Futarchy Considered Actively Vicious

Futarchy is indeed retarded, however, the post is poorly worded. Yarvin comes across as drunk or seriously sleep deprived. Let's fix it.
This post happened because, speaking of drunk or sleep deprived, Nick Land linked to Hanania talking about it. 

 

Futarchy, in short: "If manipulating procedural outcomes wasn't a thing, then we could have procedural government." Sounds true to me!

Reality: personnel is policy. Any system can be corrupted. Inherently bad systems can even be corrupted to serve wealth creation. If you pick a corrupt ruler, they will corrupt the system.
If you make a system for picking the ruler in an attempt to replace personal judgment, then they will focus on corrupting the ruler-picking system. Same problem meritocracy has. Futa-archy is perverse. It shall now be known as chicks-with-dicks politics. 

Futa-archy isn't a law of physics, which is why there's anything to discuss. Someone must implement it. Someone corruptible, either through bribes or fraud. It will decay over time, which means someone must maintain it, which means making arbitrary changes to the system. Even if you fixed the maintenance problem, ultimately humans must submit to the system, which they won't do whenever it conflicts with their interests. That is, unless someone else (who is corruptible) enforces the system. Using, like, force and stuff.

As per Moldbug, it is impossible to replace grass monkey judgment if you intend your system to apply to grass monkeys. "The only way to have reason is to be reasonable."

Background: using force against criminals is necessary because criminals are already using force. It should be possible to convince them to stop - to corrupt them into being law-abiding - but they're genuinely that stupid. It is impossible to eliminate all crime. The world is not perfectible and it's better that way.
Bonus round: any system which legitimizes more force than this is a criminal system. They have invented a new crime and wish to commit it with impunity. Futa-archy is not only retarded and deviant, but an actively traitorous system for defectors. If the system were profitable for non-Hansons, folk would voluntarily agree to follow it. If folk would voluntarily agree to follow it, he wouldn't need anyone's permission to implement it. He could start today. He can't start today, so he needs permission, so they won't voluntarily follow it, meaning it's coercive parasite government, meaning it's deviant, meaning it's a crime.

P.S. @Mark Ledwitch: "I asked questions because I thought Richard was not telling the truth. So he blocked me. [...] Blocking is fine, but he can't get any autist truthyness creds on my watch." Nailed it. Conservatives basically accept Sophist supremacy, meaning they worship Satan and think a good society tells the right lies. See also: Plato vs. "noble" lies. It's a minor miracle whenever they say anything even provisionally true. 

P.P.S. Hanson: "The way they are disruptive is analogous to, imagine you put a very knowledgeable autist in the C suite, that is somebody in the C suite that knows a lot about the company and they go to the meetings. They just blurt out when they know things that it's relevant to the conversation but they have no political savvy. [...]
"They would be shunted aside and become an advisor to someone perhaps, trusted advisor to their side but they wouldn't be allowed to speak in the boardroom. But that's what a prediction market is. It has no idea who wants to hear what it has to say."

Basically once autists realize that cooperation, though expensive, is rational, normie society is fucked. Normies often realize this, which is why they're so vicious with open autists. Nobody goes out of their way to persecute Williams syndrome.

"The question is could we give people more direct, better incentives to actually tell the truth and figure out the truth"

Because hypocrisy, even normies frequently aren't consciously aware that they all know the truth that isn't being said, unless they're in the concrete situation right now and not thinking about truth-telling in the abstract. The "incentive" you need is desires and values. Normies simply don't value the truth, because they're too dumb too see the profit. "Discomfort now and profit later? What a bad deal. Especially when I'm going to be uncomfortable with that truth again in the future!" 

Of course you could stop pinning your ego on weird random (false) facts, but, like, who would do that? Not be narcissist to some degree? How unfashionable.