Well written essay! I agree with your diagnosis, but I've come to believe there is an analytical need to engage in structural analysis of decision making processes and there is great practical risks for any big policy change if that hasnt been done. And respectfully, your analysis here may have ran into that risk, because your essay is that it treats these problems as failures of will, culture, or national priority rather than the deeper malign effects of changes to the deeper architecture of decision making itself. The Western nations you didnt decline because democracy “got in the way", that simply cannot be the case because we intensely de-democratized decades ago as over the course of the post WW2 decades our systems had replaced their formerly pluralistic, locally semi-sovereign, economically diversified, etc civic systems with highly centralized, hierarchical, continental-scale command structures, structures that cannot be repaired by simply changing policy direction or installing “strong national leadership”. Without rebuilding the underlying analytical, deliberative, and decision-making processes, regional financial organs, local economic discretion, publicly accessible civic channels, federated governance, etc., any proposed fix merely runs the same centralized machine with a different ideological script. Unless the institutional architecture changes, the outcomes will not.
I 100% agree, and in my mind, I did imply such a need for structural change with the concern about democracy getting in the way because of dysfunctionality and the over-legalization of democracy. I did not define the problem as well as your comments, but implied that we have become dysfunctional in many ways both from within a nation and outside via my comments about our obsession with following strong multilateralism. So, in a way we are talking about a need for a “complete makeover” both across and down in terms of government structure, functionality and complexity. Unfortunately, in some ways its part of the death wish that goes with organizations that have lost the true purpose…. Very scary, as the decline of the Roman empire comes to mind.
Hi, thanks for the interesting reply! And I appreciate the clarification. For the following I'm speaking in the context of America, while I do know some about Canada, I dont think I know enough to be able to form a good opinion. In the case of America, the phrase you use -- which is a good one btw -- "over-legalization of democracy", well, in the case of America its important to note, both for intellectual and practical planning because in regards to American organizations, the "organizations that have lost the true purpose", well them, the other organizations they are interconnected with, co-functioning with, the broader institutional spaces they all operate with in, and the broader System they are all apart of, have all, in the definable and concrete terms of pre 1960s/1970s/1980s America, been deeply de-democratized and centralized, and the USA's Old Republic's term, the USA is currently -- not entirely but still primarily -- a centralized technocracy that engages in economic central planning, and has been that way for decades.
The United States once had genuinely democratic governance structures, however imperfect and limited, fundamentally based around decentralized and publicly accessible mass-member parties. The Democratic Party, as a small "d" democratic institution, and the Republican Party, as a small "r" republican institution, were honest in their naming and functioned within a politically, economically, governmentally, financially, and scientifically decentralized and pluralized system. These parties, while far from flawless, allowed for real representation, genuinely participatory governance structures even for very serious policy matters with real participation, and a level of public accountability in political, economic, governmental, financial, and scientific decision making.
However, after WW2 a long multi decadal transformation began due to the dirty deeds of a convergence of several interests and an assortment of powerful special interest groups, and then our parties were transformed into centralized, exclusionary membership organizations. The so called Democratic Party has become a technocracy party, and the so called Republican Party became a conservative party. Neither really represents their original principles of democracy or republicanism, and they dont offer meaningful access or representation to the public. This transformation of the parties has been accompanied by a broader centralization of political, economic, and scientific decision making, which has caused the effective loss of most democratic governance structures.
Canada is about the same as the US with the two main parties organized left to right but with inversions of who votes for who. Our politics is just as useless at serving the citizens and there is certainly all the same issues that we both have identified.
We have just had a 10-year dose of rank socialism that has been a disaster.
In the US I was impressed at the start with the concept of Trump in terms of policies, but I agree his execution is poor.
I am not sure anything good will happen without strong leadership, and even then it’s a hard slog to change anything….. which I think is your point.
Re the current Trump admin, agreed! And I find it striking that elements of it and its broader support base have been literally publicly-explicitly invoking the never implemented so called “American System” that was the main policy proposal of the Whig Party**** and that proposal, and the entire Party that advocated as matter of fact, were both intellectually and technically slaughtered in a comprehensive and fully fair duel! So yes, the Trump admin — up to now — has been a disappointment (there are good people there doing good things tho), so, well, lets hope it changes
**** and btw was actually admitted by them to be a departure from America’s design up to that point and also, they admitted that it would be a divergence from the broader Anglo-Saxon tradition from at least as far back as the Magna Carta, they argued that the “world had become to complex for democracy”, and that it was “inevitable”, and that places like California, the Far West, and much of the interior “inevitably must” be made into raw-commodity roles and told that trying to build a diversified, high value-add economy as well was “impossible” and “uneconomic.”; well their policy was intelectually defeated and not implemented and then they were, as a technical matter, proven completely wrong!
