Page 1 of 3

Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:57 pm
by Funkyterrance
Hypothetical situation:

A pill is invented that guarantees that anyone who takes it becomes incapable of corruption regarding their function in government. Which society/government would you consider the best if anyone appointed a position in said government had to take the aforementioned pill before being appointed? Obviously the term "government" is being used loosely for my lack of a better one and even "no government" is a legitimate option. Also, to keep things simple lets assume that other than the new pill, the current state of the world remains the same. Otherwise, the sky's the limit.

I remember when I first learnt of the different potential forms of societies thinking that a lot of them sounded pretty bulletproof and would totally work, maybe even better than the current ones, if not for the element of corruption. Basically it seems like the governments with the most checks and balances win by default in the current real-world scenarios but in a world where a system would be non-corrupt, which do you all think would be most idyllic and why?

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:58 pm
by thegreekdog
My initial answer is either meritocracy or dictatorship. I haven't decided yet.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 8:59 pm
by Woodruff
Funkyterrance wrote:Hypothetical situation:

A pill is invented that guarantees that anyone who takes it becomes incapable of corruption regarding their function in government. Which society/government would you consider the best if anyone appointed a position in said government had to take the aforementioned pill before being appointed? Obviously the term "government" is being used loosely for my lack of a better one and even "no government" is a legitimate option. Also, to keep things simple lets assume that other than the new pill, the current state of the world remains the same. Otherwise, the sky's the limit.

I remember, when I first learnt of the different potential forms of societies, thinking that a lot of them sounded pretty bulletproof and would totally work, maybe even better than the current ones, if not for the element of corruption. Basically it seems like the governments with the most checks and balances win by default in the current real-world scenarios but in a world where a system would be non-corrupt, which do you all think would be most idyllic and why?


Honestly? With such a pill, there can hardly be a bad government. I suppose perhaps the totalitarian one, but how would that work with such a pill? I almost think they would all be equally "best".

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:02 pm
by Funkyterrance
thegreekdog wrote:My initial answer is either meritocracy or dictatorship. I haven't decided yet.


Okay then, for now, which merits and which dictator?

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:04 pm
by thegreekdog
Funkyterrance wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:My initial answer is either meritocracy or dictatorship. I haven't decided yet.


Okay then, for now, which merits and which dictator?


I need to think about it some more, but I'm going to make my vote meritocracy. Then I'm going to say that the best person for each particular job in government gets that job. The best general is in charge of the military. The best legla mind writes the laws. The best tax guy comes up with the tax structure. Etc. Maybe have a test every year for all eligible candidates to determine if the general gets replaced.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:08 pm
by Funkyterrance
Woodruff wrote:Honestly? With such a pill, there can hardly be a bad government. I suppose perhaps the totalitarian one, but how would that work with such a pill? I almost think they would all be equally "best".


I can think of some Woodruff...
What about a dictatorship where the dictator were a bad decision maker?
Democracy is far from perfect but it fits the bill in a world of corruption.
So many governments are designed with corruption in mind that their derivation from true perfection is quite large.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:14 pm
by Funkyterrance
thegreekdog wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:My initial answer is either meritocracy or dictatorship. I haven't decided yet.


Okay then, for now, which merits and which dictator?


I need to think about it some more, but I'm going to make my vote meritocracy. Then I'm going to say that the best person for each particular job in government gets that job. The best general is in charge of the military. The best legla mind writes the laws. The best tax guy comes up with the tax structure. Etc. Maybe have a test every year for all eligible candidates to determine if the general gets replaced.


Okay, what if I am a genius at Math but hate the subject? Do I have to be a mathematician? Also, I'm assuming that testing would be the preferred method for finding who was the best at what? I then ask myself is the best lawyer the one who did best in law school?
Tbh though, this one does sound very appealing. I think I just need more information and perhaps some tweaking to take the pill and sign up.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:19 pm
by thegreekdog
Funkyterrance wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:My initial answer is either meritocracy or dictatorship. I haven't decided yet.


Okay then, for now, which merits and which dictator?


I need to think about it some more, but I'm going to make my vote meritocracy. Then I'm going to say that the best person for each particular job in government gets that job. The best general is in charge of the military. The best legla mind writes the laws. The best tax guy comes up with the tax structure. Etc. Maybe have a test every year for all eligible candidates to determine if the general gets replaced.


Okay, what if I am a genius at Math but hate the subject? Do I have to be a mathematician? Also, I'm assuming that testing would be the preferred method for finding who was the best at what? I then ask myself is the best lawyer the one who did best in law school?
Tbh though, this one does sound very appealing. I think I just need more information and perhaps some tweaking to take the pill and sign up.


There are a bunch of questions about meritocracy with no corruption...

(1) What positions do you need to fill?
(2) What happens to people who are the "best" but don't want to serve?
(3) Who makes the tests?
(4) Who scores the tests?
(5) What happens if the "best" person fails at something while in office?

