haeffele, and Storr, this tradition emphasizes that social cooperation is possible without central direction despite human cognitive limits, highlighting spontaneous order over expert control.
🎯 Four Fallacies of Top-Down Peacemaking 4 insights
The Design Delusion
Proponents assume a 'peacemaking power elite' can deliberately engineer complex peace institutions, ignoring Hayekian insights and James Scott's critique in 'Seeing Like a State' that order emerges from human action but not human design.
The Knowledge Problem
Elites lack access to tacit, context-specific local knowledge necessary for functional institutions, causing imposed systems to fail against the friction of 'institutional stickiness' with underlying cultural practices.
Incentive Misalignment
Public choice theory reveals that democratic frictions and bureaucratic pathologies lead elites to pursue narrow opportunism rather than the public interest, particularly when intervening in foreign polities where accountability is absent.
The Imperial Myth
The assumption that imperialism promotes liberal values contradicts Caroline Elkins' documentation in 'Legacy of Violence' that violence was endemic to the British Empire, serving as both means and end of colonial rule.
⚠️ The Illiberal Consequences 3 insights
Crypto-Imperialism Crowds Out Self-Governance
Interventions marketed as fostering freedom often impose arrangements that prevent the development of genuine liberal skills, creating what Vincent Ostrom calls 'crypto imperialism' or 'jack boot peace' through militarized authoritarianism.
Domestic Liberty Erosion
Preparing for global interventions requires expansive discretionary state power that destroys constitutional constraints and informal norms, permanently expanding government scale and scope while reducing freedoms at home (Higgs, Hall).
Violence as Means and End
Rather than exporting liberty, top-down peacemaking generates violence and dependency that undermine liberal values abroad while corrupting institutional integrity within the intervening nation.
Bottom Line
Genuine liberal peace requires abandoning imperial interventions in favor of bottom-up processes that respect local knowledge, emergent voluntary cooperation, and the severe limits of centralized social engineering.
More from Conversations with Tyler (Tyler Cowen)
View all
David Schmidtz — 2024 Markets and Society Conference Keynote
David Schmidtz argues that rational self-governance—whether individual, corporate, or academic—requires artificially imposed constraints and mission-driven frameworks to make decision-making manageable, while criticizing universities for prioritizing student comfort over intellectual growth and risk-taking.
Ornit Shani and Rohit De on Assembling India's Constitution
Shani and De argue that India's Constitution was not an elite gift or pedagogical project imposed from above, but actively assembled through mass public participation across the subcontinent, with ordinary citizens claiming constitutional agency long before the text was finalized.
Maria Pia Paganelli on 250 Years of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations
On the 250th anniversary of *The Wealth of Nations*, economist Maria Pia Paganelli reframes Adam Smith not as a simplistic apostle of self-interest, but as a sophisticated critic of institutional power who exposed how special interests capture the state to benefit at society's expense, while emphasizing that understanding wealth creation is literally a matter of life and death for the most vulnerable.
Reconsidering FDR With David Beito
Historian David Beito challenges FDR's ranking as one of America's greatest presidents, arguing that prolonged economic depression, anti-Semitic refugee policies, and pioneering mass surveillance programs reveal a record of civil liberties abuses that wartime leadership has obscured.