Serving the people vs serving the state: what is the right path of modern governance

Avatar photo
Daohe · Jun 10, 2025
Why do nations exist? Not for slogans, not for borders, and not for GDP numbers. The true purpose of a nation is to protect basic human rights, uphold the dignity of its people, and improve their quality of life. If a country appears powerful but its people are suffering—if there is national pride but public […]

Why do nations exist?
Not for slogans, not for borders, and not for GDP numbers.

The true purpose of a nation is to protect basic human rights, uphold the dignity of its people, and improve their quality of life.

If a country appears powerful but its people are suffering—if there is national pride but public anxiety—then that country is just an empty shell. It may look strong on the outside, but inside it is full of deep problems.

That is why it is essential to understand the difference between “serving the state” and “serving the people.” A modern government must see serving its people as the only true source of legitimacy. Only then can a nation remain stable, fair, and truly prosperous.

I. The conflict between serving the state and serving the people

“Serving the state” usually means focusing on national goals like economic growth, military power, global influence, and national security.

“Serving the people” means protecting individual rights—fair income, stable jobs, affordable housing and healthcare, free speech, fair justice, public welfare, dignity, and political participation.

These two goals should go hand in hand. But in practice, especially in how governments use power, there are often structural conflicts:

  • Resource conflict: Governments spend more on big projects or military and choose to cut public welfare spending.
  • Unequal participation in decision making: National strategies are decided by a small elite; ordinary citizens have little say.
  • Different values: Power wants control and unity, while people need freedom and choices.
  • Unfair benefits: “National interest” often serves the rich and powerful, while citizens are left behind.

These deep conflicts are the biggest problem with “state-centered” policies—and the real threat to the people.

II. What are the risks of “state-centered” policies?

Some governments, in order to protect national image or appear strong in foreign affairs, choose to sacrifice the rights and wellbeing of their citizens. Over time, this leads to seven major risks, with consequences that are hard to ignore:

1. Collapse of social trust

Citizens lose trust in the government, the legal system, and institutions. As a result, policies lose effectiveness.

2. Widening wealth gap

Powerful capital groups take advantage of national strategies to control resources. Wealth becomes concentrated among the few, while the poor get poorer.

3. Crisis of political legitimacy

Public confidence in the government fades. People no longer believe in the system, and the state’s legitimacy begins to erode.

4. Rising social anxiety

High costs of housing, jobs, education, healthcare, and retirement create widespread stress and insecurity.

5. Rigid policymaking

Decision-making is dominated by a small elite. Without public input or checks and balances, policies become outdated and tensions build up.

6. Backlash from media control

When free speech is suppressed, public frustration grows beneath the surface, creating a false sense of peace while unrest brews underneath.

7. Decline in long-term national strength

A society without freedom and fairness loses its creativity, innovation, and energy. In the long run, the nation’s global competitiveness will suffer.

III. Core principles of a people-centered government

A truly modern government must be guided by four key principles that serve the people:

1. People’s wellbeing comes first

Government spending must first support basic needs—healthcare, education, housing, jobs, and retirement.

2. Protection of rights

The constitution must guarantee citizens’ rights to know, to speak, to participate, and to hold power accountable.

3. Transparency in public finances

Budgets, spending, and government decisions must be fully transparent. Taxpayers have the right to monitor how public funds are used.

4. Limits on state power

State power must be bound by law, used only for the public good—not for personal gain, private interest, or political inheritance.

IV. A balanced structure for national governance

To build a fair and effective system, We need three-pillar governance model with dual-level counterbalance.

Power Holder Core Role Supervision Mechanism
State government National security, fiscal control, legislation, diplomacy Supervised by citizens, media, and parliament
Civil society Industry regulation, community affairs, NGOs Bound by law, holds the right to join public decision-making
Individual citizens Voting, oversight, right to information Directly supervises state power, takes part in governance

V. Reforming the civil service: new standards for a modern era

A truly modern civil servant must meet the following criteria:

1. Public-first mindset: serve the interests of taxpayers, not just follow orders from above.

2. Performance-based evaluation: measured by public well-being, citizen satisfaction, and policy implementation results.

3. Lifetime accountability: retirement does not exempt one from responsibility for past actions.

4. Public reporting system: regularly report achievements and problems to citizens, and accept public questioning.

5. Separation from business interests: strict bans on collusion with capital groups; assets must be declared and transparent.

