The palpable adds up to the data driven... Well, yes, but the data driven also averages out the palpable - and it's the losers of the palpable that are asserting the Polanyian rights that you emphasize so much elsewhere.
I thought that the Payne article was silly, but he has a point. Politically, there is nothing second-order about the distribution of GDP. People respond doubly to a perceived maldistribution--they are angry about being deprived, and angrier at those who gain at their expense. Their response could be welfarist, socialist, or fascist. But respond they do, and pretty strongly.
The palpable adds up to the data driven... Well, yes, but the data driven also averages out the palpable - and it's the losers of the palpable that are asserting the Polanyian rights that you emphasize so much elsewhere.
I thought that the Payne article was silly, but he has a point. Politically, there is nothing second-order about the distribution of GDP. People respond doubly to a perceived maldistribution--they are angry about being deprived, and angrier at those who gain at their expense. Their response could be welfarist, socialist, or fascist. But respond they do, and pretty strongly.