Reflections on Interest Groups
Today we are looking at Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups written in 1965. We are specifically looking at chapter 2 and chapter 3 of this book.
Chapter II- The chapter starts off by explaining the benefits of small groups vs large groups and is then backed by research. Small groups reach decisions quickly and are more decisive while large groups have a broader range of points of view and different reactions. The writer advocates for smaller groups for its superiority in getting things done compared to larger groups. The writer then highlights the issues large corporations have with many stockholders vs. corporations with very few stockholders.
The writer then makes a distinction that they believe is lacking in identifying the types of small groups privileged, intermediate, and latent. Privileged groups have to resolve the issues of the majority which will probably be resolved regardless of what action they take. Intermediate groups have to perform an action to solve the issues of the majority however those issues will most likely be resolved. Latent groups cannot act in common interest of the majority so they are free to act in the interest of the individual group. With this distinction, the writer rejects the traditional definitions and studies of small groups and believes it needs to be amended to include the motivations of the group.
The writer then explores the different reasons groups might be incentivized to act, while most believe money is the only motivation the writer rejects this idea. The economic incentive is a possibility but there are many others such as friendship, respect and other social and phycological incentives. Social incentives and pressures are motivators for groups to act which the writer believes is the reason why federal groups divide into smaller subgroups. The writer then addresses counter-arguments some may have believing social pressures do not exist and why this is simply not true.
Chapter III- The chapter starts off by explaining how unions were created and how unions have grown and developed throughout the years. The author then looks at the early years of the American labor movements and compared them to the earliest days of union organization. Unions were made ineffective by strikebreakers which legally had nothing stopping them from crossing picket lines. Union strikes often broke out in violence, normally by the employers hiring mercenary gangs to scare the union into working. The writer explores the complexity of unions and non-union workers working in tandem with the railroad industry.
The growth of the union industry led to collective bargaining which led to better working conditions, political influence, and higher wages. Employers were no longer able to dismiss unions as their power and influence grew like they could in the past. From 1897 to 1904 the size of union workers exploded from 447,000 to 2,072,000 in such a short time frame. Employment was high during this period, there was high job satisfaction, and conditions were noticeably better. One method employers retaliated to unions which were actually effective was lockouts where employers would simply not allow workers to work so they would have a drop in wages. This slightly deterred union membership but not by much leading up to World War I due to a lack of availability in jobs. As unions started to lose more members, so all of the union's efforts were focused on finding new members to bolster their numbers. The government created a "union maintenance agreement" to maintain union numbers so that the government is not affected by strikes during the war and to support industries that support the war effort.
The writer gives a couple of examples of how union membership affects the effectiveness of a unions ability to operate. One example the writer gives is the period of 1915 to 1920 where union participation and during that period the labor force was stronger and more satisfied. In order for the labor union to be effective, it is clear that the labor movements need to have high membership participation. The writer gives a couple of examples of how unions are not effective such as when union representatives use the term "right to work."
The writer also indirectly explains in the ineffectiveness of communism by stating the downfall if the government produced industry. When the government has economic control of industry there is a restriction on economic freedom and growth. The government can still provide non-collective good such as healthcare and still have a free and growing economy. The writer states it best when they say "No analysis of the limits of economic freedom or the uses of coercion by government, labor unions, or organizations of any kind can do justice to the complexity of the subject without taking account of the distinction between collective and noncollective goods."
Today we are looking at Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups written in 1965. We are specifically looking at chapter 2 and chapter 3 of this book.
Chapter II- The chapter starts off by explaining the benefits of small groups vs large groups and is then backed by research. Small groups reach decisions quickly and are more decisive while large groups have a broader range of points of view and different reactions. The writer advocates for smaller groups for its superiority in getting things done compared to larger groups. The writer then highlights the issues large corporations have with many stockholders vs. corporations with very few stockholders.
The writer then makes a distinction that they believe is lacking in identifying the types of small groups privileged, intermediate, and latent. Privileged groups have to resolve the issues of the majority which will probably be resolved regardless of what action they take. Intermediate groups have to perform an action to solve the issues of the majority however those issues will most likely be resolved. Latent groups cannot act in common interest of the majority so they are free to act in the interest of the individual group. With this distinction, the writer rejects the traditional definitions and studies of small groups and believes it needs to be amended to include the motivations of the group.
The writer then explores the different reasons groups might be incentivized to act, while most believe money is the only motivation the writer rejects this idea. The economic incentive is a possibility but there are many others such as friendship, respect and other social and phycological incentives. Social incentives and pressures are motivators for groups to act which the writer believes is the reason why federal groups divide into smaller subgroups. The writer then addresses counter-arguments some may have believing social pressures do not exist and why this is simply not true.
Chapter III- The chapter starts off by explaining how unions were created and how unions have grown and developed throughout the years. The author then looks at the early years of the American labor movements and compared them to the earliest days of union organization. Unions were made ineffective by strikebreakers which legally had nothing stopping them from crossing picket lines. Union strikes often broke out in violence, normally by the employers hiring mercenary gangs to scare the union into working. The writer explores the complexity of unions and non-union workers working in tandem with the railroad industry.
The growth of the union industry led to collective bargaining which led to better working conditions, political influence, and higher wages. Employers were no longer able to dismiss unions as their power and influence grew like they could in the past. From 1897 to 1904 the size of union workers exploded from 447,000 to 2,072,000 in such a short time frame. Employment was high during this period, there was high job satisfaction, and conditions were noticeably better. One method employers retaliated to unions which were actually effective was lockouts where employers would simply not allow workers to work so they would have a drop in wages. This slightly deterred union membership but not by much leading up to World War I due to a lack of availability in jobs. As unions started to lose more members, so all of the union's efforts were focused on finding new members to bolster their numbers. The government created a "union maintenance agreement" to maintain union numbers so that the government is not affected by strikes during the war and to support industries that support the war effort.
The writer gives a couple of examples of how union membership affects the effectiveness of a unions ability to operate. One example the writer gives is the period of 1915 to 1920 where union participation and during that period the labor force was stronger and more satisfied. In order for the labor union to be effective, it is clear that the labor movements need to have high membership participation. The writer gives a couple of examples of how unions are not effective such as when union representatives use the term "right to work."
The writer also indirectly explains in the ineffectiveness of communism by stating the downfall if the government produced industry. When the government has economic control of industry there is a restriction on economic freedom and growth. The government can still provide non-collective good such as healthcare and still have a free and growing economy. The writer states it best when they say "No analysis of the limits of economic freedom or the uses of coercion by government, labor unions, or organizations of any kind can do justice to the complexity of the subject without taking account of the distinction between collective and noncollective goods."
Comments
Post a Comment