One party says small government, another says government of the people, another says end the grave danger threatening from without, another says take care of the threat coming from within. There is never any attempt to tell a more comprehensive story.
There is a good reason for this.
As long as there is a story, any story, every political action can be seen as a means to the end of making the story real. The story smallest in scope becomes total in scope when all of life is adapted to realize it.
For example, Marxism is a theory relating economic relations and quality of life. Once we set out to make a Marxist state, however, not just economics, but all social, political, and money matters came under control of the state.
A story gives a criteria of judgement: will this act under consideration lead faster or slower to achieving a small government, safety from invasion, the right human relation to property? Efficiency and power become decisive, when previously there was only the question, will this act lead to good or bad? To more justice, equality, fraternity, or less? To less violence, or more? But now anything, good or bad, is permitted in the cause of efficiency.
Telling little stories in politics leads to totalitarianism, a very big result.
Further Reading, on not making human arrangements your ultimate goal: Aldous Huxley, Ends And Means
