Probably, it’s worth having some sort of formal statement of what you want for the nation’s aims, objects and purposes. The US has a formal constitution, and in the UK we have laws based on the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta was a landmark English document sealed by King John in 1215, forced by rebel barons to limit royal power and establish the principle that everyone, including the king, must obey the law. It addressed grievances like unfair taxes and arbitrary justice, introducing concepts like due process (trial by peers) and consent for taxation, laying foundations for Parliament, individual liberties, and constitutional law, influencing legal systems globally, including the U.S. Constitution. Though initially annulled, it was reissued and became a powerful symbol of freedom and the rule of law. But these examples are based on Christian beliefs, and Christianity is only a single voice, coming from its own routine perspective.
What about alternate views? Is the idea of family important? Is the idea of tribal groupings important? What weight should we give to diversity? Everyone has personal aims and objectives – which ones are important, and which ones are less so? Luckily, we can draw upon world knowledge – there are learned treatises on every imaginable subject; however, we need help in order to deal with the complexity of the world. There are advantages to this as well as difficulties. We don’t live in a vacuum, we can choose from the best ideas in the world. Also, as I’ve fairly lately realised, we can depend upon those far cleverer than us. There’s nothing wrong with this – we all do it every day. We drive cars that are the end-product of many years of development, innovation and brilliance, for example.
Having a basis for the set of lives lived by our society seems important. Practically, this probably means requiring people to adhere to a suite of laws, and these probably need to have a common base. But, as I’ll be describing, we need much more than laws to control society; we need a healthy culture in order to thrive.
Political parties (at least, here in the UK) present manifestos that describe what the government aims to achieve if elected to power. The mechanisms of election are enshrined in law, but it does seem inevitable that people with similar aims and philosophies will end up teaming together, forming a suite of parties. However much I might wish that I could cast an independent vote, these political groupings form an almost convenient means of understanding a ‘groupthink’ for a set of people.