Common Sense Papers 46 through 52 discuss certain arguments for the right kind of independent political movement.
Rebuild Trust in Politics
There are those in society who seem to operate by the belief that government can do anything it wishes. So long as it represents the will of the people (meaning their rightfully elected representatives), any course of action is acceptable. This idea is born of incomplete thinking and lacks understanding. Government sits at a unique and critical intersection of human social, political, and economic activity. The “laws” that pertain to these activities apply to the government as well. It thus follows that only sound government policy will result in sustainable performance of social structure conducive to forward progress for citizens. To use government policy to suspend economic or social gravity, so to speak, will only end in failure. For this reason, those who choose to run for office should evidence some knowledge and care for the principles of sound government, rather than rise to popularity by making policy promises which cannot find fulfillment in the structures of government as they exist in our current 21st-century setting.
Trust relies heavily on two underlying principles: intent and competence. Both are necessary for the mutual success of public sphere activity and private sphere endeavors. Some would appropriately argue that one should never trust the government due to its twisted ability to be redirected in aim and purpose by accumulating power and changing leadership at each election cycle. The government can’t be trusted because it is always a vehicle for abusing power—it must be held accountable, or so the argument goes.
The trust that I refer to is the working trust of executing laws that have been duly passed by authorized representatives of the legislative body. For there to be a positive cycle of policy implementation, trust must be founded on some evidence that the intent of government is for the good of the people, rather than some selective aims of favoritism of the few at the expense of the many. While utilitarianism is not a perfect political philosophy, the notion of evaluating government intent should be based on some measure that honestly attempts to assess the benefits of any course of policy action in comparison to the harms or costs that also flow from the policy action. With static and dynamic cost-benefit analysis or benefit/harm analysis, and the accompanying public comment periods that inform certain policy proposals, the intent of government programs can be evaluated. Still, the present system can leave government intent obscured and hidden by loads of special interest interference in the legislative and administrative functions of government. Increasing transparency in the process goes a long way to establishing trust.
The second necessary component is competence. One would not ask a skilled auto mechanic to perform heart surgery any more than one would ask a skilled heart surgeon to rebuild an automobile engine. Regardless of the goodness of the intent that pervades the actions of each individual, the domain expertise or competence would be lacking to make the match work. While this is certainly not a pitch for a technocratic government of ruling “experts”, there is wisdom in suggesting that those who run for legislative and executive offices at the highest level of government where the reach is most broad and complex should be fit for office by demonstrating a wide range of skills. Based on the proposals and frameworks presented in The Common Sense Papers, a reboot of the American political system requires an uncommon breadth of thinking and deliberation to refine the proposals that will ultimately move our country forward for a thriving 21st-century national revival.
Everyone is welcome to seek office, but not everyone is qualified as to maturity, judgment, prudence, and ability to debate and deliberate for the common good. In light of the highly complex political and economic systems of the present day, we need talented individuals with the capability for systems thinking, a sound basis for political decision-making in keeping with constitutional frameworks, and a great breadth of perspective on American institutions to seek elected office.
With individuals of good intent and excellent capability running for office, the opportunity to restore public trust in political actions becomes a possible future reality.
Notes for new readers:
The Common Sense Papers are an offering by Common Sense 250, which proposes a method to realign the two-party system with the creation of a new political superstructure that circumvents the current dysfunctional duopoly. The goal is to heal political divisions and reboot the American political system for an effective federal government. If the movement can gain appeal, a call to crowdfund the project may occur in 2024 or 2025. Subscribe for free with an email to follow along.
The tabs on the top of the Substack page can bring you to earlier essays that spell out key political issues. Common Sense Paper No. 1, No. 2, No. 4, and No. 5 can help anyone get up to speed on the project.
Common Sense 250 is still working out details on launching a podcast for those who want to listen to the political strategy but don’t have time to read. Subscribe and watch for an email announcement.
Your point about competence is very important, I think...without some sense of professionalism and skill guiding candidate choices, America will remain the domain of demagogues and propaganda rather than a nation whose government truly accomplishes the good of the people. They key question is how can candidate selection become more meritocratic. How does this fit into the Common Sense platform?