>
Maybe starting with principles and making yearly changes that can easily be undone or redone by future administrations is the only path forward.I'd trend in the opposite direction. The death of bipartisanship (due to changes in media, education, and gerrymandering: none likely to change soon) render democracies incapable of solving large problems over a multi-voting cycle timespan effectively.
Ergo, the best solution is to punt to an independent body, in the same way central bank management was done.
It makes more sense to have democratically-elected government responsible for and deciding the details, but not the strategic arcs.
Healthcare, national debt / budget deficits, military procurement, voting rights enforcement, education policy would all be better off in consistent hands, even if occasionally less capable ones.
Sometimes, it's more important to keep to an approach than have the optimal approach.
Now? Most democracies get the worst of both worlds there.
I'd trend in the opposite direction. The death of bipartisanship (due to changes in media, education, and gerrymandering: none likely to change soon) render democracies incapable of solving large problems over a multi-voting cycle timespan effectively.
Ergo, the best solution is to punt to an independent body, in the same way central bank management was done.
It makes more sense to have democratically-elected government responsible for and deciding the details, but not the strategic arcs.
Healthcare, national debt / budget deficits, military procurement, voting rights enforcement, education policy would all be better off in consistent hands, even if occasionally less capable ones.
Sometimes, it's more important to keep to an approach than have the optimal approach.
Now? Most democracies get the worst of both worlds there.