Re: The importance of the seperation of powers
[ QUOTE ]
Moral argument?? It's a practical one. There is no logical conclusion. I love how you guys try to earn cheap points, though.
And it's not decentralization either - that's something completely different. It's separation. Decentralization is when no one person is in command, and power and autonomy is spread to a large number of units. Separation is when each a few entities split up centralized power into specific roles.
[/ QUOTE ]
How many entities is "a few entities" and what is the point? From what I've read in the thread so far it seems like the point is to prevent abuse by limiting the probability that all these roles will be acting in concert. If this is the case it seems like you'd reduce your variance and potential risk of ruin by spreading the role over as many people as possible, no? i.e., 3 branches of government is better than 1, 100 members of the senate is better than 1 elected official etc. If we're trying to avoid power being concentrated in one single minded individual or a group of people acting towards their own, unified ends, we'll do a better job the more people are involved. The logical conclusion to this line of thought seems fairly similar to what Neilso was implying.
|