Progress in governance comes from adding constraints

Structuring state power is the source of many historical improvements in governance.

Over human history, we have not only seen technological innovations, but innovations in how states are run. Many of these innovations enabled greater human flourishing. In the past, power was quite concentrated and people enjoyed few rights, today, power is much more decentralized and people across the world enjoy far more protection from abuse by the state and others.

Many of the innovations in governance have come from adding structure to how the state is run. In other words, we have learned to constrain the government in certain ways in order to aid human flourishing¹.

For example, democracy created explicit rules for how leaders are selected and made those leaders at least somewhat accountable to voters. Representative democracy structures power further, creating rules for how elected representatives can make collective decisions. Documents like the Code of Hammurabi made rules and their punishments explicit, while documents like the Magna Carta codified individual rights and due process. The U.S. constitution divided power between government branches and added a system of checks and balances to mainstain stability. Concepts like federalism structure power among localized government entities. The invention of independent monetary authorities has been critical for governments to manage their currency appropriately.

Each of these innovations were preceded by other states dabbling in these ideas, but it’s valuable to make these rules explicit and resistant to change. If legislators can change the rules to consolidate power, they eventually will.

There are good reasons why adding constraints to governance leads to better outcomes. Simply put, making decisions that effect everyone is tricky. Reaching compromise amongst so many conflicting interests is fundamentally hard. In the real world, there are imbalances in power and difficulties in coordination that corrupt all collective decisions. That means that it’s critical to limit government decision to the few areas where it is truly needed².

This theme connects much of my writing on governance. I have emphasized the importance of rights when it comes to achieving growth. I have proposed federalizing immigration decisions, laws with an expiration date, and regulated marketplaces as ways to better structure state power.

The fact that progress in governance comes from structuring government activities will help to motivate some of my future writing. I believe that governments today lack the structure to make good decisions in many domains including regulation, tax policy, and diplomacy. I want to propose some additional constraints to create a blueprint for good governance.

1. Of course, not all innovations in governance are in the form of constraints on government power, and not all innovations in governance have increased human fluorishing. States have developed much more sophistication in their tax systems, the size of their bureaucracy, and the precision of their regulations. China is arguably innovating in ways to stably maintain power. Some innovations in state surveillance of citizens may have a negative impact on human fluorishing.

2. See here for more discussion.