3 ms·

You’ve diagnosed the problem well, but I don’t understand how that leads to “smaller government” being a solution. In many regards are relate to civic responsib

You’ve diagnosed the problem well, but I don’t understand how that leads to “smaller government” being a solution. In many regards are relate to civic responsibility, India probably needs bigger government. They need it both to enforce the small laws (litter, traffic rules, safety regulations) as well as building the sustained infrastructure to make life more convenient (mass transit to deal with traffic, public housing so people aren’t in slums, sanitation services to clean up after everything, etc.) And then there is the need to create and maintain the public spaces to accommodate all these people, like parks and libraries.

1024core 7y ago
I think both of you are right. We need a smaller existing type of government, and we need a bigger new type of government, which is more answerable to the people. Consider, for example, the police force. They are not customer (inasmuch as you can call the voter/taxpayer a customer) oriented force; they are a subjugation force. They carry sticks around, which they wield with gay abandon. Many of the forms of power in the current system are meant to keep the people down and subservient. To continue this example: what we need are fewer state-level (where "state" is the region in question) police, and more local (city-level or district-level) police. We need more power on quality-of-life issues devolved to the local bodies, and less with the state or the feds.
- naravara 7y ago
  Local control is a double edged sword. It may make them more sensitive to local issues if they’re part of the community, but it can also lead to arbitrary enforcement or non-enforcement from one area to another or between one group or another. The smaller the political unit, the more likely it is to be dominated by a clique of people. This can lead to corruption, but even in a non-corrupt setting it can lead to racist, casteist, or other kinds of discriminatory decisions about enforcement or resource allocation.
naruvimama 7y ago
When I say small government - I only meant that the government should lower regulations and simplify laws. In the case of India, I am even in favour of the government stepping in to help fledgling industries, either because the local industry is so far behind or because foreign companies are deliberatly unwilling to be inclusive. India does not have the ability to enforce - Lacks the resources to police and the diversity prevents uniformity. Add to that draconian colonial/socialist era laws. It is hard to enforce anything if you neither have the capacity nor need. As an old civilisation India has an enormous capacity to self regulate. Compared to say the EU, India is way more diverse yet a single country and not by force. A sane change would be to have bare-bone laws and swift justice on - property, business, greater personal freedom in education. Complicated laws only favour the rich, powerful and definitely the corrupt. If the honest thrive, it would be increasingly expensive to be dishonest.

1024core 7y ago

I think both of you are right. We need a smaller existing type of government, and we need a bigger new type of government, which is more answerable to the people. Consider, for example, the police force. They are not customer (inasmuch as you can call the voter/taxpayer a customer) oriented force; they are a subjugation force. They carry sticks around, which they wield with gay abandon. Many of the forms of power in the current system are meant to keep the people down and subservient. To continue this example: what we need are fewer state-level (where "state" is the region in question) police, and more local (city-level or district-level) police. We need more power on quality-of-life issues devolved to the local bodies, and less with the state or the feds.

naravara 7y ago
Local control is a double edged sword. It may make them more sensitive to local issues if they’re part of the community, but it can also lead to arbitrary enforcement or non-enforcement from one area to another or between one group or another. The smaller the political unit, the more likely it is to be dominated by a clique of people. This can lead to corruption, but even in a non-corrupt setting it can lead to racist, casteist, or other kinds of discriminatory decisions about enforcement or resource allocation.

naruvimama 7y ago

When I say small government - I only meant that the government should lower regulations and simplify laws. In the case of India, I am even in favour of the government stepping in to help fledgling industries, either because the local industry is so far behind or because foreign companies are deliberatly unwilling to be inclusive. India does not have the ability to enforce - Lacks the resources to police and the diversity prevents uniformity. Add to that draconian colonial/socialist era laws. It is hard to enforce anything if you neither have the capacity nor need. As an old civilisation India has an enormous capacity to self regulate. Compared to say the EU, India is way more diverse yet a single country and not by force. A sane change would be to have bare-bone laws and swift justice on - property, business, greater personal freedom in education. Complicated laws only favour the rich, powerful and definitely the corrupt. If the honest thrive, it would be increasingly expensive to be dishonest.