I think about politics through a system, a sort of fluxogram, that tells me if what I'm thinking (or what others are thinking) aligns with what I consider to be good practice. In other words: it's not that my politics aim to reach the right answer, but rather that they aim to cull the wrong answers.
For this purpose, I've come up with two guiding principles: The Function of the State; and The Framework of Politics.
The purpose of these principles is to direct a practical approach to policy, in which the state's actions are limited to the pursuit of the fulfillment of its function within the framework of acceptable political action.
The function of the state is to uphold the rights of its inhabitants, as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
This might seem simple or even reductive, to some, while it might seem almost overbearing to others. The truth is: generally, states don't do this! It is a shame, in my opinion, that such misery is allowed to flourish all over the world. I mean that, by the way; Misery is allowed to flourish! This is an abject failure of the state, especially in the global North where, by all reason, abundance should guarantee that this principle is pursued to its rightful end.
Yet, this is simply not the case. Every day, states fail to execute their function.
This is a failure of Humanity, no doubt, but very much so a simple failure of policy, as well. For as much as I would like to blame corruption, for example, which is very often to blame for much of the misery of the world, I fail to see it as the ultimate evil that permeates the states. Instead, it seems to me that there are many people with noble intentions that are misguided in their actions; While they pursue the function of the state, they fail because of stupidity, intelectually and practically.
As such, I see it as paramount to clearly declare that this is, indeed, the Function of the State, and that to fail to accomplish it is a failure of the state.
Policy should be evaluated based on how well it executes the Function of the State, now and for the future.
Once again, some might think that this is obvious and self-evident. "How else would policy be evaluated?" Well, the answer is on how well it conforms to dogma, for example.
Many people, including people in power and people vying for power, see their dogma, their particular ideology, as the ultimate right of policy; The correct approach, that is correct by the fact that it is so.
Mind you, I have no issue with ideology or dogma (in fact, these very principles are dogma!); What I do take issue with is when dogma is pursued to the detriment of the well-being of the people. This isn't an issue of ideology, in the sense that all of right-wing idiots (like those neoliberaloids that say the state should stay out of people's business entirely) or left-wing nuts (that say that there is no such thing as "the people's business") or centrist fence-sitters ("The answer's somewhere in the middle, guys; I swear!") do the same thing: they sacrifice the people in favour of their ideology, rather than following an ideology for the well-being of the people.
If you're sick, do you try to get better? This might seem like an innocuous, mundane question. However, I don't think it is. After all, even after repeated failure of policy, people pursue the same measures. They deregulate the markets even more, after the markets have betrayed the people; They tighten the hold on the markets even more, after the beaurocracy has failed the people; They try to find somewhere in the middle through micro-adjustements that end up doing nothing, because of course that does nothing!
It seems obvious, glaringly so, that change is needed; Reform is needed. Yet, this sickening insanity, this addiction to misery, continues to haunt the people of the world.
Policy can't chase dogma; It must chase clear, defined goals. Those goals, of course, should be those oulined in the Function of the State. All else is, simply put: SHIT.
Really, all this is perfectly synthesized as such: The state should work to uphold Human Rights for its inhabitants.
Sounds simple; Is simple; Yet, it's hard. I don't mean to say (or imply) that politics is easy and that policy is obvious. It isn't. However, I do think that the way politics is conducted, very often, is misguided and requires realignment.
Really, that's the crux of the issue, and these are my guiding principles.