3 ms·
A small and limited government is a weak government. A weak government is susceptible to corruption. To avoid corruption you need the state and the collection
by audunw 9y ago
A small and limited government is a weak government. A weak government is susceptible to corruption.
To avoid corruption you need the state and the collection of the most powerful corporate/private actors be of similar size, and they must be as isolated and independent as possible. This way you get a balance of power, rather than one corrupting the other.
The problem in the US is the isolation/independence part. Money in politics and revolving doors has corrupted the balance.
“Limited government” is an idea sold by people who want government to be weaker so it’s more easily corrupted.
What we should strive for is the middle way. Just the right amount of government.
- icebraining 9y ago> A small and limited government is a weak government. A weak government is susceptible to corruption. Why? Also, is that borne by history? Was the US federal government more corrupt when it was more limited?
- gwright 9y ago> A small and limited government is a weak government. A weak government is susceptible to corruption. Your assertion isn't self evident. A government could have great power within its defined scope of power and little power outside that scope. There is also a reasonable argument that as the scope and strength of government power increases so does the desire to corrupt and control that power. Which is more dangerous a corrupt but weak and limited government or a corrupt strong and expansive government?
- DSingularity 9y agoThe integrity of a weak government is uninteresting. Let them be corrupt, what will they do? Reprimand you? If the government has power. If is an authority in the eyes of the people. In those cases we should care about the integrity of the government.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]