Would your definition be the same as mine or would ours be the same as someone who lives in Detroit or Syria? Not likely. The definition of good is abstract, and again depends on your experience. If we cannot agree on what it means to be good, how do we define good governance? There is no universal definition for good governance, everyone sets their priorities and their red lines in different places, but everyone still has their own definition. I think a good government, in general, is one which involves itself only when it must, puts the well-being of its populace as its first priority, follows the rule of law, and impacts individuals as little as possible in their day to day …show more content…
Another example of good governance would be for the government to defend its citizens from harm. Harm can range from something as monumental as war to something as benign as safe food handling. We, as a people, expect our government to keep us safe, and in turn, have been willing to give up some of our freedoms in that vein. Think about the last time you flew. You probably walked through in your socks and even may have been x-rayed. We do this without thinking (or perhaps with a little grumbling) because it makes us safer, or so we are led to believe. We are willing to let the government interfere in our life because we think we gain safety, and while it is mostly annoying, walking around in your socks isn’t a huge inconvenience. When talking about food safety, government should not dictate what we eat for lunch, where we can and cannot shop for food, or limit how many calories we can consume in one day. That is not to say the government should not stop certain foods from being introduced to the market place, such as contaminated meat, or improperly processed goods. Good governance is controlling the extremities in life, only involving itself in extreme situations or in public health and safety