Utilitarianism loop — up-spiral
- Enhances GDP power relative globally
- Makes importing goods/services cheaper relative
- Allows cheaper growth relative
- Fulfilling deontological obligations easier
- ↺ Loops back
Easy policies rarely force your priorities to collide. They feel good, but they’re typically incremental. Big-impact policy usually leans hard on one set of priorities — for example, cutting global aid to reduce taxes — and that’s exactly why it’s politically difficult: it reveals what you value most when values conflict.
My view is that a clear understanding of your priorities (and a party’s priorities) will increasingly be the only way to judge whether a policy “cuts through”, what it costs and how to have the most impact.
The intuition: the policies that are easiest to agree on usually don’t meaningfully pit priorities against each other. The policies that truly move the needle usually do — and they reveal what a party is willing to sacrifice.
In competitive environments, utilitarian performance focus compounds positively when maintained — and compounds negatively when abandoned.
Post globalisation, we are very exposed to global competition. It is a race with no let up. It feels like globalisation is a noose for democracies. Early prosperity generated from globalism can reduce the felt need to push hard on growth.