Communal Needs in an Age of Power

THEE Analysis

Politics often seems such a long way from any focus on communal needs and personal concerns. But it only seems so because that is the way it is at present. It doesn't have to be like that.

We saw in the Spiral of Political Maturation that several stages (and much social mayhem) lie ahead for even the most advanced nation-states before communal needs become the centre of political attention.

We saw in the Tree of Political Choice that power struggles sit at L1 while communal needs are found at the opposite end: L7.

We saw, however, in the Framework of Political Life, both the possibility and the route for bringing politics and needs together. We also recognized there that ordinary people, unlike politicians, are primarily concerned with their personal and social needs.

Finally, we now see here that our needs are primarily met at local level—in L3-territories.

The Challenge of Community Politics

Putting services to vested interests to one side, national politicians and top officials currently make decisions on many matters that are far too complex to be understood. The result is vast waste, corruption, and mindless harm.

Only in local communities can the typical politician consider choices being made, understand the funding applied, appreciate the consequences, and be around to personally experience the end result.

Most people are concerned to get their everyday needs met, whatever other interests they may have. These needs do require political oversight. But politicians cannot deliver services effectively or often at all. Services belong in the hands of professional executives providing them in a properly regulated market.

To bring needs and services together for a community, there must be:

  • Strong communities at each tier within a country and no duplication of tiers.
  • Governments concerned to ensure communities get the services they need without necessarily getting directly involved in provision.
  • Responsible citizens who do not expect a free lunch.
  • The National tier is deeply preoccupied with «grand strategies» for national security, and strategies of power and control in regard to lower tiers and the general public.
  • Higher tiers of government make too many detailed decisions affecting local communities about which they know very little.
  • Relations between tiers of government are tense, especially Central-Local and Regional-Local.
  • Bureaucracy and service delivery are often put before community identity; and there is a lack of clarity as to who «owns» particular public services.
  • Dissatisfaction with government provision of services is widespread and justified.
  • Despite recent privatizations, far too much is done inefficiently and uneconomically by government agencies.
  • Local democracy is sometimes poor and weak.
  • Changes in governing components—finance, structure, services &c.—are often developed in isolation from each other.
  • Spending is often poorly controlled, despite torrents of legislation from Westminster.
  • Finance is viewed as a solution rather than a means. ClosedMore…

Originally posted: August-2009; Last updated: 15-Nov-2010