Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Measuring good government

Measuring good government
Getty Images

Leland R. Beaumont is an independent wisdom researcher who is seeking real good. He is currently developing the Applied Wisdom curriculum on Wikiversity.

Researcher Abraham Maslow recognized that people have many needs, and they are motivated to meet certain basic needs before turning their attention to higher levels of fulfillment. His insights are often represented using a pyramid to illustrate this hierarchy. The physiological needs of air, water, food, shelter, sanitation, and sleep form the base of the pyramid because people seek to meet these needs before attending to safety, belonging, esteem and other higher levels of fulfillment.


By assessing needs that are met and unmet, a person can determine their current position in the hierarchy. Because people seek higher levels of fulfillment, the higher levels of the pyramid generally represent greater life satisfaction. We strive to move up the pyramid.

When governments are formed “ for the people,” we can use this hierarchy to assess how well any particular government is meeting the needs of its people. Governments attain better results when they allow more people to meet more of their needs. To determine how well the government is doing, plot the position of each person against the needs hierarchy. Two examples are shown in the diagram and described below.

Better governments allow more people to meet more of their needs.

The results of a poorly performing government are represented on the left. Here many people are lacking clean safe drinking water, some people are hungry or homeless, and even their most basic physiological needs are not being met. These unfortunate people are shown in red in the diagram, where each icon represents one percent of the population. When people feel unsafe because of crime, terrorism, threats, oppression, humiliation, violence, war, or other human rights violations, their safety needs are not being met. These threatened people are represented on the diagram in orange. When social systems lead to isolation rather than foster community, these alienated people don’t feel like they belong. They are represented by amber icons.

In contrast, the government represented on the right is attaining better results for the people. Here everyone has met their physiological needs, and most have met their safety needs. Many people will attain higher levels of satisfaction by fulfilling their belonging, esteem, cognitive, and aesthetic needs. These people are flourishing as they become engaged in the culture, gain self-esteem, continue to learn, develop moral reasoning, and enjoy frequent encounters with beauty. A few will “become all they can be” and reach their full potential as they attain self-actualization. Some especially wise people, shown in violet, achieve transcendence — experiencing deep connections beyond themselves. (Beware of delusions and charlatans.)

This approach to evaluating government results can transform abstract policy questions and speculative theories of government into empirical questions that can be reliably answered by carefully evaluating evidence. We can determine what governments are attaining better results, learn from their successes, and continue to develop and improve.

Although this may be simple, it won’t be easy; we must get started.

This article originally appeared on Wikiversity.


Read More

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less