{"version": "1.0", "type": "rich", "title": "Meh, honestly I'm not so naive as to think anyone could design a system that couldn't break or be broken, I think the best...", "author_name": "kontextmaschine", "author_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "provider_name": "kontextmaschine", "provider_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "url": "https://kontextmaschine.com/post/43492844526/", "html": "<p>Meh, honestly I&rsquo;m not so naive as to think anyone could design a system that couldn&rsquo;t break or be broken, I think the best system is always &ldquo;a new one&rdquo; - dynasties always start fresh and die stale and so does any system, encrusted with cruft and iron triangles. That is to say, so long as the system has a feedback loop in which control is exerted through a mechanism (say, elections, or alternately the military support of lesser lords) that responds to policy.<br/><br/>If you&rsquo;re going to maintain a republic you need a limited franchise of electors so self-sufficient that they&rsquo;ll be fine no matter what, that&rsquo;s been known for millennia.<br/><br/>I guess my ideal government would be one that changes forms randomly and unpredictably as determined by a meta-government. You could maybe even design an electoral system with three modes, in each of which a different leg of Arrow&rsquo;s impossibility theorum collapses, so long as which mode to be used was determined by some Swiss functionary rolling a die.</p>"}