Well written essay! I agree with your diagnosis, but I've come to believe there is an analytical need to engage in structural analysis of decision making processes and there is great practical risks for any big policy change if that hasnt been done. And respectfully, your analysis here may have ran into that risk, because your essay is that it treats these problems as failures of will, culture, or national priority rather than the deeper malign effects of changes to the deeper architecture of decision making itself. The Western nations you didnt decline because democracy “got in the way", that simply cannot be the case because we intensely de-democratized decades ago as over the course of the post WW2 decades our systems had replaced their formerly pluralistic, locally semi-sovereign, economically diversified, etc civic systems with highly centralized, hierarchical, continental-scale command structures, structures that cannot be repaired by simply changing policy direction or installing “strong national leadership”. Without rebuilding the underlying analytical, deliberative, and decision-making processes, regional financial organs, local economic discretion, publicly accessible civic channels, federated governance, etc., any proposed fix merely runs the same centralized machine with a different ideological script. Unless the institutional architecture changes, the outcomes will not.
I 100% agree, and in my mind, I did imply such a need for structural change with the concern about democracy getting in the way because of dysfunctionality and the over-legalization of democracy. I did not define the problem as well as your comments, but implied that we have become dysfunctional in many ways both from within a nation and outside via my comments about our obsession with following strong multilateralism. So, in a way we are talking about a need for a “complete makeover” both across and down in terms of government structure, functionality and complexity. Unfortunately, in some ways its part of the death wish that goes with organizations that have lost the true purpose…. Very scary, as the decline of the Roman empire comes to mind.
Hi, thanks for the interesting reply! And I appreciate the clarification. For the following I'm speaking in the context of America, while I do know some about Canada, I dont think I know enough to be able to form a good opinion. In the case of America, the phrase you use -- which is a good one btw -- "over-legalization of democracy", well, in the case of America its important to note, both for intellectual and practical planning because in regards to American organizations, the "organizations that have lost the true purpose", well them, the other organizations they are interconnected with, co-functioning with, the broader institutional spaces they all operate with in, and the broader System they are all apart of, have all, in the definable and concrete terms of pre 1960s/1970s/1980s America, been deeply de-democratized and centralized, and the USA's Old Republic's term, the USA is currently -- not entirely but still primarily -- a centralized technocracy that engages in economic central planning, and has been that way for decades.
The United States once had genuinely democratic governance structures, however imperfect and limited, fundamentally based around decentralized and publicly accessible mass-member parties. The Democratic Party, as a small "d" democratic institution, and the Republican Party, as a small "r" republican institution, were honest in their naming and functioned within a politically, economically, governmentally, financially, and scientifically decentralized and pluralized system. These parties, while far from flawless, allowed for real representation, genuinely participatory governance structures even for very serious policy matters with real participation, and a level of public accountability in political, economic, governmental, financial, and scientific decision making.
However, after WW2 a long multi decadal transformation began due to the dirty deeds of a convergence of several interests and an assortment of powerful special interest groups, and then our parties were transformed into centralized, exclusionary membership organizations. The so called Democratic Party has become a technocracy party, and the so called Republican Party became a conservative party. Neither really represents their original principles of democracy or republicanism, and they dont offer meaningful access or representation to the public. This transformation of the parties has been accompanied by a broader centralization of political, economic, and scientific decision making, which has caused the effective loss of most democratic governance structures.
Canada is about the same as the US with the two main parties organized left to right but with inversions of who votes for who. Our politics is just as useless at serving the citizens and there is certainly all the same issues that we both have identified.
We have just had a 10-year dose of rank socialism that has been a disaster.
In the US I was impressed at the start with the concept of Trump in terms of policies, but I agree his execution is poor.
I am not sure anything good will happen without strong leadership, and even then it’s a hard slog to change anything….. which I think is your point.
Re the current Trump admin, agreed! And I find it striking that elements of it and its broader support base have been literally publicly-explicitly invoking the never implemented so called “American System” that was the main policy proposal of the Whig Party**** and that proposal, and the entire Party that advocated as matter of fact, were both intellectually and technically slaughtered in a comprehensive and fully fair duel! So yes, the Trump admin — up to now — has been a disappointment (there are good people there doing good things tho), so, well, lets hope it changes
**** and btw was actually admitted by them to be a departure from America’s design up to that point and also, they admitted that it would be a divergence from the broader Anglo-Saxon tradition from at least as far back as the Magna Carta, they argued that the “world had become to complex for democracy”, and that it was “inevitable”, and that places like California, the Far West, and much of the interior “inevitably must” be made into raw-commodity roles and told that trying to build a diversified, high value-add economy as well was “impossible” and “uneconomic.”; well their policy was intelectually defeated and not implemented and then they were, as a technical matter, proven completely wrong!