6.8.2 Processes for Appointing Politicians
The processes for appointing politicians are important because they take decisions on behalf of the people; they need to be competent.
There are good reasons why people ask others to represent them, and why they delegate decision-making to politicians. The selection of political candidates should be based purely on merit, but there are several problems in both democratic and authoritarian systems:
● Although they are chosen by the population in a democracy, there are limitations in how accurately people’s wishes can be reflected in election results (6.3.2).
● Money can influence elections in democracies, so the politicians who win are not necessarily working for everyone’s benefit (6.4.5).
● Politicians in an authoritarian system are appointed without asking people what they want, even if they are selected on merit. They might not serve the interests of the population, unless they understand that their stability of tenure depends upon them being sufficiently acceptable (6.3.1.7).
These problems can never be entirely solved, but they can be reduced:
● An educated public might make better choices in a democracy, as described in the previous section (6.8.1),
● It might be useful to have an oversight mechanisms, such as an independent ombudsman, to provide a channel for dealing with complaints.
● There should also be ways of making politicians accountable, as described below (6.8.5).
The selection of leaders is even more important than selecting other politicians. It is also problematic, in both democracies and authoritarian political systems (6.3.4):
● There is a tendency for presidents and prime ministers to be appointed on the basis of charisma, rather than on the other qualities required to do a good job.
● Loyalty to the leader may be desirable In any political system, but it is not a sufficient qualification for granting authority over a government department. Donald Trump’s cabinet appointments in his second term of office were highly contentious, as described by Heather Cox Richardson. He prioritised loyalty to himself and television appeal over competence, appointing people who clearly did not have the relevant experience.
● The Washington Post reported on nepotism in an autocracy, for example: A lost generation of young people of Tunisia discuss grievances that led to their revolution.[1] It quoted an unemployed graduate: “job openings, he said bitterly, are filled by those connected to the regime”.
Even good leaders cannot continue indefinitely. They become hubristic and they stop listening to others. It is advantageous to set term limits for leaders in all political systems (6.3.4.3).
This page is intended to form part of Edition 4 of the Patterns of Power series of books. An archived copy of it is held at https://www.patternsofpower.org/edition04/682c.htm.
[1] The Washington Post article. A lost generation of young people of Tunisia discuss grievances that led to their revolution, was published on January 20, 2011. It is no longer available online.