It almost always does, the few exceptions prove the role. Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust.

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent [-]

> Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust

Complex society is a potent counterargument to this hypothesis. Systems that rely on good people to work are fundamentally flawed. Instead, the game has to be about aligning self interets in favour of the collective.

▲

asdf88990 an hour ago | parent [-]

The self-interest for the bureaucrat and representative is supposed to end at their remuneration including their handsome retirement options not shady side hustles and market manipulation at the cost of the collective.

In matters of collective concern fair and just rarely aligns with personal self-interest. Because no matter how good the outcome of any endeavour for the collective given a budget, it will be even better for select few than the entire collective. It is simple economics.

If you look at the outcome of highly corrupt states, you will see proliferation of Private Security, Collapsed education system, failed financial services and markets, not highly efficient systems in service of “self-interest of the administration”.

	▲	29 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	s1artibartfast 14 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Sounds like a failure to align interests. In general, politicians should want to be elected by the public, rewarded for acting in the public interest, and punished for not doing so. A system that does none of those things and just hopes it will all work out is a recipe for disaster. Why bother even having elections in that case?