Historically, governments have attempted to exact loyalty from those placed by history within their boundaries. Surely there is a better way to determine who will be the subjects. Certainly no people should be required by force to live under a government that is hateful to them. I suggest that now is the time to create a climate where governments compete for the loyalties of their citizens and where geographic and thus political boundaries change by agreement between the governing and the governed.
Leaders and their bureaucrats should be required to compete for the loyalties of their subjects; governments should rise and fall in keeping with the peoples' cumulatively expressed desires. Moreover, an individual should be allowed to request recognition by the government of his choice and, once recognized, be free (under agreed-upon restrictions) to move into the geographical area controlled by that government. Thus peoples of like interest or like ethnicity may become concentrated in specific locales and cooperatively influence the government there more to their liking.
I further suggest that a government is a consortium of individuals acting on behalf of those subject to it. Moreover, peoples, acting through their governments, should be free to join in confederations of varying degrees of tightness, or overlapping jurisdictions, for administrative or other mutually agreed purposes.
So much for grand philosophy; there must, of course, be a reasonable degree of stability
mindspring.com |
