Every government in this world is facing a "1+N" social environment, namely its domestic environment (“1”), and a number of foreign environments (“N”). This status quo is objective. It has nothing to do with ideology, value, wealth, or religion. So long as a country has a governance organization, it has to face such a social environment. On the basis of such governance, any policy decision is either right or wrong, with no intermediate or vague possibilities. Although there could be various explanations afterward, or the fact may be muddled by different opinions, over the long course of history, the results will always be revealed.
So how can governance make the right policy choices?
The conclusions based on the assessment and regression of the relationship between government and society are in fact simple and straightforward. The best and most reasonable policy choice is the one that ignores social labels, puts aside all kinds of interference, and aims at the biggest interests and fundamental goals. This is a very simple definition, but it is also rather difficult to implement. The reason lies in the different environments in which government organizations are located and the different levels of interference. In many cases, it is hard to realize the biggest interests and fundamental goals in reality even if we readily understand and grasp them.
Labelling is a common practice, regardless in which country. Facing various situations, society is more often than not, a passive spectator. When one cannot identify the situations on faces, it would then necessary to label all kinds of participants in the social "game". In a society where such labels are like price stickers of goods, so-and-so may be "right" simply because so-and-so has a certain status and title. The same is true of "representative". To say that so-and-so is "representative" is also to say that so-and-so owns the label. To say that so-and-so is "who" is also a label. Most people certainly don't really know this person. They believe so-and-so only because of a label. In this world, there are many people who believe in someone because of a label, but when things turn worse, the same someone would often keep quiet.
The other thing is human nature itself. The leader of any government organization always has preferences, because the leader of any country is also a person with emotions, so he or she must have preferences and choices as well. When such policy leaders' preferences and choices deviate from their best interests and fundamental goals, crises will occur and policy choices can go wrong. This is what emotion is. Ordinary people get emotional, and so do policy leaders. This will also cause troubles and bad policy choices.
In today's society, due to the existence of the internet, information can spread rapidly, and it is easy for all kinds of characters with labels to emerge, or even become popular for a while. Among them are famous scholars, professors, public figures. They have a high profile and a label, but their advice is not necessarily the right one. Some people may have ideas on foreign relations, and speak eloquently and passionately. In the case of China, they actually push China to be beaten up in the world. Therefore, this kind of person's proposition deviates from the best interest and the fundamental goal. There are also some so-called good ideas put forward by scholars and well-known figures, but in terms of implementation, these ideas are not satisfactory and unrealistic. This kind of situation also deviates from the best interest of the governmental organization and fundamental goal.
The most stable countries in the world have always been those where policy deviations can be effectively corrected and rectified. Policy choices based on labels and preferences often have uncontrollable consequences that are not in the best interest or fundamental goal. Therefore, it is the most beneficial and correct policy choice mode for any government organization to restrain preferences with system and ideological consciousness and to make policy choices based on reality rather than labels.
It is no accident for any country to achieve stability. All this has to do with policy choices that serve the country’s best interests and fundamental goals. Deviations of any kind can lead to obstacles, troubles, perplexities, and unquantifiable policy losses. In a complex world, we need to be realistic.
Final analysis conclusion:
Public policy choice is the most important way for the administration of a government. The policy choices and decisions aiming at the greatest interests and fundamental goals based on the spirit of realism would be the most ideal and reasonable options.
