This week, this month, we are living through incredibly interesting times. That such a large chunk of the world population has been forced to move is monumentous. Our reaction to it has been perhaps the biggest test of our values (that much overused word) for several generations.
Some have come out looking better than others. Perhaps an interesting twist in stereotypes and history, the Germans and their leader in particular have inspired by compassion today.
And I assume they will continue to do so. Of course, the situation is much more nuanced than just right or wrong, but it has exposed so many base instincts in so many, so many attitudes, so much of cultural dynamics, and of course so much that never changes – our underlying human instincts.
Transparency, in companies, governments and the press is so often given as a universal positive. But in today’s world do we always have to accept that. An MP who was on the right side of the public opinion (and the evil press, personified by the Daily Mail) could be a pariah today.
Is this really the most effective form of government, formenting as it does a preference for point scoring over genuinely solving problems? Here and in the States, we see these structures causing paralysis, not action amongst those charged with leading.
How about this. Every year, rather than four, we hold a vote in the UK (via Facebook, or something) on whether the government is doing a good job overall. And if they’re not, we hold an election. And then we make debates in Parliament subject to Chatham House rules.
I suspect this is more or less the situation we had before round the clock media and a million lobbies on our leaders.
Might it make a difference?
2 thoughts on “Too much transparency”
This could work if: objective, not subjective success measures were in place AND if the methods of measuring performance were definitive and indeed transparent.
Is the problem not a combination of 2 things: 1) the special type of hubris needed to motivate someone to seek power and how that power amplies it, 2) the ‘general public’ (who ever they are) don’t know what they want, are not skilled at interpreting highly complex structures (such as government) and can’t differentiate between individual responsibility and that of the state.
True. But isn’t that exactly what we expect them to do today, whilst making point scoring more important than outcomes?
Comments are closed.