3 ms·

This is what I've found incredibly healthy and liberating about less developed countries. Nobody believes politicians or assumes that government has their best

This is what I've found incredibly healthy and liberating about less developed countries. Nobody believes politicians or assumes that government has their best interests in mind. That level of trust appears as a toxic mythology from my perspective. Instead they look for their own solutions.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
So your assessment of the benefits of several hundred years of continuous political culture, along with a semi-continuous chain of protest movements, in "developed" countries is ... "meh" ?? Cynicism at this level does nothing but ensure that your worst take on government is what we actually get.
- mikem170 6y ago
  I thought that the parent made an interesting observation. It's not cynicism, it a simple fact, backed up by history, of what happens when nobody trusts their government, when a the government of a people deviate too much from the interests of those people and making their lives more difficult instead of less, when all of that goes too far. This can lead to reform. It can also lead to instability. It doesn't matter whether a country is "developed" or not. Developed countries can still have corrupt governments that are not responsive to their people, civil wars, etc. It can happen quick, or take a long time. The stakes are high. Can enough of us agree on how to fix our problems? I don't know. I think that removing corporate and union money from politics would be a good first step, which is what most other countries already have done. Beyond that I wonder if we've grown our federal government too far past it's design specifications, expecting whoever is president this year to fix all our problems, leaving the other 49% of people very upset.
- aww_dang 6y ago
  Perhaps it would help if I elaborated. I feel that you're filling in the blanks with some of your own projections. The locals here openly accept money for voting. Politicians and bureaucrats are widely regarded as liars and cheats. The government's authority is checked by continuous protests. Government officials don't want to rock the boat or create further instability. Similarly, the people have very little interest in politics. There's not constant bickering or hyperbolic demonization. Political fights don't permeate every sphere of life. Everyone mostly stays in their own lane. Yes, corruption is a problem here. Corruption is also a problem in the US. However the barrier to entry is higher. K street lobbyists don't come cheaply. Yes, the government is ineffective. The question is, do the people want it to be effective? Even the private sphere is similarly ineffective. That's just a cultural norm, separate from the relationship to government.
DFHippie 6y ago
Yet they are still developing countries. Maybe being a low trust environment isn't actually working in their favor and having a government you can trust to solve problems is good. A corollary: maybe working to sow distrust in the government doesn't promote the general welfare.
- mikem170 6y ago
  I think you have it backwards. First their government was untrustworthy, then they stopped trusting them. Not the other way around. And this is not a problem of developing countries only! Developed countries have had their governments turn on them in a surprisingly short time. It can get to the point where a people can't change their government, the government being the institution with all the money, power, and guns.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago

So your assessment of the benefits of several hundred years of continuous political culture, along with a semi-continuous chain of protest movements, in "developed" countries is ... "meh" ?? Cynicism at this level does nothing but ensure that your worst take on government is what we actually get.

mikem170 6y ago
I thought that the parent made an interesting observation. It's not cynicism, it a simple fact, backed up by history, of what happens when nobody trusts their government, when a the government of a people deviate too much from the interests of those people and making their lives more difficult instead of less, when all of that goes too far. This can lead to reform. It can also lead to instability. It doesn't matter whether a country is "developed" or not. Developed countries can still have corrupt governments that are not responsive to their people, civil wars, etc. It can happen quick, or take a long time. The stakes are high. Can enough of us agree on how to fix our problems? I don't know. I think that removing corporate and union money from politics would be a good first step, which is what most other countries already have done. Beyond that I wonder if we've grown our federal government too far past it's design specifications, expecting whoever is president this year to fix all our problems, leaving the other 49% of people very upset.
aww_dang 6y ago
Perhaps it would help if I elaborated. I feel that you're filling in the blanks with some of your own projections. The locals here openly accept money for voting. Politicians and bureaucrats are widely regarded as liars and cheats. The government's authority is checked by continuous protests. Government officials don't want to rock the boat or create further instability. Similarly, the people have very little interest in politics. There's not constant bickering or hyperbolic demonization. Political fights don't permeate every sphere of life. Everyone mostly stays in their own lane. Yes, corruption is a problem here. Corruption is also a problem in the US. However the barrier to entry is higher. K street lobbyists don't come cheaply. Yes, the government is ineffective. The question is, do the people want it to be effective? Even the private sphere is similarly ineffective. That's just a cultural norm, separate from the relationship to government.

DFHippie 6y ago

Yet they are still developing countries. Maybe being a low trust environment isn't actually working in their favor and having a government you can trust to solve problems is good. A corollary: maybe working to sow distrust in the government doesn't promote the general welfare.

mikem170 6y ago
I think you have it backwards. First their government was untrustworthy, then they stopped trusting them. Not the other way around. And this is not a problem of developing countries only! Developed countries have had their governments turn on them in a surprisingly short time. It can get to the point where a people can't change their government, the government being the institution with all the money, power, and guns.