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:25 pm
by Woodruff
Funkyterrance wrote:
Woodruff wrote:Honestly? With such a pill, there can hardly be a bad government. I suppose perhaps the totalitarian one, but how would that work with such a pill? I almost think they would all be equally "best".


I can think of some Woodruff...
What about a dictatorship where the dictator were a bad decision maker?


He's not likely to last very long then, is he?

Funkyterrance wrote:Democracy is far from perfect but it fits the bill in a world of corruption.


But you said no corruption...

Funkyterrance wrote:So many governments are designed with corruption in mind that their derivation from true perfection is quite large.


Certainly true.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:26 pm
by BigBallinStalin
It's difficult to answer because I'm not sure what 'not being corrupt' entails.

For example, a liberal democracy would be optimal because if the politicians and bureaucrats are incapable of corruption, then they'd be impervious to rent-seeking (groups trying to advance their own interests, e.g. social security recipients voting for those politicians who reject significant yet necessary reform). Since these politicians are not corrupt, they'd be impervious to advancing short-term profit (votes from rent-seekers) while neglecting long-term costs (insane debt and unfunded liabilities).



They'd make the necessary cuts, balance the books, keep surpluses to for future spending in order to mitigate the consequences of recessions, etc. They strive to uphold the Constitution, abide by the right rules (which is a hole in this hypothetical situation), and behave in ways which go against political incentives (which is another hole in the situation). So, it depends on how broad one wishes to extend that 'non-corruption'.


If the bureaucrats were incorruptible, then they wouldn't advance the interests of their cohorts, salaries, and budgets at the expense of taxpayers. In my mind, that would serve as being incorruptible because they're actively trying to discover what the common good (so they're not corrupted by greed or self-advancement).

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:30 pm
by thegreekdog
BigBallinStalin wrote:It's difficult to answer because I'm not sure what 'not being corrupt' entails.

For example, a liberal democracy would be optimal because if the politicians and bureaucrats are incapable of corruption, then they'd be impervious to rent-seeking (groups trying to advance their own interests, e.g. social security recipients voting for those politicians who reject significant yet necessary reform). Since these politicians are not corrupt, they'd be impervious to advancing short-term profit (votes from rent-seekers) while neglecting long-term costs (insane debt and unfunded liabilities).



They'd make the necessary cuts, balance the books, keep surpluses to for future spending in order to mitigate the consequences of recessions, etc. They strive to uphold the Constitution, abide by the right rules (which is a hole in this hypothetical situation), and behave in ways which go against political incentives (which is another hole in the situation). So, it depends on how broad one wishes to extend that 'non-corruption'.


If the bureaucrats were incorruptible, then they wouldn't advance the interests of their cohorts, salaries, and budgets at the expense of taxpayers. In my mind, that would serve as being incorruptible because they're actively trying to discover what the common good (so they're not corrupted by greed or self-advancement).


Like FT indicated above, a liberal democracy would not ensure that the most qualified people were in office. A meritocrracy would, by its definition, ensure that the most qualfied individuals were in office.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:35 pm
by BigBallinStalin
Here's another problem:


Good intentions don't always lead to good outcomes, and if the voting public and interest groups aren't required to take the pill, then their 'corrupt' ways enable them to take advantage of the incorruptible politicians and bureaucrats--who might be completely oblivious to this. (example:)


Or since the politicians and bureaucrats are incorruptible, then interest groups and voters could not profit from their incorruptible nature, so they'd pursue substitutes, thus making the government less necessary. For example, as Insurance Company A, if I can't get what I want from politicians to level the competition to benefit me, then I'd have to actually compete (thus the market would become more free). Or, as Regular Joe, if I can't get what I want from politicians in regard to unemployment insurance or government healthcare, then this demand would create a market for others to create associations, pool resources, etc. So, we have mutual aid societies back in full force.


In other words, with incorruptible politicians and bureaucrats (P&B), the problems which public choice faces become irrelevant because P&B won't strive to enrich themselves at the expense of others or for their own private benefit (i.e. rent-seeking is no longer effective). In turn, the government largely becomes irrelevant, so it'll regress into some minimal classical liberal state.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:39 pm
by BigBallinStalin
thegreekdog wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:It's difficult to answer because I'm not sure what 'not being corrupt' entails.

For example, a liberal democracy would be optimal because if the politicians and bureaucrats are incapable of corruption, then they'd be impervious to rent-seeking (groups trying to advance their own interests, e.g. social security recipients voting for those politicians who reject significant yet necessary reform). Since these politicians are not corrupt, they'd be impervious to advancing short-term profit (votes from rent-seekers) while neglecting long-term costs (insane debt and unfunded liabilities).



They'd make the necessary cuts, balance the books, keep surpluses to for future spending in order to mitigate the consequences of recessions, etc. They strive to uphold the Constitution, abide by the right rules (which is a hole in this hypothetical situation), and behave in ways which go against political incentives (which is another hole in the situation). So, it depends on how broad one wishes to extend that 'non-corruption'.


