Devil's advocate..

[Angrboda]

I don't think that Genk was actually trying to establish that third criteria. Your statements on the matter would seem to imply that it is one which you are using as a metric. Where else could any argument to this effect proceed from?

Genkaus introduced that third criteria as something he thought I was implying, from which he tried to argue that it could serve as a wedge to differentiate between better and worse political systems. I don't accept that as a necessary metric. Where and when it might serve as one depends on a lot of things. It's not an arbitrary standard that I would endorse as an absolute law. Moreover, the only political system in which it applies absolutely seems to be one that neither exists in a pure form, nor seems to be a very effective political system where it approximates it.

There is the political platitude that the government which governs least, governs best. I think this is ultimately where Genkaus was headed. However the government that governs the least is no government at all. I think the implied meaning of this platitude is that the government which does the least beyond that which it necessarily should do, governs best. So the best government is one that does the least without sacrificing any essential goods. And that leads us back to the horn of the dilemma, as what are essential goods is a matter of values. And that brings us right back to where we started from.