On Debate of Political Theories

Summary

The article distinguishes good political theories from bad ones based on their response to harming innocent people, advocating for transparency and rectification over suppression and retaliation.

Abstract

The article "On Debate of Political Theories" argues that discerning between beneficial and detrimental political theories hinges on their respective responses to causing unintended harm to innocent individuals. It posits that a commendable political model is characterized by its commitment to transparency, investigation, and rectification of such harm, both on an individual and systemic level. Conversely, a flawed political theory is identified by its tendency to silence those who are harmed and the journalists who report on it, employing tactics such as stonewalling, attacking, and even resorting to extreme measures like secret imprisonment. The author emphasizes that the true measure of a political theory's validity lies in its ability to address and reasonably respond to the negative consequences it may inadvertently impose on individuals.

Opinions

Good political theories are recognized by their proactive approach to addressing harm, valuing transparency and investigation.
Bad political theories are marked by attempts to silence and retaliate against those harmed and those reporting the harm.
The "acid test" for any political theory is how it responds to incidents of harm against individuals.
A theory's failure to respond reasonably to such harm is a clear indication of its inadequacy.
The author indicates a preference for practical demonstration of a theory's merit through its response to harm over abstract debate.

On Debate of Political Theories

Telling bad policy, bad political theories or models, from good is not hard — does it harm innocent people? Ah, you say, but at a certain level of goverment all policy harms someone.

The test is, when we find a particular innocent person harmed, what is the response?

A good model will include value for transparency and investigation into the harm done, will try to rectify it both in a case by case and on a more general level.

A bad one will try to shut up the person and the reporter, stonewalling and then attacking, perhaps retaliating and in the extreme, disappearing both into secret prisons.

Whatever the theory is, whatever the supposed benefit, here is the acid test.

A theory is disproven by its failure to respond reasonably to harm done to an individual.

And rather than debate further, I have some cases to address.