When thinking about Public Goods and the role of the government as perhaps stewards of information I have been thinking about the justification for withholding information from the public.
On one hand, some may argue that making certain information available to the public may endanger lives. There is no doubt that intelligence and the information gathered is the most precious military advantage in the new world of decentralized threats and armed opponents without even a country much less a persistent headquarters or consistent leadership. The ability to know more than the enemy is the only thing that might be said to separate the well-equipped and well-trained militaries of large 1st world countries from the emerging dangers. Some would argue that unless the governments are allowed to keep what they have learned to themselves they will lose this last important advantage.
However, I am personally of the opinion that the moment a government starts to withhold vital information about its policy decisions from the electorate even the semblance of a democratic government breaks down. If the public is not aware of the actions of the government how can it decide when they are not in accordance with its own priorities?
All good governments who seek to distribute power vigorously employ a system of checks and balances. In the case of democracies, by far the most important of these balances is struck between an informed electorate and an elected legislature and executive. When essential information is withheld from the public this balance is disastrously skewed.
3 comments:
"However, I am personally of the opinion that the moment a government starts to withhold vital information about its policy decisions from the electorate even the semblance of a democratic government breaks down."
Sorry to inform you, but the government already withhold vital information from its constituents. Despite the Sunshine Laws, only certain ammount of information is avaiable to the public. That is one reason that Interest Groups are in place. Coming from a Pluralist view, they are established to provide a link from the government to the people. That is how we, as constituents, get our information and for those who us who are less politcally conscious, we'll find out when the policy applies to us.
Shawn, your post is good. You are right that a democracy in the truest sense only works when the people are informed. But, some would question whether we have a true democracy, at least not in the sense that the Greeks envisioned it. Molding public opinion through the manipulation of information seems to be the biggest trend in governments - and anyone that has read Machiavelli would understand why those in power do this. Just to play Devil’s advocate for a moment, do you think the American public is truly ready for the responsibility of being a pure democracy? Do you think there is a commitment in society to govern by rule the people – or do people just like to complain about what the elected government does on our behalf?
Interesting to know.
Post a Comment