3 ms·

> Anyone who thinks differently is arguing for a shadow gov, i.e. unelected bureaucrats who answer to no one and can make decisions unilaterally without consequ

> Anyone who thinks differently is arguing for a shadow gov, i.e. unelected bureaucrats who answer to no one and can make decisions unilaterally without consequence... not exactly democracy. Lots of countries have an establishment "civil service" comprised of those "unelected bureaucrats" that you mention, and it actually works out quite well for them. That said, they aren't unaccountable: they answer to departmental heads, MPs, committees, etc. A big advantage of the system is to prevent mad-swings in policy just because the head-of-government changed. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Service_(United_Kingdom)

andrepd 5y ago
>A big advantage of the system is to prevent mad-swings in policy just because the head-of-government changed. You can frame this another way: it prevents meaningful change even if the electorate demands it. Sorry, I watched too much Yes Minister to think this is a good thing x)
- DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
  Yes, of course - but if a country already had a well-oiled establishment civil-service which kept its finger on the pulse of the nation then it would already be aligned with the electorates' interests and voting-intent. I recognize I'm basically describing a utopia.
  - vinay_ys 5y ago
    Any power structure naturally seeks permanence. Democratic elections with short office terms goes against the nature. If we are not vigilant, shadowy forces will take control of this mechanism too. Some could argue it already has happened.
    - ShannyBabes123 5y ago
      I like how Putin describes his impression of the powers of the US President. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xykvrGpCW6E&ab_channel=RussiaInsight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xykvrGpCW6E&ab_channel=Russi...
- skoskie 5y ago
  Has a certain “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” vibe. There are pros and cons to both.

andrepd 5y ago

>A big advantage of the system is to prevent mad-swings in policy just because the head-of-government changed. You can frame this another way: it prevents meaningful change even if the electorate demands it. Sorry, I watched too much Yes Minister to think this is a good thing x)

DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
Yes, of course - but if a country already had a well-oiled establishment civil-service which kept its finger on the pulse of the nation then it would already be aligned with the electorates' interests and voting-intent. I recognize I'm basically describing a utopia.
- vinay_ys 5y ago
  Any power structure naturally seeks permanence. Democratic elections with short office terms goes against the nature. If we are not vigilant, shadowy forces will take control of this mechanism too. Some could argue it already has happened.
  - ShannyBabes123 5y ago
    I like how Putin describes his impression of the powers of the US President. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xykvrGpCW6E&ab_channel=RussiaInsight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xykvrGpCW6E&ab_channel=Russi...
skoskie 5y ago
Has a certain “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” vibe. There are pros and cons to both.