  Anthony de Jasay uses the evocative metaphor of Ulysses bound
to the mast, restrained by knots beyond his reach, and secured
by his admonition to the crew to ignore his pleading. That’s the
paradox of Ulysses’ command: “You must obey the following order:
Disobey me when I order you to release me.” I found it strange,
however, when de Jasay complains that “little or no awareness is
shown of the ‘incentive-incompatibility’ of limits that would
exert real rather than illusory restraint.” Really? I would have
said that consideration is at the very heart of modern public
choice theory.  The example of Ulysses/Odysseus is important,
because it demonstrates just how complex the problem of
commitment can be. Suppose the foremost rule of behavior is
this: Obey the ruler. Suppose further that the ruler has no
other constraints on his behavior. Would a self-interested ruler
accept this situation? He would not, if he could help it. A
self-interested ruler wants, in fact needs, the power to impose
limits.  The first thi