Those are interesting points, but I have to assume that it would be harder for political machines to run new candidates every two cycles instead of throwing all their might behind one big fish for 40-50 years.
I would like to see term limits for the bureaucracy as well.
I'm generally against "boardgame-style" rules in politics, like "You can do X, but only up to N times".
Life doesnt have to be "balanced" : either a "move" is "good", and should be used as often as the political situation necessitates, or it is bad and should be disallowed completely. If a rule seems "excessively used", it is usually a symptom of a design problem with the system. Thus restricting "overuse", is attacking a symptom, instead of dealing with the root cause. In other words, a cop-out. Breaking your thermometer at whatever temperature you're comfortable with, will not fix your heating/cooling issues.
As such, conversation about term limits should be viewed as a symptom of a dysfunctional system, where people are looking for a "cheat rule" to get those they don't like out of the power position. But rotating out corrupt stooges(in politics or administration) every X years will not solve the problem of having your system overrun with corrupt stooges. You solve that issue with education and active citizen involvment. Possibly with a touch of firing squads - in some situations(though, obviously, I can't think of any modern real-world country where that last part would apply).
Those are interesting points, but I have to assume that it would be harder for political machines to run new candidates every two cycles instead of throwing all their might behind one big fish for 40-50 years.
I would like to see term limits for the bureaucracy as well.
I'm generally against "boardgame-style" rules in politics, like "You can do X, but only up to N times".
Life doesnt have to be "balanced" : either a "move" is "good", and should be used as often as the political situation necessitates, or it is bad and should be disallowed completely. If a rule seems "excessively used", it is usually a symptom of a design problem with the system. Thus restricting "overuse", is attacking a symptom, instead of dealing with the root cause. In other words, a cop-out. Breaking your thermometer at whatever temperature you're comfortable with, will not fix your heating/cooling issues.
As such, conversation about term limits should be viewed as a symptom of a dysfunctional system, where people are looking for a "cheat rule" to get those they don't like out of the power position. But rotating out corrupt stooges(in politics or administration) every X years will not solve the problem of having your system overrun with corrupt stooges. You solve that issue with education and active citizen involvment. Possibly with a touch of firing squads - in some situations(though, obviously, I can't think of any modern real-world country where that last part would apply).