The average imbecile regardless of political preference, bias, and instinct, see

The average imbecile regardless of political preference, bias, and instinct, seeks an authoritarian government, whether marxist or fascist anything in between under the presumption that ‘it hasn’t been tried enough’ as a proxy for ‘I would do it better my way’. …

But No. Organizations require systemic rules for making decisions regardless of the temperaments, preferences, biases,and instincts of their members from the most competent to the least – and those rules mustn’t conflict with incentives – they must be possible and enforceable.

The purpose of a parliament (parley, negotiate) is to serve as a jury for the initiatives of the state (monarchy, cabinet, bureaucracy). The division of labor between competency (the state) and market (parliament). It is not to operate the state – they lack competence.

There is no reason any longer for any model other than rule of law under Natural Law by P-Law, monarchy, cabinet, and direct democratic assent or dissent for policies, and contracted services instead of bureaucracies. There is no reason for it at all. Why do we need politicians?

Setting aside for the moment the criteria for voting, and presuming for a moment that representatives are more valuable than direct democracy (admittedly false) if representatives (jurors) in parliaments were to exist, what would we require for criteria for office?

For all his understanding of political history, Francis Fukuyama has a very poor understanding of economics and he has an unhealthy obsession with democracy. An empowered government is proven more effective, yes, but when limited by monarchy and natural law – not by votes.

Again, this is simply a problem of scale. Democracy functions as the means of selecting priorities among people with common interests. That means it’s for small heterogeneous polities.

one can say that monarchies select better priorities and likely be correct. that does not distinguish the difference between monopoly, majority, and markets.

Argue the right problem: we are heterogeneous and large and have no common interest

Yes. My recommendation is to return to our original design as a continuation of the HRE, as a loose federation of states under a weak judicial government, that licenses ‘free cities’ within constraints.

This requires educating the public for whom the present model is a religion