I need some input on this.

First, people use different definitions depending on where they come from.
An European liberal would be more like an American libertarian while an American liberal would be more like an European Socialist, to give an example.

So in this post I define Big Government as centralistic state, where the government of the few control the many.
Big Business is similar, in that the leadership of the few control much resources, much financial (and thereby social) power.
Big Society is the term I borrow to envision a society where the power is as localized as possible, where smaller communities has more autonomy then in a centralistic states.
(and please, I do not want this to be about wheter 'big society' is an excuse to cut social benefits. thats more of domestic uk issue, I want to discuss principles)
Big dreams are, well, wheter stuff is realistic or not

Generally speaking, I see much the same problem with big governemnt and big business.
Both have a leadership far away from the ground, far from the users of their product, far from their employees,
and thereby might create a certain arrogance or distance from the sections further down on the ladder.
Both also have the capability to overrun and dominate local communities for the 'betterment of society as a whole'.

To avoid this we could could create a society from the bottom up, where the communites have alot more power to manage budgets,
to regulate business, to say no to both the government and to companies.

But, it would come with a cost. I think it is given that small sections with alot of power would be more costly to govern.
We would have to spend much more time and money on negotiation on even small trivial stuff if it would effect different sections or communities.
Then again, you might say it would be worth it if it could lead to more democratic society, a society where people are more encouraged to participate.

Also, in crisis or other situations which require a national, or even international, mobilization, such a society would be slow to react.

And at last, would Big Society/r Small Autonomy be a realisticly acheivable? The tendency in the world is toward more globalization, more dependance on each other,
and thus less autonomy to different national states. So perhaps this is just a hippy dream? Or perhaps it is not even wanted?

_________________
Is the cup half-full or half-empty? Neither, the cup is the rightful domain of air,
and water are the imperialistic invader that must be fought by all means neccesary.
Drink it.

i feel that the american libertarian movement has been taken over by the tea partiers so i don't think euro liberals are the correct match up?

i like your idea. there was a sci fi short story i read which described a direct democracy. no representatives eliminated corporate influence on the few key decision makers. i wish we could have that.

Of the four you just mentioned three I LOATH with a passion of a thousand suns! The exepction being big dreams. I love to dream.

The only government that I would be for is what I would call a loving anarchy; meaning that you love each other deeply and treat them as you would wish to be treated. No goverment, no other rules, no leader. Just guided by the feeling of love and fellowship for your fellow people and animals.

Of course that will never happen and so I have no interest in politics. After all the word politics is related to policy and I have never been much for rules.