2 ms·
Nailed it. The question is how you put the genie back in the bottle. I think this is the core insight of small-government conservatism. When big, powerful ins
by eldavido 7y ago
Nailed it.
The question is how you put the genie back in the bottle.
I think this is the core insight of small-government conservatism. When big, powerful institutions exist, they can do great things...provided they're always run by exceptional people. But when they're not, the damage they can do is incalculable.
So the question becomes, how do you create a system with the best long-run survival properties? I, I suspect much like you, would like it if there was some way we could return a bit of power back to Congress and other institutions, and away from the huge executive we have today, in 2020. It just feels like a ticking time bomb until the wrong people get the helm.
- jameslevy 7y agoA ticking time bomb until the wrong people are at the helm of the executive branch? I'm not hearing ticking so much as a loud ringing in my ears.
- pengstrom 7y agoIt sounds like a lack of insight and accountability. I don't see a large government as a problem, but unchecked power. As long as all people in power are democratically appointed, subject to transparency and with accountability, errors can be corrected.
- solveit 7y ago> democratically appointed, subject to transparency and with accountability I am no longer so sure these aren't mutually exclusive. In the end, the buck stops at the voters. Do voters in practice make decisions that make any sense at all? Were the successes of democracy really the successes of voters, or were they the successes of a technocratic gatekeeper class who very carefully controlled the flow of information to induce the voters to make the "right" decisions?