*
Suppose we do (overall and in the long term) - What then?
*
Of course, to suppose that, entails that the concept of 'deserving' is meaningful and real, and also that desert can be applied to governments and the relationship between government and the people.
And this implies people, persons - a personal relationship.
'Government' by and for the sake of abstract procedures rules-out desert (and intentionally so).
*
However, if we reject the concept of desert; then all government is arbitrary, pure luck, something that just happens.
And it makes no difference whether the government really is the grinding of impersonal processes, or - behind this facade - a mass of grubby corruption, since the corruption in modern societies is defined by an ideal standard of perfect adherence to impersonal procedures.
*
That government is pure luck and just happens and has nothing to do with just deserts is indeed what many seem to believe - indeed, democracy entails that there is no such thing as desert.
Because democracy entails that what we deserve is (roughly) 'whatever comes out of the process/es of mass voting' - there is nothing more to be said about the matter. Personal opinions and standards are exactly what democracy ignores, over-rides, crushes (ultimately).
*
Much of political discourse is the attempt to avoid these implications of democracy without attacking the principle of democracy; to humanize mass voting and bureaucracy - despite their being intrinsically inhuman - or rather anti-human.
Because secular modern culture distrusts the human - quite rightly - yet denies the transcendental.
And so secular modern culture is left with nothing but the inhumanly procedural, which it tries to treat as if it was of transcendental value and intrinsic worth.
*
Then the whole of political discourse becomes (is) a business of wrangling over the conduct of mass voting - under the assumption that if we could get the voting system right, then the result would be truly authoritative: transcendentally authoritative.
In other words we are de facto judging democracy by human standards, yet the critique proceeds using procedural standards.
And so, the transcendental perfection for which modern, secular Western culture strives (here! on earth!) is a perfect democratic procedure, underpinning perfectly rational and procedural bureaucracy; which system always and inevitably also yields the highest attinable human (individual, personal) standard of gratification (the optimal human pleasure, the minimum human suffering).
Yields it like clockwork - or a computer alogorithm!
*
Since we persist in seeking all this and nothing but this, the answer is: Yes, we do indeed get the government we deserve...
*
