The institutional determinants of self-governance: a comment on Edward Stringham's Private Governance

Many pages would be require to discuss Private Governance's important contributions, so I focus on a relatively minor flaw: chapter 9 on moral beliefs is inconsistent with Stringham's general treatment of private governance institutions as endogenous. Moral beliefs are essentially depicted as unchanging, but they actually are endogenous too. Individuals can pursue wealth through cooperative interaction, which requires trust, creating incentives to develop beliefs that encourage ethical and benevolent behavior. Alternatively wealth can be taken from others through force and/or guile. Beliefs to facilitate involuntary transfers also are institutionalized. For instance, in order to benefit from coercive wealth transfers "in good conscience," recipients have incentives to see their victims as enemies to justify a moral "right" to transfers. Changing moral beliefs is costly, however, so they tend to be fixed in the short term. Once it becomes apparent that existing beliefs significantly conflict with an individual's interests, she is forced to question those beliefs. The impetus for rationalizing new beliefs arises. The direction of evolution can be predicted with a rational decision-making model. To illustrate the endogeneity of moral beliefs, three institutional settings are examined: "dignity culture," "honor culture," and "victimhood culture".