One of the major problem with governance is that conniving sociopaths will always exist, and that they tend to have an endless craving for power (as their sociopathy eliminates the intrinsic satisfaction with life many others have). As such, governments inevitably get hijacked by these sociopaths who gradually normalize the exploitation of others (which everyone else is forced to turn a blind eye to), and then eventually shift from exploiting select segments of the population whose suffering can be kept out of sight and out of mind to broad swathes of the population (e.g., consider the abhorrent COVID-19 vaccine mandates).

Note: an excellent overview of this cyclical process can be found in the (brief) Wikipedia summary of ?obaczewski's Political Ponerology. A key point that ?obaczewski made is that many of these psychopathic tendencies originate from individuals with brain damage that eliminate natural human empathy—a remarkable insight given that its only recently been possible to prove sociopaths have organic brain damage. Additionally, a strong case can be made that the inflammatory brain damage certain vaccines cause results in sociopathic behavior, as a rippling wave of unprecedented violent crime spread across America in tandem with the adoption of the vaccine which was notorious for frequently causing encephalitis (which I discussed further here).

Because of this, I've spent decades thinking over the competing models of governance and come to the conclusion famously elucidated by Winston Churchill:

Democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

More specifically, I believe that since psychopathic individuals will always exist, the best "solution" is to have a form of checks and balances in place where different (likely sociopathic) parties are continually competing against each other for power, and hence "cancel their evil out" by forcing each other to act in a somewhat decent way so they can be the ones to hold into power.

In contrast, anytime healthy competition is eliminated, the quality of government rapidly declines as there is no longer an incentive to do a good job or produce the results the electorate actually wants (which is essentially identical to what is seen in market monopolies—which for example is why American medical care is so expensive yet its results rank last amongst the affluent nations).

On one hand, we have this at a national level, as (at least until Trump's recent political insurgency) legislators from both parties will consistently vote to spend trillions on abhorrent foreign wars or bank bailouts while simultaneously refusing to support basic necessities that benefit most of the populace. This video for example synopsizes an extensive 2014 study which found public opinion had no influence on the likelihood a bill would become law, and rather, a law passing is entirely dependent upon what the upper class and business interests want.