If the bureaucrats were incorruptible, then they wouldn't advance the interests of their cohorts, salaries, and budgets at the expense of taxpayers. In my mind, that would serve as being incorruptible because they're actively trying to discover what the common good (so they're not corrupted by greed or self-advancement).


Like FT indicated above, a liberal democracy would not ensure that the most qualified people were in office. A meritocrracy would, by its definition, ensure that the most qualfied individuals were in office.


I don't see how this really gets to the core issues. If the government is incorruptible, then they'd attempt their best to establish a fair and impartial means of determining qualifications for various positions. And even if the 'best' politicians and bureaucrats (P&B) don't get in, then does that even matter? An incorruptible government can no longer enrich itself by making false promises in order to advance its own goals. With rent-seeking rendered ineffective, then more people won't view the government as necessary for services/goods X, Y, and Z. Instead they'll turn to themselves (in the market) and/or to local 'political' communities to provide their own public goods (e.g. greek polis/city-states with local governing councils).

It all hinges on what exactly being incorruptible entails.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:04 pm
by Funkyterrance
BigBallinStalin wrote:I don't see how this really gets to the core issues. If the government is incorruptible, then they'd attempt their best to establish a fair and impartial means of determining qualifications for various positions. And even if the 'best' politicians and bureaucrats (P&B) don't get in, then does that even matter? An incorruptible government can no longer enrich itself by making false promises in order to advance its own goals. With rent-seeking rendered ineffective, then more people won't view the government as necessary for services/goods X, Y, and Z. Instead they'll turn to themselves (in the market) and/or to local 'political' communities to provide their own public goods (e.g. greek polis/city-states with local governing councils).

It all hinges on what exactly being incorruptible entails.


I suppose I consider incorruptible to be void of self interest regarding their positions in government X,Y or Z. All choices/tasks within the duties of the particular function would be done with the sole purpose of filling the role as it was intended.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:05 pm
by john9blue
technocracy/meritocracy

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:09 pm
by Funkyterrance
john9blue wrote:technocracy/meritocracy


Wow, 2 votes for meritocracy already and interestingly enough by(I'm assuming) two Americans? I am an American and I also am finding myself somehow attracted to this option. John, care to add why or do you basically follow thegreekdog's train of thought?

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:09 pm
by Woodruff
john9blue wrote:technocracy


I, for one, welcome our new robotic overlords.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 10:58 pm
by john9blue
Funkyterrance wrote:
john9blue wrote:technocracy/meritocracy


Wow, 2 votes for meritocracy already and interestingly enough by(I'm assuming) two Americans? I am an American and I also am finding myself somehow attracted to this option. John, care to add why or do you basically follow thegreekdog's train of thought?


maybe because americans have seen firsthand what it's like to have highly incompetent politicians?

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:07 pm
by Funkyterrance
john9blue wrote:
Funkyterrance wrote:
john9blue wrote:technocracy/meritocracy


Wow, 2 votes for meritocracy already and interestingly enough by(I'm assuming) two Americans? I am an American and I also am finding myself somehow attracted to this option. John, care to add why or do you basically follow thegreekdog's train of thought?


maybe because americans have seen firsthand what it's like to have highly incompetent politicians?


Solid point.

I was thinking though, as far as the meritocracy choice this seems more like an adjective you could add to some forms of government as opposed to an actual specific system. If you don't mind amplifying, your choice would be then a meritocratic __________ ?

Tgd, how about you?

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:14 pm
by tkr4lf
Libertarian Police State.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:44 pm
by DoomYoshi
Randomtatorship.

All children born play an assdoodle game at age six. Winners are eligible for office, with relative rank decided by further assdoodling.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:48 pm
by Funkyterrance
DoomYoshi wrote:Randomtatorship.

All children born play an assdoodle game at age six. Winners are eligible for office, with relative rank decided by further assdoodling.


All Hail our Randomtator DoomYoshi!

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:05 am
by Funkyterrance
tkr4lf wrote:Libertarian Police State.


To each their own. I'm assuming you would want to be a commoner in this scenario? It wouldn't be much fun without corruption though.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:19 am
by tkr4lf
Funkyterrance wrote:
tkr4lf wrote:Libertarian Police State.


To each their own. I'm assuming you would want to be a commoner in this scenario? It wouldn't be much fun without corruption though.

I don't even know what the hell that is.

I just posted the most absurd sounding government type that I could think of. I'm pretty sure I saw it on NationStates.


Anyway, to be serious, I would probably go with dictatorship, for its efficiency, or meritocracy, for the fairness. I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but in a corruption-free world, they would both do nicely.

Hell, even communism would work well with absolutely no corruption.

Re: Best Form of Government Assuming No Corruption

PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:24 am
by Neoteny
Neotocracy.