The people who pioneered democracy in Europe and the United States had a low but pretty accurate view of human nature. They knew that if we get the chance, most of us will try to get something for nothing. They knew that people generally prize short-term goodies over long-term prosperity. So, in centuries past, the democratic pioneers built a series of checks to make sure their nations wouldn’t be ruined by their own frailties….
Western democratic systems were based on a balance between self-doubt and self-confidence. They worked because there were structures that protected the voters from themselves and the rulers from themselves. Once people lost a sense of their own weakness, the self-doubt went away and the chastening structures were overwhelmed. It became madness to restrain your own desires because surely your rivals over yonder would not be restraining theirs.
This is one of the reasons why Europe and the United States are facing debt crises and political dysfunction at the same time. People used to believe that human depravity was self-evident and democratic self-government was fragile. Now they think depravity is nonexistent and they take self-government for granted.
Read it all (my emphasis).
Brooks misses the key point in it all: Humans are either inherently good, or we are inherently evil.
If humans are fundamentally good, then we do not need more than the most rudimentary structures of governance, such as roads, defence, and the like. Government should therefore be small and non-intrusive.
If, however, humans are fundamentally evil, many of the worst will seek governmental power in order to dominate, control, and exploit others. Government should therefore be small and non-intrusive.
Large, powerful government is the pathway to slavery. Our founders knew that, and wished to avoid it. Many in Washington also know that, but seek to implement such government, with (of course) themselves in charge.