Im reflecting from the pov of a parents role re: the kids. If you give the kids what they want, its going to be soda and candy every day of their lives. Some deciaions are tough, e.g. delayed gratification, and holding ones ground, but do voters even care about stuff like that?
Can we even hope on common sense, when the population is concerned?
Good for the country.
Most people are assholes. The government shouldn’t enact racist policies just because the people want to.
The answer to both questions in your compound question is yes.
Now, good luck defining each of those.
Well who is any one individual - or even a small group of outside individuals - to decide what’s “best” for the country? That’s why we have “for the people”.
The role of the government is to thread the needle of identifying who has power (including your common labor) and creating a consensus among them that prevents a civil war. It however usually becomes captured and ossified and is unable to identify when certain power blocks have reached their red lines that will topple the whole damn thing until a new government forms. Mandate of heaven essentially. Paternalistic or will of the people are legitimacy building frames but the reality is always material.
That feels like a false dilemma to me. The country and government, ideally, are the people.
The role of a government is to collect taxes, then use those taxes to provide the most good to the greatest number of people.
In general, voters will have many ideas as to what that implementation should look like, which is why we elect representatives.
According to the US, the role of government is to protect to the opulent minority from the will of the majority. That’s what Madison argued for in the Federalist Papers. He then proceeded to explain how to achieve this with the design of the Senate. And then that is exactly how the Senate got designed in the Constitution.
The role of government, essentially forever regardless of system and country, is to manage power struggles between all the possible sources of power.
What’s right for the people.
NOT the will of the people, because that’s just mob rule.
My mother always did the former and despite pretty much ignoring the “will” was reelected for decades.
deleted by creator
One major problem is that people don’t agree on what’s right for the country. Some want a police state, and others want a nanny state. They both compromise freedom for security / safety. Meanwhile, if you’re in the middle, you’re seen as colluding with the “other” side.
In theory yes
But
The governments role is to lead the country
Could be through taxes which are then usednto make roads, schools etc
Could also be to control slaves that work for the few
Depends who you vote for
In a truely objective sense, the concept of “good for the people” and “good for the country” would be one and the same. The people are the country, and if treated as a population aggregate, are easy to monitor for overall well-being. Yes, individual people will always want selfish things, pork-barrel spending, local projects, etc.
All we can do is try our best to follow the middle path between the two. A dictator is bad but a benevolent dictator might guide us with a firm hand that benefits most while negatively affecting the least. Of course, based on human nature, all power eventually corrupts so who knows? I’m surprised we made it this far.
It is to extract wealth from its residents to provide a steady steam of transfer towards the rich.
The role of the government is to be at the service of the people.
To serve the interests of the people, to protect the people’s rights, to watch the back of the people so they’re not taken advantage of. That’s why we have elections, to vote people in because it is their sworn duty of oath to be at the service of the people in office, domestically and internationally.
The role of a government is to do what’s best for the government. That usually involves keeping the people from getting too unhappy with them.
