Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[qwertyuiopas]

For any programmers here, compare any given governmant to a constantly evolving program.


They are constantly changing and building, and lately it has started to slow down from all that old deadweight.


For a computer program, that means it is time to refactor or rewrite some or all of it.




The question is, why hasn't that happened to a governmant yet?
And how can we make it happen(other than threaten magma floods and nuclear bombings)?

[Nilocy]

Well, I'm guessing rewrite anything thats over 20 years old, make every alot more concise and succinct. Thus reducing the red tape everywhere and making the process of government much much more streamlined.

[Frelock]

You know, they tried that in a place called Latin America.  20 years of a single government?  Sounds like it's time for a coup!

Didn't work out too well for them....

[Armok]

You know, they tried that in a place called Latin America.  20 years of a single government?  Sounds like it's time for a coup!

Didn't work out too well for them....

Yea, "refactor or rewrite" and "revolutionary govenment overthrow" are basicaly the same words in different lingos.

[qwertyuiopas]

It depends. Refactor or rewrite is generally only going to be sections at a time, and supported at least partially by the government itself.

Overthrowing a government is just discarding everything and starting over from nothing.

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

It depends. Refactor or rewrite is generally only going to be sections at a time, and supported at least partially by the government itself.

Overthrowing a government is just discarding everything and starting over from nothing.

And that's the difference between Evolution and Revolution, I guess?

[Aqizzar]

Speaking as someone who studies the process of government academically, and assuming you're speaking of the American government (since that's the only one anyone ever seems to complain about)...

1) Organizations made of human beings do not work like computer programs.  Among myriad other differences, we have enough spare initiative and the system of government has enough components that it can "refactor and rewrite" while operating.

2) Legislative ossification is not nearly so bad as often perceived because-

3) As it follows from 1, the human minds charged with carrying out government policy are constantly rejudging what their instructions mean.  The commonly reported legislative activity (or "lack thereof" if you want to be cynical) is but one tiny part of the process.  Departmental policy and culture of enforcement have tremendous end effect themselves, and are constantly changing.

Basically, I'm saying three things.  You're applying a "theory" of systemic control that relates in no way to the situation, you're seeing a problem as far larger than it realistically is, and the reform you're calling for is always taking place, it just doesn't usually bear mention because it's boring.

[qwertyuiopas]

I am mostly refering to the Canadian government and similar democracies that have existed for a long time.

I do recognise, and have stated, that it can change without stopping.


However, there is a certain level of redundancy that exists in any growing government that leaves room for freeloaders and unessecarily excessive burocracy. Think Vogon.


However, the main issue why a global(or at least country-wide) initiative is required is that, in comparison to point 3, many of the people in charge take the option that benefits them rather than the interpretations better for the country.

The refactoring required is to remove unessecary redundancy and policies, and reduce the potential locations for political corruption. Or better yet, add key points of control dictated entirely by what the people need.

[ChairmanPoo]

*/thick German accent*
Time vill tell... sooner or later.... time vill tell...