500channelsurfer Posted December 8, 2021 Report Posted December 8, 2021 (edited) Currently, all nation-states utilize single monopoly government to rule all policy jurisdictions typically over single ideological lines. This is evidently detrimental to citizens as it is not logical that one party or ideology would perform competently over all jurisdictions. Monopoly government has almost always been the default form of government but since the advent of democracy the option to elect jurisdictional governments has not been explored. In the example of an automobile manufacturer, it would not be expected that an automobile company would manufacture the car and the tires, own and run the delivery trucks and trains to dealerships, maintain the roads the car would drive on, manage drivers' licenses, as well as manage the automobile financing. Any competent CEO would break up such a company into jurisdictions in order for them to function competently. Why is it then that citizens continue with monopoly government and expect ideological political parties to manage jurisdictions as diverse as the military, health and education systems and economic policy. Even with all governments being departmentalized, executive branches of governments adhere to one head of state and narrow ideology. Would nation-states not be better off electing separate councils for defense, economics and social services? Edited December 8, 2021 by 500channelsurfer 1 Quote
Queenmandy85 Posted December 14, 2021 Report Posted December 14, 2021 Canada's Head of State is non-ideological. The Ministry is made up of people with varied ideologies, even though they belong to the same political party. They receive input from the opposition parties as well as their constituents. They also receive advice from the professional public servants in their various ministries. So, it is not a monopoly. Quote Socialism is the opiate of the intellectual class.
500channelsurfer Posted December 18, 2021 Author Report Posted December 18, 2021 (edited) In the realm of public governance there is one government. One Head of State whether ideological or not is not what I am getting at. In the private sector there is more than one economic sector. Companies that sell boots do not also sell spark plugs. There is competition among both boot and spark plug manufacturers, respectively. The public sector could be divided similarly. There could be Head of state for Health Care as well as a different Head of State for military, and this would better ensure that more competent people manage each public sector, as they would be more specialized in each field. Edited December 18, 2021 by 500channelsurfer Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.