Patrickov wrote:On a side note, this is why I think the West is better. Even control freaks among them agree that a voice of dissent must exist.
So, dissent and being able to criticise authority without getting thrown in jail, are part of the accountability equation. It is not so much that the West is better, as this accountability exists in Eastern nation’s like Taiwan and S Korea, but that political accountability matters. Western countries would suck as much as mainland China if they lost it. Which is why I am critical of political correctness and big tech censorship.
Let me present a theoretical position to explain the importance of political accountability.
Consider the subsistence strategies of nomandic versus agricultural communities.
Nomads collect or hunt their resources and consume those resources almost immediately without significant storage. We can call this an immediate return economy. Property rights are restricted to what one needs and can carry.
Farmers must grow, then harvest their resources. To survive until next harvest, they must store resources. Storage and land use requires more elaborate property rights to ensure those who did the work get to enjoy the benefits of that labour. Otherwise they wouldn’t bother and a farm system could not exist. We can call this a delay return economy.
The other thing a farming economy needs is to be able to control distribution of the stored resources, if the surplus is to be used to maintain non food producing activities. Someone has to be responsible for controlling that distribution of resources.
The person or group who is responsible for deciding how stored resources are distributed has considerable power, as everyone else is specifically depended on them for subsistence.
This is politics as we know it:
who gets what, when and how.Political theories must address this question of distribution. However, there is a second question which is not always addressed by political theories:
what method shall there be to hold accountable those would make the choices on how resources are to be distributedThe rule of law (everyone has the same law applied to them and no one is exempt)
Liberalism and limits of government power, eg: rights
Democracy
Free, independent media
Intellectual freedom
They are all attempts to hold accountable those with the power. Without such restraints, the powerful can do whatever they like to whomever they like. Those subject to that power have no recourse. This situation is what leads to unjust governance.
In my view the basic failure of ideologies such as communism and fascism is that there is no consideration of how leaders could be made accountable for what they do with their power. A political ideology must attempt to answer both questions of how to distribute resources and also how power is to be accountable. Only liberal democracy, amongst current ideologies originating from the enlightenment, makes a serious attempt at answering both.