VI. A mature model of tripartite governance

In a fully modern state, governance should evolve to the following form:

  • Reduced government scope: government is limited to macro coordination, national defense, foreign affairs, justice, and legislation.
  • Full autonomy of social organizations: sectors like healthcare, education, academia, and community affairs are managed by self-governing bodies.
  • Comprehensive citizen oversight: establish citizen assemblies, policy referendum days, and annual government satisfaction voting.
  • Public budgeting under citizen control: national budgets must be approved by a citizen assembly each year.
  • Transparent public projects: major national projects require open proposals, public opinion surveys, and third-party evaluations.

VII. Conclusion: serving the people is the foundation of the state

A country may appear strong, but if its people suffer, that strength is hollow and unstable.

A country may seem powerful, but without public trust, it cannot last.

The only rightful path to national governance is to build a people-centered modern system—rooted in citizen rights, focused on quality of life, guided by people-first budgeting, protected by limited and transparent power, and secured through open and participatory institutions.

Only then can a nation achieve lasting peace, public trust, and sustainable development.

Share this article:
LEARN MORE

Continue Reading

Law or morality: which is the true measure of a civilized society?

Kishou · Nov 21, 2024

This question may sound profound, but in reality it is a false proposition. The relationship between law and morality is certainly important, yet both are tools and means, not the ultimate goal of a civilized society. True happiness and civilization do not lie in law or morality alone, but in the creation, production, and protection […]

法律与道德:到底哪个才是文明社会的准绳?

Kishou · Nov 21, 2024

这个问题看似深刻,实则是一个伪命题。法律与道德的关系固然重要,但它们只是工具和手段,而非文明社会的最终目标。我们真正的幸福和文明,不在于单纯的法律或道德,而在于社会福利的创造、生产与保障。通过建立能够保障和提升社会整体福利的体系与制度,个人与社会之间才能形成良性互动,推动人类走向更幸福、更公平、更有尊严的未来。 一、法律与道德的局限性 法律作为社会治理的基础,强调规则和秩序。然而,它无法涵盖人类生活的全部复杂性,更无法直接解决个体的幸福问题。法律虽能约束行为,却无法培养善意与关怀。例如,法律可以处罚偷窃,但无法立法强制每个人都去帮助贫困者。 同样,道德以内心和社会共识为基础,但其局限性在于缺乏强制力和普遍适用性。每个人的道德认知可能因文化、教育和个人经历而不同,这使得道德难以在多样化的社会中发挥统一的约束作用。 此外,单纯依赖道德指引,容易导致虚伪的道德表演。甚至有人站在道德的高地上,对处于弱势的群体提出道德要求,打着道德的幌子剥削他人。历史上这样的事情并不少见,直到今天类似的情景还在不断上演,比如我们经常看到有人对受害者进行道德审查。因此,对于维系与发展社会,单靠道德的引导是不够的,甚至会导致恶果。 二、社会福利:文明社会的真正准绳 真正的文明社会,不是建立在法律与道德的对立或协调之上,而是以能否创造社会福利为标准。社会福利通过满足人的基本需求,以提升人的生活质量和精神上的幸福感为目标,从根本上构建一个不断进步的社会。 1. 社会福利创造 社会福利创造是文明社会发展的第一步。通过创新性的制度设计与政策规划,我们可以为更多人创造公平发展的机会。例如,普惠性的教育的不断创新、全面的医疗覆盖体系,都是社会福利创造的体现。当然,很多社会中的教育制度和医疗体系都存在各种不足,人们需要以公平的分配、高质量的成果为目标不断去提升现有的体系,而不是旁观和顺从。只有在不断创造幸福感受基础上,个人才能实现真正的幸福,社会才能迈向更高层次的文明。 2. 社会福利生产 社会福利生产是将理念转化为现实的关键环节。更是社会福利创造后的延伸,它包括教育资源的不断普及、医疗设施的不断建设、社会服务标准化的提供等。例如,在许多发达国家,通过公共财政的投入和社会企业的参与,形成了高效且多样化的社会福利生产体系。这不仅让社会成员获得实实在在的帮助,也促进了社会文明的整体进步。 3. 社会福利保障 社会福利保障确保每个社会成员在面对疾病、失业、老龄化等风险时,能够获得基本的生活保障。这种保障不只是对个体的关怀,更是对社会稳定的维护。例如,养老保险制度的完善,不仅让老年人能够安享晚年,也减轻了年轻一代的经济压力。这种福利保障,是人类文明从弱肉强食到合作共赢的重要标志。 三、以社会福利为核心的幸福社会 当一个社会将福利创造、生产与保障作为核心任务时,法律和道德便不再是彼此对立的工具,而是共同服务于社会福利的手段。法律为福利的实现提供强制力和保障力,而道德则为福利的创造注入温暖与关怀。我们一乘公益在对此不断研究分析。 例如,北欧国家的社会福利体系被誉为现代文明的典范。通过免费教育、全民医疗、育儿补贴等一系列政策,这些国家在法律与道德的基础上构建了高度完善的福利社会。这样的社会,不仅让每个个体都能有尊严地生活,也实现了社会生活水平的整体提升。然而,北欧的福利体系重在保障人们的基本生活,却缺少福利的持续创造与生产,未能形成可持续的良性发展,全靠政府和纳税人持续的经济投入。如果能够在源头加入福利创造与生产环节,这个系统将源源不断地创造社会价值,超越现阶段这个高度依赖税金投入的体系。 四、一乘公益:重新种福我们的文明 我们一乘公益深知,真正的幸福与文明来自于社会福利的全面发展。因此,我们致力于通过创新公益项目,推动福利创造,优化福利生产,保障福利公平。我们相信,文明不是抽象的概念,而是可以被感知的幸福感,是可以种植的善意与责任感。 通过设计普惠性的公益组织、公益联合体、公益经济体,我们持续引入社会福利生产, 社会福利创造、 社会福利保障的服务,重新种福我们的生活,帮助更多人获得希望与支持。这种福祉的播种,将会改变了他人的生活,也将从根本上提升整个社会的幸福感与文明程度。 结语 社会真正的幸福与文明,源于社会福利的创造、生产与保障。通过社会福利体系的完善,法律和道德才得以发挥更大的价值,个体的生活质量与社会的整体进步才能得以保障。 文明的准绳,不在于抽象的理论争论,而在于实际行动中的福利播种。每一次社会福利的创新,每一个人生活的改善,都在推动社会迈向更光明的未来。幸福与文明的源泉,正是我们共同努力创造、生产和保障的福祉社会。

