Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Happiness
My old buddy Matt Anderson recently commented at Mere Orthodoxy on Britain's use of "happiness" as a measure of the effectivenss of governmnet policy. He likened it to the Ministry of Silly Walks, but forgot to link to the video. Thankfully, I'm here to correct that.
Matt rightly points out that a happiness metric is rather difficult to arrive at. I have gone even farther and argued that the world is clueless as to what constitutes genuine happiness.
What really troubles me about this however is twofold. Firstly, for a government to take responsibility for the citizenry's emotional state is laregely political rather than governmental. I mean it is likely to get you re-elected, but the link between that and good governance is pretty slim don't you think? Which leads me to my second point.
Government, even though elective, has a responsibility larger than just serving the electorate. It is responsible for maintaining the public good. Up until recent times, the electorate could be counted on to have a reasonable understanding of the public good and was thus willing to sacrifice personal pleasure for the good of the whole. As Spock says, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
But that age seems to be past us. It is time, if we are to preserve what we have built, for government to lead, not merely respond. The pulic good needs to be explained to us, illustrated for us, and upheld despite our protests.
And we need to learn to be happy regardless of circumstances. We control our happiness, not the government.
Related Tags: happiness, Britain, governance
Matt rightly points out that a happiness metric is rather difficult to arrive at. I have gone even farther and argued that the world is clueless as to what constitutes genuine happiness.
What really troubles me about this however is twofold. Firstly, for a government to take responsibility for the citizenry's emotional state is laregely political rather than governmental. I mean it is likely to get you re-elected, but the link between that and good governance is pretty slim don't you think? Which leads me to my second point.
Government, even though elective, has a responsibility larger than just serving the electorate. It is responsible for maintaining the public good. Up until recent times, the electorate could be counted on to have a reasonable understanding of the public good and was thus willing to sacrifice personal pleasure for the good of the whole. As Spock says, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
But that age seems to be past us. It is time, if we are to preserve what we have built, for government to lead, not merely respond. The pulic good needs to be explained to us, illustrated for us, and upheld despite our protests.
And we need to learn to be happy regardless of circumstances. We control our happiness, not the government.
Related Tags: happiness, Britain, governance
