>you should set the values that enable bold decision making by the lower downs.
This take is indistinguishable from management politics. Without a policy at the top:
1. The "lower downs" all make "bold decisions" in different directions, resulting in administrative paralysis.
2. Voters aren't making meaningful choices. They're literally voting for someone who will enable everyone to do whatever.
This is a recipe for political chaos. More importantly, it's the story that's been playing out for the past 40 years, with the results we all know.
I can relate to the distrust of central planning to some extent -- it is certainly something that warrants caution -- but those risks are best addressed through institutional checks and balances, not by having the political class abandon its duties altogether! The irony is that in an effort to avoid tyranny/autocracy, we've created the kind of political vacuum that incubates the very outcome we feared.
I don’t think we disagree. Maybe being concrete would help.
Joe Biden is not qualified to make medical judgments about COVID-19 or vaccines. But he absolutely should decide eg: is better to be fast and risky or slow and safe with new vaccines? Should we prioritize reopening or lowering COVID mortality (bearing in mind being closed causes other mortality, eg suicide)? Can we trust an education/information strategy for masking or do we need a punitive approach to make people participate?
These trade offs are all among two good choices that are also two bad choices (“tragic”). For things that are unilaterally good (put more vaccines in fancy syringes! Speed vaccines! Make a freaking website for vaccines already!) underlings ought to be able to do it without Joe telling them so (but he can intervene if they fail).
Ah, I think I see your point now: the essential qualities of a democratic leader are both (1) to grapple with conflicting values and make judgement calls and (2) to facilitate the work of domain experts. Or, in your words: "set the direction" and "choose the people to implement it". I somehow overlooked the first part of your post.
This take is indistinguishable from management politics. Without a policy at the top:
1. The "lower downs" all make "bold decisions" in different directions, resulting in administrative paralysis.
2. Voters aren't making meaningful choices. They're literally voting for someone who will enable everyone to do whatever.
This is a recipe for political chaos. More importantly, it's the story that's been playing out for the past 40 years, with the results we all know.
I can relate to the distrust of central planning to some extent -- it is certainly something that warrants caution -- but those risks are best addressed through institutional checks and balances, not by having the political class abandon its duties altogether! The irony is that in an effort to avoid tyranny/autocracy, we've created the kind of political vacuum that incubates the very outcome we feared.