read more

Related Content

Education in Free Societies vs. Authoritarian Regimes
Education in Free Societies vs. Authoritarian Regimes
Avatar photo
Daohe · May 17, 2025
Every step forward in civilization has been guided by the light of education. Education does more than shape individuals—it molds entire eras. It is the foundation that determines whether a society remains stable or transforms, whether power is balanced or abused. In free and democratic societies, education is seen as the key to awakening public […]
Cowardice and brutality in Chinese education: a warning and threat to global civilization
Cowardice and brutality in Chinese education: a warning and threat to global civilization
Avatar photo
Master Wonder · Jun 9, 2025
I. Why are cowardly and brutal styles of education so common in Eastern societies, especially in China? To understand these two distorted educational patterns, we must go beyond blaming individual parents or schools. Instead, it is necessary to examine the deeper cultural and historical roots—particularly the long-standing authoritarian structure of Chinese civilization. For centuries, Chinese […]
Inside the “cage trap”: how authoritarian governments maintain control
Avatar photo
Yicheng · Dec 19, 2024
If a regime or government adopts the “Cage Trap” policy, it essentially acts as an extreme mechanism to safeguard privilege and protect class interests. This article offers a multidimensional exploration of this concept. The “Cage Trap” refers to government policies that impose strict controls on citizens’ freedoms, often justified in the name of national security […]
Voting vs. decision-making: Understanding their roles in civilization
Voting vs. decision-making: Understanding their roles in civilization
Avatar photo
Kishou · Jun 11, 2025
This article explores the fundamental difference between voting and decision-making. Voting reflects the distribution of power and interests, while decision-making requires a small group of people with strategic competence. When these two are blurred, decisions risk becoming shortsighted and driven by emotion, leading to power imbalances that ultimately weaken social governance.
View All Content